Ezra Levant warns Justin Trudeau’s anti-Islamophobia summit risks censoring critics, not fostering unity, while the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) pushes radical policies like a social media regulator and five-year human rights complaint extensions. Derek Sloan joins to detail his censorship—Twitter suspending him for sharing a Reuters vaccine article, YouTube removing CPAC content—contrasting it with unchecked left-wing or foreign extremist voices. With an August election looming, Sloan plans a "Liberty slate" to unite conservative and free-speech factions, citing Preston Manning’s Reform Party as precedent but hoping for faster momentum like Trump’s. Meanwhile, vaccine passport legal challenges stall, and Facebook’s secretive censorship aligns with Biden’s targeted suppression of conservatives, deepening Canada’s free-speech crisis. [Automatically generated summary]
Hello my friends, I take you through a document put together by the National Council of Canadian Muslims.
Their demands for an upcoming anti-Islamophobia summit.
And I'm worried about them because they don't really focus on how we can all get along as a society.
They focus more about demonizing people they don't like, censoring people they don't like, and just as troubling, taking powers and independence away from the actual border guards and security that keep our country safe.
Why would you call for that?
I'll get into it in Justin Trudeau's response.
That's ahead.
But before I get to that, let me invite you to become a subscriber to Rebel News Plus.
That's the video version of this podcast.
You also get access to Sheila Gunread's show, David Menzies' show, and Dr. Chapodeau's show.
That's a lot of TV viewing for eight bucks a month.
It's about half the price of Netflix.
Just go to RebelNews.com and click subscribe.
Here's today's podcast.
Tonight, Justin Trudeau says he will implement the most radical pro-Islam agenda in a non-Muslim country.
It's July 20th, 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.
Protecting Islam Over Criticism00:16:09
The only thing I have to say is government.
But why publish them?
It's because it's my bloody right to do so.
Another Christian church was torched.
I don't know the total count of churches burnt or vandalized in the past few months.
I think our friends at True North actually have a map they're making.
Last I checked, it was 43 churches.
So I suppose this makes 44.
The church that was targeted had Christians from the Middle East, Coptic Christians, who along with other Christians from that region, Chaldean Christians, Syriac Christians, Assyrian Christians, are ancient Christians, almost dating back to Jesus' time.
It was a Christian land once, the plains of Nineveh, you remember that from your Bible.
It's not a Christian place anymore.
And Copts are a small minority in what was once the Christian country of Egypt.
Many of them flee to Canada and other places in the West to escape this very thing.
And in Canada now, their church is torched.
Not a word from our prime minister, though.
I should point out that Egypt's Muslim president, Al-Sisi, when a Coptic Christian church was bombed recently, went to that church in solidarity.
The Muslim president of Egypt went to a Coptic Christian church in solidarity, and our prime minister doesn't have a word to say as we come upon four dozen churches that have been torched or vandalized.
But there's other hate that fits with Trudeau's narrative.
We're on the eve of an anti-Semitism conference.
I think that's probably a good idea because anti-Semitism is growing across the West.
It's growing particularly within Justin Trudeau's own party.
But I noticed that the only Jewish leader of a political party in Canada, Annami Paul is her name, the leader of the Green Party, was not allowed to attend.
Justin Trudeau has brought all his liberal friends, some of whom are in parliament, many of whom are not.
They're invited, but Trudeau certainly doesn't like this Anami Paul, which tells me maybe I like her a little bit more than I normally would.
And of course, the big project is an anti-Islamophobia summit.
This is going to be interesting because there's a difference between being critical of Islam, the religion, and being critical of Muslims, discriminating against ordinary Muslims.
And I think it's a very important distinction.
Islam, the religion, the philosophy, political Islam, these are all ideas.
And of course, every idea ought to be able to be criticized, at least in a free country.
And the problem with Islamophobia, the word as it's become implemented in politics, is that it scoops up any opposition to Islam's expression, either religiously or politically or even through political violence.
