Ezra Levant examines forced sterilization’s dark history, from Nazi Germany’s 1933 "eugenics" program—targeting 400,000+ people with disabilities or homosexuality—to Tommy Douglas’ 1933 thesis advocating similar measures. He links this to COVID-19 vaccine mandates, citing Pfizer’s FDA-monitored trials until 2027 and Ontario’s suspension of Dr. Roshan Killian for granting exemptions, while questioning modern transparency amid undisclosed doctor-pharma ties. Melbourne’s protests against vaccine passports, framed as societal segregation, echo past authoritarianism, with over 50,000 signatures rallying to kill the bill—highlighting enduring risks when medical ethics bow to state power. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, is it okay to force people to be sterilized against their will?
It's November 4th, and this is the Es Levant show.
Why should others go to jail when you're the biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I'm publishing it, is because it's my bloody right to do so.
Is it okay to force people to undergo a medical procedure against their will?
Let's take sterilization as an example, as in making it so they can't have children.
That sounds pretty horrible.
You know, before the Holocaust against the Jews even began, the Nazis were engaged in eugenics as in weeding out people from society who were considered medically or genetically or morally inferior.
People who were mentally disabled, people who were sickly, even people with epilepsy or cerebral palsy, even deaf people and blind people, homosexual people, people who were depressed, even people who were just weak, whatever that means.
Hundreds of thousands were sterilized, as in they were made so they could not have children, so their genes would not be passed on.
And in fact, hundreds of thousands were killed, too.
A sort of Holocaust, based on the theory that they were inferior like the Jews were, and that it was the state's job to improve the race and get rid of them.
Here's Hitler's order.
Let me read the English translation of the German.
It's an order from Hitler to medical doctors, not to soldiers, to doctors, to kill people medically deemed inferior.
Let me read it.
It's a translation into English.
Reich leader Bohler and Dr. Brandt are entrusted with the responsibility of extending the authority of physicians to be designated by name so that patients who, after a most critical diagnosis, on the basis of human judgment, are considered incurable, can be granted mercy death.
Adolf Hitler.
Mercy death.
Got it.
They thought what they were doing was right, that it was merciful even.
Mercy, it's a virtue.
To let them live, that would be the sin.
They said this, they wrote this, they did this, they believed this.
This was public health.
They said so.
And who are you to say it wasn't?
These were doctors.
Oh, do you think it was just them, just the Nazis?
Here's the master's thesis from no one less than Tommy Douglas, the Christian man, the progressive man, the great Canadian, the spiritual leader of the do-getters and the NDP.
His thesis is called The Problems of the Subnormal Family.
It was his thesis, you can see, published it in March of 1933.
That's two months after Hitler became Chancellor, by the way.
Tommy Douglas was right in sync with the Nazis on this stuff.
Do you think I exaggerate?
Look at this page.
Here's his prescription.
Here's what he wants to do.
Make it so you can't get married without the state giving you a permit.
Make it so you have to give the world seven days' notice so doctors or others can object.
Segregate people on social status.
Look at point C, sterilization of physically unfit and mental defectives.
That's your NDP saint.
That's your healthcare saint, your public health saint, Tommy Douglas.
That was 1933.
That's how it was.
And that's how it would be in Nazi Germany.
And they killed millions of Jews.
And do you not see that they believed what they were doing was right?
And that it was clean.
And they were getting rid of the mental defectives and the physical defectives, defectives, as Tommy Douglas called them, the Untermenschen, the under people in German.
And worse than that, Dr. Joseph Mengele was a medical doctor, and he thought he could do experiments on Jews at Auschwitz.
Was it because he was cruel?
Well, perhaps, but that is not why it was approved.
And his madness had a method.
He was doing genuine medical research.
He was checking things, testing things that no doubt were useful to understanding human biology.
But they were treating humans like lab rats.
He would find twins and he would butcher them.
He would infect one with typhus and then transfuse the blood of the other twin into the first.
He would conduct amputations.
He would inject things into their hearts and then do autopsies, dissect them both to compare both people on twins.
So he had a control group, the other twin.
He would torture and kill both, of course, in the name of science.
I'm going to stop there because I cannot bear to describe more of what he did.
I've told you 1% of it.
Countless atrocities that I hate to read, let alone say, but you should read them.
You should Google Joseph Mengele, and you should read what he did.
We can't forget because, you know what they say, never again.
But never again happens again if we forget, right?
