David Menzies highlights comedian Mike Ward’s 5-4 Supreme Court of Canada victory, where free speech prevailed over offense claims despite his controversial jokes about Jeremy Gabriel—a child celebrity with Treacher Collins Syndrome performing for the Pope and Céline Dion. He warns of potential censorship if governments police humor, comparing it to historical suppression of comedy. At COP26, Menzies exposes world leaders’ hypocrisy—Justin Trudeau and Boris Johnson promoting climate action while using private jets and Land Rovers—with Rebel News banned for asking tough questions like taxpayer funding. Rising fuel prices and a dinosaur ad suggest deeper agendas beyond climate change, echoing concerns about "nefarious strategies" akin to COVID-19 restrictions. The episode also critiques cancel culture after Peter Sherman’s firing from AM 640 Toronto for victim-safety advice misconstrued by activist Farah Khan, questioning whether dissent is increasingly punished under politically correct pressures. [Automatically generated summary]
Hello Rebels, you're listening to a free audio only recording of my show Rebel Roundup.
Now if you like listening to this podcast then you would love watching it.
But in order to watch you need to be a subscriber to Rebel News Plus.
That's what we call our long format TV style shows here on The Rebel.
Subscribers get access to watching my weekly show as well as other great TV style shows too.
It's only $8 a month to subscribe or you can subscribe annually and get two months free.
And just for podcast listeners, you can also save an extra 10% on a new premium membership by using the coupon code PODCAST when you subscribe.
Just go to RebelNewsPlus.com to become a member.
And please leave a five-star review on this podcast and subscribe in iTunes or wherever you listen to podcasts.
Those reviews are a great way to support Rebel News without spending a dime.
And now, enjoy this free audio-only version of my show.
Welcome to Rebel Roundup, ladies and gentlemen, and the rest of you, in which we look back at the very best commentaries of the week by your favorite rebels.
I'm your host, David Menzies.
Well, victory on the free speech front.
The Supreme Court of Canada recently released a decision in favor of comedian Mike Ward, deciding that there is no such human right as the right not to be offended.
The bad news, the decision was a judicial photo finish with the court deciding five to four that no crime had occurred, meaning that the Supreme Court was just one vote away from setting a disturbing new precedent when it comes to free speech.
Rebel News Commander Ezra Levant will weigh in with his take.
Well, another climate catastrophe conference recently wrapped up in Glasgow.
And Hutman, check out who's flying all over Europe telling others to reduce their carbon footprints while he ramps up his own emissions.
Yes, that would be none other than Justin Trudeau, just like the rest of the world leaders.
Defending Offensive Comedy Jokes00:15:11
Our man in the UK, Lewis Brackpool, was there to cover all the egregious virtue signaling and the hypocrisy.
And unlike President Biden, Lewis managed to stay awake.
And letters, we get your letters, we get them every minute of every day.
And you had plenty to say regarding my interview with veteran radio broadcaster Peter Sherman, the latest victim of canceled culture.
And what was Peter's sin?
Well, he offered up safety advice that somehow offended a social justice snowflake.
Just wait till you hear the baffling details.
Those are your rebels.
Now let's round them up.
Mike Ward is rougher.
He's not to everyone's taste.
And one of the things he joked about was this guy, Jeremy Gabriel, who was actually just a kid at the time.
As you can probably tell by looking at him, he has a rare disability called Treacher Collins Syndrome.
It's tough.
It's tough to look at.
Imagine how tough it is to be him, to be his family.
And he was a kid at the time, and Mike Ward made fun of him.
That's definitely not to everyone's taste.
I think it's very important to note that Jeremy Gabriel was not a private person, though.
He was a celebrity, like a child actor, like Greta Tunberg was until, like so many child actors, she aged out and became just an actor, which has less cachet.
Jeremy Gabriel was a celebrity because he was born deaf, but when he turned six, he got a special hearing aid that allowed him to hear.
And he began to sing, and that's how he became a celebrity, because he was a child with such a punishing disease, and yet he still had dreams, and he tried to reach them.
I suppose he did.
He even sang for the Pope and Celine Dion.
I think we can all agree that mocking little Jeremy is punching down.
He wasn't an immoral person.
He was a kid.