And it calls that anti-Islam hatred on par with hating an individual, discriminating against an individual.
I'm worried about this anti-Islamophobia summit for that very reason.
I don't support discriminating against people or picking on people, let alone violence on people based on religion.
I certainly don't oppose that.
But I'm worried that this will actually become a backdoor to re-implementing a blasphemy law in Canada, and not just for attacks on, oh, let's say, the Danish cartoons of Mohammed, where I was hauled before a Human Rights Commission a dozen years ago.
But any criticism of Islamification in the public square, any criticism of the treatment of women in Islam, I'm worried that those subjects will now be called Islamophobic and will be targeted with the full force of the law.
And on the eve of that summit, a group called the NCCM, the National Council of Canadian Muslims, has released nearly 100 pages of recommendations for all levels of government and indeed much of non-governmental society that would transform Canada into an anti-Islamophobia state,
giving it more political and police tools than even a country like, oh, say, Pakistan would to hunt down anything judged to be critical of Islam.
That's my worry.
The group NCCM formerly was called CARECAN, the Canadian branch of CARE, Council of American Islamic Relations, a group that a U.S. judge once said was linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Justin Trudeau was asked about these policy recommendations by the NCCM.
He was asked if he would adopt them.
I'm not sure if he's actually read them, but he said he will move forward on them.
Here's what he said today.
There is much we need to do, and I know the National Council of Muslim Canadians have put forward a list of recommendations that we're going to be talking about later this week and we're going to move forward on.
Now, it's always good to be skeptical of Trudeau's promises.
I mean, he promised that his top priority was getting Indian reserves in Canada clean drinking water six years into his term, and he hasn't done so.
So that's a bit of a relief.
I also remember that Trudeau said he would implement all the policies recommended in the Truth and Reconciliation Commission for First Nations.
Of course, he hasn't done that either.
But by giving his moral approval of them, he allows others within government and society to proceed.
I want to take you through some of the most dangerous ideas in the NCCM's policy book to show you how radical they are, to show you what anti-Islamophobia means today, and to show you what Trudeau has said he supports.
I'm just going to pull about a dozen of them at random.
They want the government to, quote, commit to introducing a social media regulator with a special focus on ensuring that civil liberties are protected.
What?
Either you're regulating social media or you're protecting civil liberties.
You can't do both.
But I know what the NCCM means.
They want Stephen Gilbo to regulate the internet and to kill freedom of speech or what's left of it.
I'll read some more.
The NCCM demands an investigation into whether national security agencies have unduly deprioritized the study of white supremacist groups.
Specifically, such a study could point towards disparities in resources and funding having been put towards surveilling indigenous, black, and Muslim communities in contrast to white supremacist groups in Canada.
There's a bit of a theme in the NCCM document.
What they like is censorship of critical views, and what they hate are all the instruments of the state that guard against terrorism.
It's quite something.
The NCCM, you might actually be forgiven for thinking they want to reduce our scrutiny of terrorism and replace it with a new boogeyman, as if we haven't had a spate of Islamic-motivated terrorism in this country, including in parliament itself.
Let me give you an example.
They want to establish dedicated prosecutorial units for prosecuting hate-motivated crimes.
And what they mean by that is anyone who hates Islam.
I have some friends who hate Islam.
They're Muslim.
Will they be prosecuted?
And this is my point.
If there is discrimination against a Muslim person, if a Muslim person is assaulted, whether it's because they're Muslim or just assaulted as a regular crime, we've all got to stand against that.
We've all got to be against that.
But if the crime that's being invented here is someone who's skeptical of Islam or critical of Islam, then we're not protecting individuals anymore.
Now we're protecting an ideology.
And hate, of course, is a human emotion.
Hate itself can never be a crime.
And what I'm worried about here is that the NCCM and Justin Trudeau and his Justice Minister and the rest of his cabinet want to move away from our Canadian tradition of being skeptical and being allowed to criticize any and all religions to protecting one particular religion and also to prosecute its critics.