And who even knows what a Nazi is today?
I mean, isn't a Nazi just someone the CBC doesn't like?
Isn't Trump a Nazi?
That's what the word means now, really.
That's a form of Holocaust denial in itself, isn't it?
After the war, Dr. Brandt, the one who led the euthanasia program I referred to, he was put on trial along with other doctors.
Nazi Experiments Revisited00:15:36
It was called the doctor's trial.
Many were sentenced to death.
And from that, the court that tried those horrific Nazi doctors wrote down a code, a rule, like the Ten Commandments, I guess.
There were ten of them, ten points.
I'm going to read them.
Can I take five minutes to read them to you?
The first rule is very long.
It takes about a minute to read.
The others are quite short.
Permit me, okay?
And as I read these, think about whether or not we're following these rules now in Canada in 2021 with regards to, oh, I don't know, vaccines.
I'll start.
The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential.
This means that the person involved should have legal capacity to give consent, should be so situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion, and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the element of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision.
This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject, there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment, the method and means by which it is to be conducted, all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected, and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment.
The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment.
It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
All right, that's the long one.
The next nine are short.
The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur, except perhaps in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
Proper preparation should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury, disability, or death.
The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons.
The highest degree of skill and care should be required throughout all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
During the course of the experiment, the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
During the course of the experiment, the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage if he has probable cause to believe in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill, and careful judgment required of him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.
That's from the Nazi trials in Nuremberg.
That was in response to the Nazi doctors.
Where are our doctors today upholding these values?
There's not very many of them, but the few of them there are being silenced.
Here's a story in the CBC.
Four doctors not cooperating with investigators into COVID practices, Ontario Medical Regulator.
College alleges one doctor says any attempt to gather records will be resisted physically.
Ontario's medical regulator says it is turning to the courts in an effort to compel four physicians to cooperate with its investigations into their practices regarding COVID-19, including the issuance of medical exemptions for vaccines.
The College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario says it has launched legal action with the Superior Court against Dr. Mary Elizabeth O'Connor, Dr. Mark Raymond Trotzy, Dr. Celeste Jean Thurwell, and Dr. Roshan Killian.
The regulator last week suspended Killian's medical license after previously barring her from issuing medical exemptions from COVID-19 vaccines.
Okay, so hang on.
So these four doctors, as far as we know, they're not prescribing like narcotics to their patients illegally.
Sometimes doctors do that.
They're not taking narcotics themselves.
Sometimes doctors do that.
They're not sleeping with their patients in an unethical way.
They're not stealing.
They're not violating the privacy of their patients.
In fact, it sounds like the opposite.
They're ferociously protecting the privacy of their patients, sounds like.
But they're being fired and prosecuted and demonized by the College of Physicians and Surgeons for providing medical exemptions to their patients from vaccines that are very much experimental, that have not been fully tested, that we know in some cases cause severe injury or even death.
In fact, the FDA says these very vaccines must continue to be treated, sorry, tested, pardon me, for many years to come.
In the case of Pfizer, to the year 2027, these things are still experimental and they can only be used on an emergency basis.
So you're literally firing doctors and prosecuting them and shaming them.
And of course, the state broadcaster, the CBC, is loving this.
You're prosecuting them for trying to protect people from medical procedures they don't understand or don't agree with or don't accept the risk from.
You know, I don't want to throw around the word Nazi.
That's what the CBC does.
That's what the left does.
But the entire basis of medical ethics we use today when it comes to administering medical procedures to people comes from what we learned from the Nazis.
And to his credit, even Tommy Douglas himself later renounced eugenics after seeing what Nazi Germany was doing.
Eugenics are back.
Segregation is back.
Forcing people to take medical procedures on pain of losing their work and career and position in society is back.
How do you describe this massive ethics violation other than what it is?
A return to pre-Nuremberg Code values, where doctors did what politicians ordered them to do, where deaths resulted.
Sorry, you tell me, is there a single thing that has been done in the name of public health these past two years that that Nazi Dr. Brandt would object to?
Stay with us for a more have you ever seen an ad for a medicine, a pharmaceutical product on Canadian TV?
Well, they're not as ubiquitous as on American TV.
And the first time you see an American TV ad for a drug, they're actually quite shocking.
Because besides romancing the product, they list side effects.
So you have this beautiful soft-focus ad about a drug that'll cure your depression or a drug that'll cure your skin condition.