He didn't do anything wrong.
In fact, he did a lot with what little God had given him.
Maybe that is doing a lot, actually.
He was a celebrity, and Mike Ward took a run at him.
So the kid's parents took Mike Ward to the Quebec Human Rights Commission.
I know a bit about that.
In 2006, I published the Danish cartoons of Mohammed as part of a news story about them being banned and the riots against them, etc.
And I was taking one of those kangaroo courts myself.
The claim in that case was that I was mocking Mohammed, who, by the way, died many centuries ago.
But publishing those cartoons in that context was a very important journalistic act, if I may say so myself.
Not because the cartoons were inherently interesting.
I would never have published them or even known about them were it not for the boycott against them, the banning of them, the riots that killed more than 200 about them, and later the terrorist attacks against other cartoonists.
I believe what I did was journalistically and legally and morally important, very valuable.
And the human rights complaint against me was odious for those reasons, but also because even if my publication of those cartoons was not important, it's still my right because we're a free country.
I'm not here to tell you that Mike Ward's jokes about a disabled boy were journalistically and morally important or valuable, but I'm here to tell you that despite that, or maybe even because of that, they're important to defend.
Because you have to fight for free speech even for people you don't agree with.
You don't have to think jokes are funny to approve them legally.
You can be mad at Mike Ward.
You can say so.
You can ignore him.
But saying mean words is not a crime.
I acknowledge they hurt the lad.
Here's what he told the Human Rights Commission.
He said, I was 12 or 13 when I saw those videos.
I didn't have maturity to be strong in the face of this.
I lost confidence and hope.
It made me think my life is worth less than another's because I'm handicapped.
I accept those comments as true, but what is the rule for jokes?
They can't make fun of people.
On what grounds?
And if they're under 18 or over 18?
What if they're a child celebrity promoted by their parents, as in this case?
What if the joke teller themself is disabled?
What's the rule for that?
And what exactly is disabled?
What's the definition?
And who gets to decide?
Again, I'm not saying I like picking on the kid, but you're seriously going to ban mean jokes?
And who decides what's mean?
And does it matter if it's a funny joke?
Some mean things can be really, really funny.
Oh, and by the way, can a disabled person tell jokes about disabled people?
Can he tell jokes about himself?
Well, predictably, the Quebec Human Rights Commission convicted Mike Ward, claiming he had indeed discriminated against young Jeremy.
And then the Court of Appeal upheld that conviction.
Well, thankfully, this case went all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, which just recently released its decision.
The good news, the Supremes ruled in favor of Mike Ward, that there is no such human right as the right not to be offended.
The bad news, this decision was a judicial photo finish with the court deciding five to four that no crime had occurred, meaning that the Supreme Court was just one vote away from setting a disturbing new precedent when it comes to free speech.
And joining me now is a man who knows all about fighting for freedom of speech, freedom of expression, and freedom of the press, and that would be Rebel News Commander Ezra Levant.
So, Ezra, like I said, the Supremes did get it right, but the fact that it was only five to four, that was gut-wrenching for me.
That was a little disturbing.
Oh, yeah, and I think 10 years ago, that would have been six to three or seven to two, and 20 years ago would have been nine to zero.
I think the Supreme Court is heading the way culture at large is heading, which is towards a cancel culture, a censorship culture, a woke culture.
I don't think the Supreme Court so much shapes the world as it does reflect it.
I mean, it does a bit of both, let's be honest.
They can be quite activist.
But I think that in five years from now, if this same case were to be heard or a similar case, that they would inevitably rule against free speech in the comedian.
I should note that of the judges who were for censorship, they're not all liberals.
I'm trying to remember their names exactly.
I'm sorry I don't have them in front of me.
But I'm pretty sure that there was a Harper appointee there, too.
Wow.
And that's just how it is.
It's sort of a laugh when you think that the arbiters of comedy.
Comedy is often a young person's thing.
Like everyone likes a laugh.
Everyone likes a joke.
But the edgy stuff, it's typically something that young people are in.
I just think that's how it is.
It's like pop music.
You can be 60 and like pop music, but it's more likely if you're 20.
I think the same way with stand-up comedy.
So the idea that some very rarefied judges in their 60s and 70s are going to look at a joke and look at it word for word and decide if that joke is legal or not.