I'll keep reading.
Remove the requirement for Attorney General's consent.
The Attorney General's consent is currently required to begin any prosecution for the willful promotion of hatred and genocide.
This is a uniquely high bar that should be abolished.
The same should go for any future freestanding provisions around hate-motivated crimes.
I said that emotions should never be criminalized, but of course our criminal code does criminalize promoting hatred against an identifiable group.
Now I say again I'm against promoting hatred against an identifiable group.
I don't like that in our criminal code.
I think emotions should not be legislated.
Actions should be.
But at least that criminal code provision requires the Attorney General to review the case and personally approve the prosecution.
That's not much of a limiting force, but it does mean that no individual prosecutor or cop can go around laying charges for such an extreme political offenses.
It recognizes that prosecuting someone for feelings or hate crimes is inherently political, and so it makes the government of the day own that prosecution.
The NCCM obviously wants more prosecutions, and they think that they can find some cops or some prosecutors to do it much more casually than the Justice Minister.
And I think they're right.
And I'm worried that Trudeau says he's going to move on these issues.
I'll keep reading.
The potential introduction of a public interest-based defamation fund for Canadians who were smeared on the basis of hate.
What?
Defamation, I'm familiar with it because, of course, we give and we receive it here at Rebel News in the courts.
Defamation is a civil suit where if there's someone who has said something really mean about you, you can hire a lawyer, go to court, and protect your reputation.
If you win, you'll get money.
If you lose, you'll have to pay the other side.
The NCCM obviously wants to go around hunting their enemies, but they either don't think they can find a lawyer to do it on contingency, or they don't think they can crowdfund it, or they basically want you and me to pay lawyers to hunt down any of their enemies.
I've never seen anything so bizarre in my life.
This next one here, they use the word CVE, that stands for countering violent extremism, but look what they mean by that.
Until there is a coherent set of policies enshrined to prevent the profiling and mass surveillance of our communities, pause the mandated countering violent extremism programs at the federal level and require Public Safety Canada to develop out a new program in consultation with racialized communities for broader public safety.
Boy, that's a lot of words saying stop looking for terrorists.
Just shut it all down till we can figure out what's up.
Does that really promote Muslims?
Does that really serve the interests of ordinary Muslims in the Canadian community?
Or is that a very specific rocket fired at our counterterrorism police?
It's a very strange thing to bundle up in anti-Islamophobia.
If you're afraid of terrorists, you're afraid of terrorists, whether they're Sikh or Tamil or Muslim.
But here the NCCM says it's Islamophobic to be tracking and hunting for terrorists.
I don't think that's right.
So surveil your enemies.
They want the entire social media regulated.
They want the ability to prosecute and sue in civil court ordinary Canadians, but they want the surveillance of possible terrorists nipped in the bud.
They also really, really hate Revenue Canada, but not for the reasons you and I might.
They hate the fact that Revenue Canada scrutinizes charities that have been found to give money to terrorist groups overseas.
CRA reform.
Suspend the Canada Revenue Agency's Review and Analysis Division pending review of Canada's risk-based assessment model and its national strategy to combat extremism and radicalization.
You want to stop that?
You want to stop that?
Do you see what I mean?
Do you see why I'm worried that anti-Islamophobia isn't about stopping people from picking on Muslims?
It's about stopping the government for protecting Canada either against terrorists or terrorist fundraising.
And it's about stopping people who have legitimate criticisms of political Islam or, frankly, religious Islam.
I'll keep reading.
Suspend discretionary use of revocation power where anti-terrorism financing or counter-radicalization policies inform the audit.
So you don't want charities to be revoked if they're found to be supporting radicalization?
Whose side are you on?
Enhance transparency between the CRA's charities directorate and charities audited under suspicion of terrorism financing and or radicalization.
So they want the anti-terrorism police to have to share more with the terrorist-linked groups they're defunding.
They want to know what our police know.
Provide anti-bias training and greater guidance to government officers and regularly assess whether their discretionary decisions are biased based on race or religious affiliation.