And then you hear that same narrator fire off 10 rather shocking potential side effects.
And maybe that's a reason why the vaccines are not advertised.
Because to advertise them, you'd have to list their side effects, some of which can be terrifying, many of which are not yet known.
The science develops because really you are being experimented on.
Of course, there have been some very preliminary experiments done in a clinical setting.
But the official FDA-ordered experiments and trial runs of these vaccines will continue for another six years.
So if you're taking the vaccine shot now, you're taking it the same time that clinical trials are running for six years to come.
But the good news for the drug companies is they don't have to run ads because the entire communications apparatus of the modern state is deployed to their service.
I'm not just talking about government officials, I'm talking about all the media, which brings to us our story of the day.
Written by Cosmo Jerjo in TNC.news, our friends at TrueNorth, the headline: Media didn't disclose doctors $2 million in Pfizer funding in coverage promoting child vaccination.
Another story by True North talks about Dr. Mark Lawtons at the University of Toronto, who is personally sponsored by AstraZeneca.
If he were a race car driver, his outfit would be emblazoned with their logo.
Both of these promoters paid by the drug companies, and yet the mainstream media hid that.
Joining us now, Via Skype from the lower mainland of British Columbia is the author, Cosmo Jurgi, who joins us now.
Well, first of all, congratulations on this basic act of journalism.
Now, I'm not downplaying it because you're the only journalist in Canada who did it.
Seems like a basic thing to check, but it seems like you're the only guy who did check.
Yeah, you're exactly right.
It wasn't very hard.
Both these individuals do not hide their background.
For example, Professor Mark Lawtons, it's in his very title, and you could go on the University of Toronto website and you'll see it right there.
Additionally, with Dr. Jim Kellner, it's on his CV at the University of Calgary.
So either the media incredibly failed to do their due diligence, or they purposefully did not mention this fact in numerous articles, especially with Jim Kellner, who has been paraded as the leading authority for child vaccination in Canada.
He's done dozens of articles in the past few months, and that is because they are currently testing, well, Health Canada has approved testing on certain vaccines for the 5 to 11 age group.
So you mentioned, and I read your interesting article: Jim Kellner, who got the $2 million from Pfizer, he was in CTV News, CBC News, Global News, the Toronto Star, the Globe and Mail.
And none of these publications indicated that he was on the Pfizer payroll, just none of them did.
That's right.
There was no mention that he received, well, the exact amount is $1.94 million going back to about 2014.
His current spat of over $700,000 is set or earmarked until 2022.
So he's currently still benefiting off money from Pfizer.
Although the research does not necessarily have to do with COVID-19, there's still research on vaccines and viruses.
So I approached all these media companies, and unsurprisingly, none of them got back to me.
CBC did email me back.
They said they would follow up.
They did not.
And as far as I know, there have been no corrections made, no editing to those articles to indicate that this individual is receiving money from Pfizer.
You know, I'm a little bit older than you, Cosmo, and it wasn't long ago when big pharma was as demonized, especially by the left, as big tobacco or big anything.
I mean, it was so easy to hate them, especially when you had drugs, life-saving drugs that were price, you know, hundreds of dollars a dose.
I mean, Martin Shkrelli became a poster boy for predatory pricing for pharmaceutical companies.
I'm not talking about things 20 years ago.
I'm talking about five years ago.
I mean, big pharma was one of the least trusted industries in the world.
And we've gone from, and especially by the left, I should point out.
And now we've gone to the mainstream media and the parties of the left, too, just absolutely becoming mouthpieces.
And when you bring it to their attention, they don't deny it or care.
Yeah, it's a huge failure of duty.
They've basically abdicated, you know, holding truth to power as the press, which was their original intention.
And it seems like they're not willing to make any changes.
They're just hoping to ignore this fact.
They're hoping people won't ask questions.
I'm sure there are other people who have received funding from pharmaceutical companies, especially those involved in making COVID-19 vaccines that have not been disclosed.
So they just think it's better off that we don't know, I guess.
You know, more than a decade ago, I briefly worked as a registered lobbyist.
And every meeting I had with the government, I had to document and file.
And to this day, it's searchable online.
And I wasn't paid a fraction of what these guys are getting paid.
And by the way, lobbying includes grassroots lobbying or propagandizing.
I just find that this is another failure, like you say, of speaking truth to power.
Where's the watchdogs?
We don't have them in opposition.
We obviously don't have them in government.