That's bizarre.
That is not what a free country does.
And let's acknowledge that these jokes were not gentle and were not nice.
This Jeremy Gabriel was a young boy, even if he wasn't disabled, mocking a young boy is not particularly good sport.
And mocking his disability, let's be honest, it was mean.
Now, you can be funny and mean or unfunny and mean, but it's still mean.
So you don't have to love the joke to say, whoa, The Canadian government is prosecuting a guy for years or the Quebec government, for years, and they finally, after wringing him out, I don't know how many years he's been through the courts, many years, how many hundreds of thousands of dollars he spent on legals, and woo-a victory, five to four for free speech.
This is a warning sign.
It's also, in a way, a sign of impotence by the court.
So let's say that they actually did condemn this comedian.
Do you think that's going to stamp out his jokes from the internet everywhere, on YouTube, on Twitter, on Telegram and Signal, and WhatsApp and other private ways of sharing?
I mean, even if you got every big social media, like, wouldn't, like, do these judges really think that like King Canute, they can order the tide to stop?
Yeah.
And of course, King Canute, he knew that he couldn't order.
His courtiers were flatterers, and he proved, if he was proving to them that he wasn't divine by ordering the waves to stop and they wouldn't.
He knew who he was.
This court, or at least four of them, actually think that they can order people not to laugh at bad jokes.
But no, and this is exactly what I want to get at, Ezra.
Did these dissenting justices think this through to the nth degree?
And by that, and you alluded to it in your monologue.
What would be the new rule book, if you will, when it comes to jokes and stand-up comedy and humorous observations if it was five to four the other way, that in this instance, making fun of a child with a disability is offside?
Well, then, what else is offside?
Who is a sacred cow?
I don't think they thought this through.
Yeah.
You know, there are some very disabled comedians out there who actually turn their disability into a joke.
It's obviously dominant in their minds.
It's the central fact of their life.
And they've decided to run with it and make fun of it and make jokes about it.
And I don't know if that's their sense of humor, if that's a kind of psychological therapy, or if that's just a way to earn a living.
But there are some very disabled comedians out there, and their jokes are about their disability.
And some of them are bloody funny.
And you think, should I be laughing about this?
Is this okay?
Well, he's making the joke himself.
I guess it's acceptable.
And when you think of the comedians who make jokes with Jews as the butt of the jokes, they're invariably Jewish comedians.
When you think about Asian or Muslim comedians or black comedians, those are the people, like, who uses the N-word in comedy more than black comedians?
I mean, Chris Rock, I mean, it's shocking at first.
It's like rap music.
Rap music uses the N-word a lot.
And should it be banned because it's racist?
What if 99% of the people making that music are black themselves?
Is there a special exemption?
Is something allowed if it's racist but funny?
If it's unfunny, is it banned?
And I apply the racism to the disability joke here.
This joke about this young boy, Jeremy, I don't know if it was funny.
I haven't actually seen the original format in which the joke was made.
And that's sort of pitiful too.
These judges in the Supreme Court, they print out the, in their ruling, they have the joke word for word, and they're like analyzing the joke.
That's kind of funny.
It is funny.
It's like the old saying, you know, don't dissect a joke.
It's like dissecting a frog.
It's not very interesting.
Nobody's interested.
And at the end, the frog is dead.
The idea that you've got these joke tester generals, you know, these, welcome to the court of humor.
We will decide if this is funny or not, or rude or not.
And by the way, what if being rude is the point?
Oh, well, you can't be rude.
Well, really?
I mean, we don't want to be rude all the time.
That would be a terrible world if people tried to outdo each other with rudeness.
But actually, occasionally, there is a point of view, so I'm going to give you a quick case.
I forget the name of the case.
It was a, I think it was during the Vietnam era.
Someone went into a courtroom with a shirt that said FUCK the draft.
Not, excuse me, sir, I'm against the draft.
Or I do wish to launch my protest against the draft.
I think it's a daft idea.
Like it wasn't a polite, it was F-U-C-K the draft.
And they got thrown out, and I think they got fined, and this went all the way to the Supreme Court of the United States.