They go on and on about the Canadian border guards, this whole section.
Establish a new oversight body specifically for the CBSA, that's the border security agency.
If your focus is everyday life people who don't like Muslims, why are you having so many of your proposals focused on reining in the guys who are supposed to keep out foreign terrorists?
What's that even got to do with the case of Canadian Muslims?
I don't think this is a good faith recommendation.
I'll keep reading.
Media representation.
Incentivize production of Muslim stories told by Canadian Muslims through designated funding in the Canada Media Fund, telefilm, the National Film Board, and provincial and municipal grants for arts and media.
Could you imagine if someone proposed doing that for, I don't know, Christian media.
The government should give money to have Christian TV, radio, movies, arts.
It's incredible, but Trudeau says he's going to move forward with it.
Global Affairs Canada commits to challenging Islamophobia globally.
You know, there's more than 30 countries that are Muslim majority.
In fact, the Organization for Islamic Cooperation has over 50 countries.
I'm sure there are cases of anti-Muslim bigotry in the world, but actually I think that it's a far more acute issue, the treatment of minorities within the Muslim world, including the treatment of Muslim minorities, such as the Ahmadiyya Muslims or the Ismaili Muslims, who are brutally treated by countries like Saudi Arabia or Pakistan.
And then, of course, the Christians in places like Egypt, Pakistan, even in Muslim areas of Nigeria and in Syria-Iraq.
Distressing White Supremacism Discourse00:05:06
Provide direction to all agencies to cease the usage of biased and inherently fallacious sources produced by the Islamophobia industry.
Now, I don't know what this Islamophobia industry is, but I can guess it's anything focused on the separation of mosque and state or on national security.
Legislative change to empower relevant registrars to prevent white supremacist groups from registering as a society.
They're going on about white supremacism.
I think they call anyone they don't like a white supremacist, even if they're a minority.
White supremacist is the go-to accusation by the liberals and the New Democrats and much of the media.
I think they're basically saying ban anyone we don't like.
Review existing legislation and pass legislation that prohibits violent white supremacist rallies on provincial property while paying careful attention to ensure the legislation is not overbroad and does not limit freedom to dissent.
What?
You know what?
Maybe I missed it.
Have you seen any violent white supremacist rallies in Canada in your life?
I haven't.
Maybe I'm not paying enough attention.
The thing about rallies is that anyone can have a rally unless they're violent.
So white supremacists are not.
If you're violent, shut her down.
You don't need to pass a law for that, but it would be quite weird to pass a law saying certain ideologies are allowed and certain aren't.
I think anyone who's violent should be shut down, whether you're anti-Muslim or anti-Christian or anti-black or anti-white.
They have lots of plans for provincial governments too.
Extend limitations periods for human rights complaints to five years to take into account the trauma victims face while allowing a claimant to seek an extension to the limitation period if the claimant has extenuating circumstances reasonably demonstrating why they were unable to file a formal human rights complaint within the five-year limitation period.
So if you hire someone or have dealings with someone and then you say goodbye, five years later, they can come back to you with a human rights complaint.
A typical lawsuit has to be filed within two years.
They're just trying to whip up grievances.
Provinces should conduct regular polls to determine the state of racism and Islamophobia in their particular province and to determine the relevant aspects of Islamophobic sentiment.
These people are hunting for things, hunting for grievances, hunting for trouble, and hunting for money.
I found this document deeply distressing.
First of all, it shows that the leading media go-to source for Islamic content has as its enemy the police and the surveillance and the border guards who are designed to keep all of us safe, including Canadian Muslims safe from foreign terrorists.
So much of their focus is telling police and border guards that they aren't allowed to do their job.
They have to be rigorously re-educated.
I don't think that that's a real concern for Canadian Muslims.
Another, I think, deeply distressing part of this is their focus on shutting up people they don't like.
Now, they insult people by saying you're a white supremacist.
I'm sure there are white supremacists out there.