We don't have them in the college of physicians and surgeons.
We don't have them in the legacy media, as you've proved.
We don't have them in the law schools, the law professors.
We don't have them in the law courts.
It's as if all at the same time, every single institution suddenly started singing from the same prayer book.
I don't know how it happened.
I'm not positing a conspiracy theory that there's some central organization here.
I don't know what it is about the madness of our times, Cosmo.
But how can go ahead?
Pfizer's Influence?:00:06:39
Yeah, there definitely seems to be an alignment of narrative and tactics in a way.
Because I question, like you have editorial boards on at least five, half a dozen major media outlets, and you would think that at least one of these outlets would say, hey, maybe we should mention this.
So, you know, like you said, not to be conspiratorial, but there is some sort of, you know, working in concert to not reveal certain facts about what they're telling the general public.
I could accept it as an oversight or sloppiness or laziness or hastiness if they made the mistake in the first place.
Even if all, you know, CBC, CTB, Global, Toronto, Star Global, if they all made the same mistake, I'd say, boy, they sure look down their nose at grassroots citizen journalists like you and me, but fine, maybe they were in a rush.
But you contacted all of them and they ignored you, refused to change their stories.
So that moves, removes any possibility that this was an oversight or a mistake.
And it confirms the worst, which was that this is deliberate.
I just don't get it.
Maybe Pfizer is sponsoring those media too.
I mean, here's a meme we showed the other day.
It's a montage that purports to show that Pfizer sponsors just about every political talk show out there.
It reminds me in the 90s, there was a company called Archer Daniels Midland.
They were into soy and corn and things like that.
And they sponsored every Sunday political talk show.
Ordinary grassroots citizens did not buy anything from Archer Daniels Midland.
You couldn't go to the store and say, hey, can I buy some Archer Daniels Midland product?
Their only product was lobbying those politicians for farm subsidies and protectionism.
So the ad was not for the viewer.
It was for the sake of the political talk shows they sponsored.
Here's Pfizer.
I have trouble believing this is even real, but take a look at this.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
CBS Health Watch sponsored by Pfizer.
Anderson Cooper 360.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
ABC News Nightline.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
Making a difference.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
CNN Tonight.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
Early Start.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
Friday night on Aaron Burnett Outfront.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
This week with George Stephanopoulos is brought to you by Pfizer.
This letter report brought to you by Pfizer.
Today's countdown to the Royal Wedding is brought to you by Pfizer.
And now a CBS Sports Update brought to you by Pfizer.
Meet the Press data download.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
This portion of CBS This Morning, sponsored by Pfizer, on how to find the hidden sugars in the American family diet.
Sponsored by Pfizer.
I have to assume that, I mean, I assume that's real, but it's so shocking I have trouble believing it.
That said, this is the best year in Pfizer's history in terms of profit.
And, you know, if they're spreading walking around money, a million here, a million there, to get the billions flowing to them, I guess that makes perfect commercial sense, doesn't it?
Yeah, at the heart of the matter, it's a lack of transparency, a lack of transparency from the pharmaceutical companies themselves, from the media, from the government.
For example, we do not have fully disclosed contracts to these vaccine agreements.
Portions of it are blacked out, redacted.
You know, we haven't seen what we've really agreed to in terms of financial or legal obligations.
So my entire point of doing this is just shining a light, holding up a mirror, and calling for some accountability.
You know, I should bring to your attention that it was just a few years ago that Pfizer paid one of the largest fines in history, more than $2 billion for deceptive marketing.
And it's not unheard of for major companies looking for government contracts, not just to lie and make secret payments, but to make illegal payments.
One could say that the cash literally put in a safe deposit box by Brian Mulroney, cash that came through Middleman from Airbus to grease the wheels of that purchase, suggests that one day it might be found that politicians were on the take from drug companies the same way they were on the take from airline manufacturers.
I have no evidence of this, but I do have evidence that they're spreading cash around to doctors, that in the past they were caught and punished for fraud.
And this is the biggest bonanza of their life.
Very, very troubling.
Last word to you, Cosmo.
Do you think that there are others embedded in the media or embedded in politics who are taking payments?
I'm not saying illegally even.
I'm just saying taking payments, but just not mentioning them like Dr. Kellner and Dr. Lawtons didn't tag it on to the bottom of their op-eds.
I think without a doubt, especially due to the fact that companies like Pfizer, Ashrazinik are pretty large pharmaceutical companies, very active in Canada.