And the Supreme Court ruled that not only was that protected by the First Amendment, but the choice of the word F-U-C-K the draft was absolutely necessary to convey this man's feelings.
The sharpness of his feelings, the severity of his feelings, the roughness of his feelings, the extreme, his extreme opposition to the draft.
He needed to say F-U-C-K the draft.
to communicate what was on his mind in his heart.
And the First Amendment in the United States, God bless it, upheld that.
And that's another way of saying the court said being rude is actually a human right.
Interesting, kind of the opposite of what they were trying to get here where.
You know, people say, oh, you're not allowed to say something, you're not allowed to do something offensive.
Being offended, the right to be offended, think of it for a second.
Let's say someone does something offensive.
Now, it's in the eye of the beholder.
Your right to be offended by it, your right to be appalled by something.
I'm appalled by the draft, or I'm appalled by Mike Ward.
I'm appalled by something, and I'm going to express it, how appalled I am.
Your reaction to the world, you're allowed to be offended.
In most countries, not in most, in many countries, you're not allowed to be offended.
And who gets to decide what you're offended?
Well, we all get to decide what we're offended by.
I'm going on too much length, but my point, David, is who the hell are these nine judges to tell us what we can or can't think is funny, who can or can't make the jokes.
I mean, it's like my old friend Tarek Fatah.
When people say you're not allowed to criticize Islam and that's Islamophobic, well, is he not allowed to criticize the faith he grew up in and he was schooled in and he disputes?
You can't, I mean, does it apply to him too?
Well, of course it would.
Why wouldn't it?
So I think we have to push back, but it's in the culture.
Indeed, and you know, and what you just said about the number of disabled comedians that are out there, it triggered a memory.
Back in the 80s, a couple of times I saw, I can't remember his name, unfortunately, he was a blind comedian.
Blind Comic's Unique Entrance00:15:51
And the way he began his set each time is he comes onto the stage.
He's helped onto the stage with his back to the audience.
And then it dawns on him after a couple of jokes that he's not facing the audience.
He doesn't know because he's blind.
And the line is something along the lines of that damn dog.
Seeing eye doc screwing up.
And it's funny, you laugh, but at the same time, you have empathy because he's a blind man.
But that was never an issue back in the 80s.
I mean, I can't imagine.
That's a fairly safe joke.
Oh, yeah.
But what if he was vicious about it?
And what if he did something that was actually anti-blind?
You're being mean to blind.
Well, you know what?
How about we all get to make our own decisions?
And if Mike Ward did something defamatory about this boy that would deeply harmed his, you know, oh, this boy is a thief or something.
Okay, we'll zoom in defamation.
But simply being mean is not a crime.
But that's the thing.
With Mike Ward, Ezra, as I understand it, this is a comedian.
He's very edgy.
It was called sacred cows.
This particular comedy tour was the sacred cows tour kind of thing.
Exactly.
So you know what you're, it's not like Jerry Seinfeld, who's super clean.
He doesn't even use the F-bomb.
And isn't it that the parents of Jeremy bringing that child to this concert?
Do you think, Ezra, it's kind of like somebody going into a strip club and going, oh my God, all this nudity.
I mean, what did you expect?
Yeah, I mean, again, I'm not comparing this boy to, you know, there's some pageant parents who take their very young girls and make them into these, you know, pageant, like a mini Miss America thing.
And really, it's the parents living out their own dream through their own kid.
I agree.
And I'm, listen, knock yourself out.
I can think of a lot worse ways to, you know, spend time with your kid.
But is it really about the parent or the kid?
And they turned this kid into a mini celebrity.
He sang for Celine Dion.
He sang for the Pope.
He, like, they turned him into this celebrity singer.
And that's why Mike Ward took a run at him.
So it wasn't a private person.
And that's the nature of the public square.
If you're doing something for the public's delight, the public can express their view.
And they don't just have to applaud and say, what a good boy.
I would say, what a good boy.
If I had been around at the time and had, I mean, this is all in French in Quebec.
You know, you see some young kid who has a grave disability trying to put his best foot forward.
Yeah, I'd clap.
It'd be weird not to.
But you can't ban people from having the opposite response.
You entered the public square.
You created the spectacle.
You told people to watch and to react through applause.
You cannot punish someone who reacted in a different way, even if it was rude.