There's lots of black supremacists, too, by the way.
And I think there's lots of Muslim supremacists.
I think every group has its extremists.
And the fact that they're obsessed with demonizing their critics as white supremacists and then immediately calling for their censorship or them even being banned from having meetings shows that they're deeply illiberal.
Like I say, these rules would be more at home in a place like Pakistan or Iran than in a place like Canada.
And for Trudeau to say he's going to move forward on these, I find is distressing.
Look, I think it's important that we get along as Canadians, whether you're Christian or Muslim or Jewish or Sikh or Hindu or none of the above.
I think this document is not designed to help us get along.
It's designed to further the differences, to look for differences, to look for grievances, to encourage grievances, to actually set up a fund for people to sue each other for banning people who have a different point of view and for giving the government enormous power to censor the enemies list of the NCCM.
Yeah, it's pretty clear that they are, in fact, a kindred spirit to their U.S. mother group that was said by a U.S. judge to be linked to the Muslim Brotherhood.
I find this document distressing, but what's far more distressing is the loving treatment it's getting from the media party and from Trudeau to the Liberal Party.
Stay with us.
Well, last week was a bit odd.
Twitter Censors and Political Bias00:07:31
You saw President Joe Biden accuse Facebook of actually killing people.
Remember that?
Here's a clip.
What's your message to platforms like Facebook?
They're killing people.
I mean, it really, look, the only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated.
And that's, and they're killing people.
That was odd because, of course, the Democrats and the tech companies are so often in collusion.
They work together.
There's a revolving door between working in the Democrat Party and working in big tech companies like Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, Google, et cetera.
It's the same up here in Canada.
You may not know this because the mainstream media doesn't talk about it a lot, but the boss for Facebook Canada in charge of their policy, including censorship, is a man named Kevin Chan, who is less famous for having worked in the leader's office of the Liberal Party of Canada.
They're truly in league with each other.
And so it is not much of a surprise that one of the few truly conservative voices in parliament is one of the voices most often censored by big tech.
Take a look at this tweet from Twitter.
It's a notification from Twitter to Derek Sloan, the MP for Hastings, Lennox, and Addington.
He made a pretty, you know, uncontroversial comment.
I'll just read it in full.
The combination of vaccine injuries and the extremely low risk that COVID poses to the young have convinced ministers in the UK to do the right thing.
Where is this common sense in Canada?
And then there's a link, if you can see.
The link is to an underlying story.
I believe it was from Reuters, which simply had that information.
I don't know if you know this, but Canada is racing towards vaccinating youngsters.
In the UK, they've held the line.
Derek Sloan accurately retweeted that story with a comment of his own.
And yet, as you can see, Twitter suspended the MP from his right to speak.
So much for freedom of speech.
It's not the first time that Derek Sloan has been censored.
You might recall about a month ago, he held a press conference in Ottawa, including with physicians who have been silenced and censored for taking a skeptical view of the virus.
That video became the number one most watched video of all time for CPAC.
That's the cable consortium that broadcasts parliament.
Alas, after a few days, that was suspended by YouTube as well.
Well, joining us now, before he's completely silenced, is the MP for Hastings, Lennox, and Addington, Derek Sloan, who joins us from his constituency.
I tell you, it's almost like people don't want the other side of the story being told.
You're being censored almost as much as Rebel News is.
Yeah, you're absolutely right.
And as you noted, I shared a Reuters article, hardly a far-right extremist site.
So, yes, it's absurd what we're seeing.
Yeah, I mean, let's put up on the screen again.
We showed your tweet itself, but we had the larger image of what Twitter said to you.
It's like Twitter Court just issued a sentence.
There was no trial.
You had no response.
You were allowed.
They said, we have determined that this account violated the Twitter rules specifically for violating the policy on spreading misleading and potentially harmful information.
But you just linked to a Reuters article.
And then they said, for more information on COVID-19, you know, refer to the following links.
And they send you to the China-run World Health Organization.
So there's no appeal.