So I wouldn't be surprised that a lot of people working in fields like microbiology, virology, chemistry, etc., received some money in the past.
That's not the point.
The point is disclose it.
Tell it to the media.
Tell it to the public.
Be up front.
You know, all these media companies have to do was write a little blurb, add one sentence to the article to explain this.
You know, that would change the amount of trust readers might have to the credibility of the people in that article, but it's the right thing to do.
Yeah, I mean, I've got to tell you, in a country where Bombardier is repeatedly accused and in some cases convicted of fraud, where SNC Lavaland has a corporate culture of fraud, and where in both cases politicians intervene to cover up for their friends, I think it is almost a certainty that we have corruption in the pharmaceutical industry.
America First Dilemma00:02:25
And I fear that the sunlight that exposes that will come many years after the harm is done.
Cosmo, Georgia, great reporting at TNC.news.
Our friends at True North, great to see you.
Thanks for your time.
Thank you, Azure.
All right, there you have it.
Stay with us.
Go ahead.
Hey, welcome back.
Your viewer feedback.
Someone with the nickname Scrub Attack says, Trump was an extremely important president, especially when it comes to reforming the Republicans, but the America First Movement would be better off without him.
Far-left propaganda has made him an issue and toxic to people who want to win over.
The most important thing is to clean up the Republican Party establishment, rhinos, neocons, and anyone else that represents America last.
They are an even worse problem than Trump.
I don't know if, I mean, America First refers to, you know, getting away from globalism, not caring what foreign countries say, probably ending foreign aid, getting out of the UN global warming conference, things like that.
I don't know if those were quite the issues at play in Virginia or New Jersey.
Certainly in Virginia, it seemed to me to be an education-oriented issue, critical race theory, transgenderism.
I don't think that's really an America First thing.
Alyssa, I like Trump and I thought he was a wonderful president.
But if it's possible to win with Trump's ideas, but without the stereotypical polarization that comes from Trump, if there's people who haven't been saddled yet with the baggage that the media parties put on Trump, like Ron DeSantis, my favorite example, or look at Glenn Young, what he accomplished.
Trump himself is a very young, acting, young-looking guy, but I think he's 75 now, too.
And by the time 2024 runs around, I mean, he's still sharp as attack and has a high-energy work ethic.
But maybe it's time to move to a younger generation.
Again, you can tell I'm a DeSantis guy.
Someone with the nickname, Cousin 167, says, we, the people, are the rightful masters of both Congress and the courts, not to overthrow the Constitution, but to overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution, Abraham Lincoln.
Killthebill.coma-au00:08:13
Well, I mean, our Constitution in Canada is different.
We have far fewer protections.
And I follow what the United States is doing to push back against the lockdownism and the vaccine mandates.
And courts have struck many of those down.
If you want to read some amazing jurisprudence, read the very succinct rulings of the U.S. Supreme Court smacking down California's lockdowns of churches.
And one of the wonderful rulings of the Supreme Court was: Hollywood has their singing shows that were allowed.
They had an exemption, but the churches weren't allowed to sing.
And the judges in that case said you can have the same rules on everybody, but you can't give exemptions for your pals and shut down the churches.
That's not a total win, but that's a pretty good win.
Show me a court ruling in a single court ruling in Canada that's even close to that.
Gene Burke says, Parents, oversee your children well.
This is crucial.
I heard some online lessons forbade parents to watch.
Now we know why.
Canadians too, homeschool if you can.
Oh, you're exactly right.
And the fact that teachers so blatantly say, you can't see what we're teaching, really?
What secrets are you keeping with my child from me?
I think it's a giveaway.
And I think Americans woke up in a shock.
Canadians, I regret, don't have that fighting spirit in the same way.
Well, maybe you do, because you're a rebel viewer, but we're the minority.
Well, 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.
Keep fighting for freedom.
And let me leave you with a fun video from our favourite Australian, Avi Yamini.
Good night.
Good night, Eve.
We're all here to have a good day and get our voice heard.
No worries, yeah.
We'll block the road.
We'll get the cars out.
Just let us know when you're going to step off.
No, beautiful.
Happy Luth.
Thanks, Mark.
Thank you guys.
So it looks like police today are working with the protesters to facilitate a peaceful march to the gate of the Melbourne Cup.
I guess this interaction totally dispels that myth that these lockdown protesters are here and they only come out looking for trouble to fight with police.