And I'm not saying Mike Ward wasn't rude.
But for God's sakes, imagine living in the country where the government can tell you what jokes are legal or not.
I'm far more afraid of a government telling me what I can laugh at or not than some comedian telling a rough joke.
100%.
And, you know, I can't help but think, Ezra, it was ever thus that dictators always frowned on comedy.
And for a good reason.
I mean, after you laugh at the joke, you start to analyze, why am I laughing at this joke?
And then there's nuggets of truth and reality, and that is beyond, you know, the dictator's control.
That might breed, you know, revolutionary ideas, whatnot.
And I think, too, I dug this up.
It was a great quote from our friend Mark Stein, who knows a little about fighting for free speech himself from 2014, a column in the National Post when it was far less woke than it is today.
And he said, a culture that values safe spaces where ideas cannot be debated is a culture that will stagnate and die very quickly.
Your response.
Yeah, well, for sure.
And just to get back to what you said about powerful people not liking comedy, I think it was Solzhenitsyn who was sent to the Gulag for a joke about Stalin's mustache.
The Ayatollah said there's no jokes in Islam.
That's funny too.
Yeah.
And was it Orwell who said every joke is a little revolution?
And you're right, because if people laugh at the state, they're no longer afraid of the state, or at least in that moment they feel liberated from the state.
And I read very carefully the four dissenting judges here, and they basically said you can't laugh at marginalized people.
That's their rule.
Well, who decides who's marginalized?
Well, someone has to.
And isn't it a surprise that the government's favorite people are the marginalized ones and the government's unfavored people have as many laughs at them as you want.
I mean, all this anti-bullying, well, we've learned in the last year that it was BS.
I've seen more bullying from Justin Trudeau and the premiers about people who are not vaccinated than I've ever seen in my life.
Good point.
Bullying is an official.
So, oh, don't be mean.
I've seen more meanness.
Don't make jokes.
I've seen more mockery and marginalization and denormalization of people in the last two years than I ever have in my life.
And it is so subjective.
And when you make jokes illegal, you're basically letting the powerful people use that as a weapon to kill everything.
And I think we dodged a bullet by one centimeter in this ruling, but the next shot will hit its target.
I think we have only years left if that.
I hope you're wrong.
I think you're right.
It was an excellent commentary, Ezra.
Thank you so much for weighing in on it.
And you know, the Supreme, you got it right, albeit five to four.
Here's the punchline to this black piece of humor.
It should have been nine to zero.
What were you thinking as far as you dissenting justices?
Disgraceful.
Keep it here.
More of Rebel Roundup to come right after this.
And as you can see, I'm here in sunny Glasgow, where behind me is COP26, the United Nations Climate Conference, where world leaders gather together and show off their private planes and Land Rovers.
So Rebel News does not have anything in common with these elites.
They came here on private jets and we came here, well, on EasyJet.
And there aren't going to be many organizations that are going to come here and expose the hypocrisy.
Well, we are.
And if you'd like to help fund the truth, please head on over to Rebel UN and follow my work.
Now, as you probably already know, I'm not an ecomaniac.
I don't believe in alarmism and I don't believe that the world is going to end in 10 to 20 years' time.
I also don't think that Greta Thunberg is a trustworthy source of information.
You all come to us young people for hope.
How dare you?
Now, Rebel News was supposed to be inside the conference today.
Unfortunately, due to our recent history with the United Nations, they've actually banned Rebel News from even attending the conference due to asking tricky questions such as who funds you?
Well, we know the answer to that, and that's the taxpayer, which is yourself.
First bit of hypocrisy is the fact that Chinese state media are allowed to attend this conference along with Al Jazeera.
But the United Nations excuse for when we applied to attend this conference was that they have no previous record of Rebel News even being at any of the previous conferences, which, as you can see by the screenshots, is a load of bull.
It's quite easy to work out why Rebel News is not allowed to attend this conference.
We are the organization that asks the difficult questions and points out the hypocrisies of these world leaders and the mainstream media.
But regardless of me not being allowed to attend, I'm going to still point out these hypocrisies, even if it means standing just outside the venue.
Well, the United Nations Climate Change Conference in Glasgow is now mercifully over.