There's no transparency.
Who knows who did that?
If it was some of the World Health Organization or some intern at Twitter's head office in California, who knows?
But they just censored a member of parliament in Canada.
And what are you going to do about it?
Well, that's a great question.
And really, it really is a bit of a kangaroo court.
And my kids found a bunny outside earlier.
Your kids are so cute.
I just want to ask a few more questions, though.
It's great to see the kids and they're always a delight.
But, kids, let me talk to your dad for another minute.
You know what?
It's good to know that life goes on despite politics and the ugliness of censorship.
And I'll let you get back to your family right away.
One of the perils of working from home, I've seen crazier, I've seen crazier eruptions and interventions of that.
You've got cute kids.
Hey, Derek, let me ask you: Do you think it only goes one way?
I've never seen politicians on the left or media on the left who get things wrong, sometimes extremely wrong.
I've never seen them censored or suspended.
Maybe it happens, but I've just never seen it.
Well, I think you're right.
I mean, I can't think of any good example of a left-wing politician getting banned.
I remember there were some prominent tweets in the Israel-Palestine events there.
We had a little while ago by some people that were harkening back to even talking fondly about Hitler.
And they were left-leaning type people, and I don't think they got banned.
We're seeing really a political bias in the censorship, which is why I'm so concerned.
I mean, censorship generally is troubling, of course, but when it has a political motive to it, that is extremely troubling.
You're right.
I mean, just a couple of weeks ago, after your initial bout of church arsons in BC, the head of their Civil Liberties Association, Harshawalia, tweeted, burn it all down.
And that tweet is still up there.
I mean, she was later, you know, she later was driven out of the BC Civil Liberties Association.
She had so discredited them.
But that was not done to them by Twitter.
I note that, you know, I follow Nicolas Maduro, the tyrant of Venezuela, on Twitter.
China has dozens of propaganda accounts on Twitter, many of them verified with a little blue check mark.
The Ayatollah of Iran, Vladimir Putin, they're all on Twitter, but you're kicked off.
Donald Trump's banned for life.
I think we've got a real problem there.
And I think that problem is upstream from politics, because if you can't even communicate your message, how are you ever going to win an election?
Yeah, well, you're totally right.
And the censorship is getting worse.
And we're seeing, you know, in my case, they had a thing there that said, oh, well, you may not have been following local health advice.
So, you know, in our case, where our local health advice is different from that in the UK, does that mean I can't even share what they're doing in the UK?
I mean, this is extreme and it's bizarre.
And we're seeing the liberals, you know, put forward legislation that's going to make this worse.
Yeah, and I'm worried that they're going to get a big boost because, of course, the White House seems so adamant.
I mean, they're actually naming, they're listing 12 enemies of the truth and demanding that Facebook censor 12 people.
Candidates and Liberty00:10:01
Like, that's how specific they're getting.
I find it terrifying.
Now, I remember when we spoke a little while back, and I was asking you what your plans were because you were formally kicked out and banned from running as a conservative.
You ran and won as a conservative MP.
You ran and placed well in the conservative party leadership.
And I think it's pretty much universally accepted that you were thrown out of the party with trumped up charges because you accepted some small donation from an anonymous, from someone who was hiding their real name that no one ever heard of, that the party itself, like it was just such a cooked up excuse.
They wanted to get rid of you.
And back then, we didn't quite know what you were up to.
If I understand correctly, you've decided to run again as an independent.
Is that right?
So I'm going to be running again.
I'm also creating, I'm also going to be touring across the country.
I believe that, you know, parties and these kinds of things come secondary to political movements.
And I am actively recruiting a Liberty slate of candidates to run in Canada.
Now, there are a few good conservatives that I like.
There's obviously some PPC candidates.
But I'm going to do everything I can to ensure there's a solid, common sense candidate with integrity in every riding in the country.
And I'll be out in Alberta, actually, very soon.
So I want your followers out there to stay tuned.
I'm going to be doing a tour in Alberta to try and save this great country that we have.