That was a message we've been told for months.
But as you can see, when police respectfully come and talk to the organisers or people part of the protest, they're assured that they're not here for trouble and they just want their voices heard.
Aviamini in Melbourne, Australia, for Rebel News.
The group here now marching towards the gates.
Look, woman should not have this much mail.
Get to kill the view.com.
Have you signed the petition?
Yes.
Hello, Arvie.
What horse would you like to have a bet on today?
Number one, vaccination.
Vaccination passport.
And number two.
No liberty.
No liberty.
What about my buddy, my choice?
No, that one's dead.
So as you can see, the punters are getting here.
They have to show their tickets and vaccine passports.
That's why this crowd here have gathered to protest this segregation of society where there's two classes of people.
Kill the bill!
Kill the bill!
Kill that bill!
Calling for the end of that controversial bill and an end to a segregated society, which means that 10,000 vaccinated people get to have certain abilities to enter.
Places like the showgrounds here and others are banished from society.
So as you can see, they're now marching back to the park to have a family-friendly picnic.
No issues at all because police didn't instigate anything.
In fact, they facilitated these people's right to protest.
This legislation is not the first of its kind.
It happened in 1933 with Hitler and Dan's doing it all over again.
He's learning from the bare spectator that basically the world has seen and he's turning it again to his own people in Victoria and we need to do what we can to stop it.
I was speaking to Rookshan before Aslag.
Don't do that.
He's a bad person of colour.
I was saying I'm from India and people don't realise until they have a war on their own land to get the freedom they want.
They will never realise and that's what's happening in Australia.
He's an Aussie.
He realises that people have had it too easy.
Too long.
Guys, I take it you don't like the bill very much.
Not at all.
Have you signed the petition killthebill.com.au?
How long have you guys been together?
Seven, eight years.
You married her for a visa?
Yes, absolutely.
I had it before.
So what are you worried about with the bill?
Oh, they have complete control.
No accountability.
But he promises he'll use it responsibly.
What's wrong with you?
We don't trust Dad.
So if you could put it next to him.
Madness.
Absolutely madness.
She always is cynical.
Let's hope historically we can get some people from the ALP to actually cross the ball for their community.
But if we can't, and maybe I'm a pessimist.
I'm an optimist.
If history is anything to go by the last 18 months, it says they're not crossing the floor.
You've got those three, the Greens, the Animal Justice, and Fiona Patton.
They're all going to vote with the government.
This is going to pass.
There's only one other chance that is unprecedented that can stop this bill.
And that is stopping the governor from stamping it.
Oh, that's a wonderful idea.
So that's what we're petitioning.
We're petitioning the governor to actually stand up and take, you know, take a role instead of it just being an honorary empty office.
Turn it into something it's supposed to be.
And it's a bad.
If you actually read her website, that's her job.
Her job is actually to protect us in these situations.
She can stop it.
Killthebill.com.au.
Tell everyone to sign it for us.
Killthebill.com.au, as well as email all your ALP members in the upper house.
We need you to put the pressure on.
Why'd you go with the bold black and you with the outline?
I couldn't be bothered colouring it in.
Is that the male version that's...
This is the pretty version.
So, mum and son.
I came from a country where there was one man ruling the whole country for 30 plus years and killed hundreds of thousands of people.
Giving power to any single person is wrong.
Full stop.
I mean, with this bill, tomorrow he can say on that street, pick up all the Indians.
Well, yeah, most of us would be cool with that.
As long as I take Rook's son first.
Yeah.
He's relenting, but he's son.
Same, same.
A person who has no feeling for other people.
Does not think about the future and does not feel bad about anything they have done in the past.
In back at Psycho.
Someone who is very mentally ill and dangerous.
What are we talking about here?
Have you been speaking to my mum?
You just described what she...
Killed the bill.
Dot com, I think.
Dot com dot au.
Dot com dot au.
There's a petition going.
Killthebill.com.au, sign and sure.
Ladies and gentlemen, I am inspired to report that in the couple of days that this petition has been live at killthebill.com.au, it has already amassed over 50,000 signatures.
But let's not kid ourselves, that's nowhere near enough.
We need, I don't know, at least 100,000 so that when I deliver this petition to the governor, she cannot simply dismiss it.
So please head over to killthebill.com.au.
Read the petition.
If you agree with the content, make sure to sign and share, then share again and again, encouraging every single person you know to sign it.