All right.
Well, let me ask you a few questions about what that means.
I mean, I know what a party is.
It has a certain structure.
And importantly, it allows the issuance of tax receipts.
In fact, extremely generous tax credits, more even than a regular charity, if I'm not mistaken.
It also allows that party to be affixed to the candidate's name on a ballot.
So there's some real benefits that come from being a party.
You used the word slate.
I don't know if that has any legal meaning.
It's just a group of people.
Would these people just all be independents?
Or as you mentioned, would some of them be PPC?
How does this overlap with what Maxime Bernier's party is doing?
You mentioned conservatives.
Would any Conservative Party of Canada person be on the slate?
Help me understand what you mean.
Well, I want to ensure that there is a candidate worth voting for in every single riding in the country.
Now, you mentioned different organizational things.
In the long run, all of those options are on the table, and I'm actively looking at several of them.
I want to make sure that if an election is called in August, as some of the rumors say, that in as large a portion of the country as possible, there is a candidate worth voting for.
So there are different, you know, in some cases that might be a conservative.
In many cases, it won't be.
But this is the type of thing that I want to make sure is in place in the event of an early election.
You know what?
I see a lot of, not a lot, I see a number of people who are skeptics about the lockdown, who are voices for what I would call freedom or liberty.
But there's a disunity there, a splitism.
I see it provincially in Ontario.
I see it provincially in Alberta where they're creating more parties.
And I get it.
People have their particular vision.
But the left calls that splitism.
And you split the right so many times, you're going to really guarantee the other guys win.
I mean, I note that in your own riding, you beat the Liberal by about 4% or 5% last time.
So, I mean, it's going to be an uphill battle for you to collect the majority of the votes.
How do you overcome that splitism?
Not just you, but how does the Liberty, what remains of the Liberty movement, how, you know, provincially in Ontario, you got Roman Baber, you got Randy Hillier, you got Jim and Belinda Karajelios, and they each sort of feel to me like they want to be the boss.
I don't know.
I just, I feel like cobbling together some sort of unified movement is necessary, but I don't know if I see it happening.
Certainly not in time for the next election.
Am I wrong in my hunch?
Well, unity is always imperative, and it's incumbent upon all of us to work towards that.
I do think, though, that no matter what happens, we need to make sure that we have a reasonable alternative that's ready.
And, you know, as far as I'm concerned, the Conservative Party as a structure, there are a few MPs that I would still endorse, but as a structure is not A, capable of winning.
And even if by some miracle they did, our country would not be way better off than it is now.
It's the same policies, just not quite as extreme as the liberals.
So we need to have a true Canadian alternative.
And at this point in the game, with an election looming, it could be several groups of people working together.
And you mentioned a few of them.
But we need to make sure that all hands are on deck.
And as far as I'm concerned, I'm hoping to unify the movement along with others.
But I do also believe that, you know, even if we had several options, only one of them will win the hearts and minds of Canadians.
And hopefully we can come together as a group and win the hearts and minds of Canadians united.
But I do think it is possible.
Yeah.
You know what?
I just have one more comment.
I don't want to come across as a naysayer.
I regard myself as a fan of yours.
I believe you're strong in policy.
I think you're an excellent communicator.
I think the attacks on you, both in the media and by the Conservative Party, were trumped up.
But I do have a real question that I would put to anyone who says what you say.
And that is, I happened when I was a young man, so many years ago in the 20th century, I saw Preston Manning build a party from scratch.
Now there's 338 ridings, like just to travel to 10 provinces and three territories, just to vet the candidates.
Preston was on the road 200 plus days a year, and it was hard work building the people infrastructure.
I mean, I guess it's a little bit different these days with the internet, but you still have to find good people, good candidates, good door knockers, good donors.
It's just such an enormous job.
I wonder how much of a dent you'll be able to make in it before the next election.
And I don't mean to come across as pulling down what you're saying.
I just remember the last guy who built a national political force.
And by the way, it ran out of steam before it finished its work.
And it was a 10-year project for Preston Manning.
It was more than that.
Well, you know what?
I don't intend to say that I'm going to do it by myself.
And there's other groups that have already laid the foundations.
And of course, even this past year of the liberty movement working in its own way has been laying the seeds.
But I do think that more than ever, Canadians are looking and hoping for an alternative to what we have.
And I hope to be able to bring it.
And I'm not saying I'm bringing it on my own or apart from other people.
I think the work that Maxine Bernier and others are doing is great.
And I hope to work together with all the different groups that have been pushing for liberty and these types of things and bring them together, but also mold that into a political solution.
And the People's Party is part of that.
But I think that we have to bring everybody together.
You know, I'll argue against myself for a minute because I feel like I've been too negative.
Donald Trump showed that you could create a political infrastructure in a very short period of time if you have an excellent and resonant message.
And I would also say that things are so desperately bad in Canada with a total failure of all institutions, governments and oppositions, courts, lawyers, professors, popular culture, there's a total void on so many of these key issues.
So I think that I suppose there is a chance out there, and we'll certainly be following it.
We'll be watching you.
We'll be watching you in your riding of Hastings and Addington.
Excuse me, that's the old name for the riding.
And listen, it's great to see you fighting out there.
And I'm sure no matter what happens, if it's a new party or your own riding or some new entity, I'm sure it'll be worth following.
And I appreciate you giving us an update.
Well, I appreciate it.
And all I can say is whether we succeed or fail, someone must try.
And I've dedicated my work in politics right now to saving this country with whoever wants to join me.
And there's many good people out there, and I meet them all the time.
And I'm just so thankful to see so many people on the ground.
And the work that you're doing at Rebel is part of it as well.
So thank you so much.
Well, right on there, what's your website that people can find out more?
Or let's say someone's watching this and they want to meet up with you out west or electronically.
Is there a website they should go to?
They can go to www.dereksloan.ca, sign up for my emails, and you'll get briefed on all that's going on out there.
All right.
Well, great to see you again.
And great to see your kids again.
They're a hoot.
And it sounds like they're living a normal life as best they can in these crazy times.
Nice to see you again, Derek.
Thanks so much.
Talk to you, sir.
Right on.
There you have a Derek Sloan, the MP for Hastings, Lennox, and Addington.
I did get that name right.
There used to be a Frontenac in there, too, in the olden days.
And he joined us from his riding.
Skype, stay with us.
Hey, welcome back on my show last night.
Dark Days Ahead00:01:52
Change, rights.
No vax passports.
Stay strong, everyone.
Well, we'll have to see how that goes down.
As I said, I'm looking for a litigation case where we find a very sympathetic client, say someone with a medical reason they can't take a vax, and a very unsympathetic company or school or other institution.
And to find a sympathetic client in a badly behaved institution, that is a perfect civil liberties storm.
And we need a perfect case because so far judges have turned down almost every challenge to lockdown legislation in this country.
On my interview with Ryan Hartwig, Loretta writes, we should all stop calling it Facebook.
Fact block would be more accurate.
Yeah, you know, it's incredible.
Facebook has really set itself up as the Supreme Court for the world, but they're not applying our liberal standards of law.
And of course, their rulings are done secretly.
I thought if you're referring to that Scandinavian censorship boss, it was very chilling just how blasé he was about, oh, yeah, we have a list of people that you can't talk about.
You can't even say their name unless you're attacking them.
And I haven't seen the list, but I trust that it's fair.
And there's really no way to get off the list while you're on the list.
And we're your new overlords.
So bend the knee.
I find it terrifying.
What's even more terrifying is that Joe Biden has said Facebook's not going far enough.
He's demanding that they nuke 12 specific people on Facebook and Instagram that Joe Biden says are saying the wrong thing.
And the deputy press secretary specifically said conservatives need to be cracked down on.
I think we're in for dark days.
We'll do our best here at Rebel News.
Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here, to you at home, good night.