All the virtue-signaling, fearless leaders, you know, those elitists who admonish the great unwashed masses of planet Earth to do better.
Well, they've now returned to their home countries.
Most of them getting there via carbon-spewing private jets, by the way.
But then again, what do you expect these elites to do?
Fly coach, a lead by example?
Well, in the words of one unhinged Swede who is increasingly resembling Gollum from the Lord of the Rings, how dare you?
How dare you?
And joining me now is our UK correspondent, Louis Brackpool, who was able to take in this smorgasbord of hypocrisy firsthand.
Hey, Lewis, welcome to Rebel Roundup for the first time.
How are you doing?
Thank you so much for having me on.
It's an absolute pleasure to be here.
Oh, that's fantastic.
You know, Lewis, not only are these UN types hypocrites, they are also filthy liars.
As you pointed out in your video, they stated that the reason Rebel News was denied access to the conference was due to the fact that there were no previous records of Rebel News attending UN conferences.
But that's simply not true.
Yet, here's the thing, Lewis.
I think these lying gatekeepers did you a big favor.
Keeping you out of that snorefest was a godsend, given that you could expose the hypocrisy occurring outside the venue.
For example, that image of an overflowing garbage can.
How perversely ironic, Lewis.
These elitists want us to shiver in the dark so that we can reduce our carbon footprint, yet they can't even be bothered to take care of their own litter.
What's your take, my friend?
You're totally right.
I mean, it's been a bit of a staunchy week for them.
I think the Glasgow bin handlers were on strike as well on the same week.
So it's totally honest.
Yeah, point out the hypocrisy was a lot of fun.
I'm sure you saw the petrol generated powered sign that said, let's do net zero being projected onto a bridge.
What was funny about that as well, people were stopping in their cars to film the actual sign, but not the generator.
So it is quite funny to see people's reactions to different things.
Yeah, and I wonder if there's awareness of the hypocrisy by the general public, because we know, Lewis, the mainstream media will not report this.
And I mean, I even heard it come up in a talk radio station in Toronto and the host was a complete apologist.
Oh, yeah, we understand the hypocrisy and yada yada yada.
But, you know, it's for the greater good for the years and decades ahead to clean up the planet.
Are you buying that?
Because I subscribe to the proviso of lead by example.
Exactly.
I'm all about practice what you preach.
That's the motto that I've been talking to people.
And speaking to climate protesters throughout the few days that I was there, they seem to be siding with the establishment.
And I asked the question, when did this happen in the course of history where Earth-loving hits started siding with the enemy, essentially, the establishment that doesn't seem to care about you and only is there for profit?
So it's very baffling.
I'm sure you'll be seeing a clip of me soon going head to head with a climate activist where I do say, well, surely if the elites practiced what they preached, surely they would set the example for the people and the people would follow.
But they seem to be following anyway, which is completely nuts.
You know, and Lewis, were these the protesters that were all dressed in red?
I saw a clip of that.
I don't know what the message was.
Maybe I'm a bear of little brain like Winnie the Pooh, but what were they trying to convey?
Do you know what?
I'm trying to work that out, even after the trip, if I'm totally honest.
I think their message, from what one of the stewards pointed out, was that it's the blood on the UK's hands, almost.
They're the photo or a drawing of the United Kingdom.
At all of the countries just in red, and like it's sort of like a heart and veins and things like that.
I think it was like the blood on the UK's hands when we're only 1.1% of the total world's emissions compared to China's were 30%.
So I think they're getting wrong.
Yeah, you know, same with Canada.
I mean, we have a carbon emission output of, I think, less than 2% of the global total.
I think it's 1.8%.
And yet countries like China, India, they get a free pass for some reason.
And, you know, another baffling thing I'm going to throw to it now, Lewis, it was that advertisement of a raptor addressing the UN Assembly.
Here, folks, just check it out in case you missed it.
Listen up, people.
I know a thing or two about extinction.
And let me tell you, and you'd kind of think this would be obvious, going extinct is a bad thing.
So, I mean, it is, like I said, Lewis, baffling.
You have a dinosaur.
And of course, we know the dinosaurs were wiped out by a device that was not of their making.
In other words, a meteor or an asteroid crashed into the planet.
So he's kind of making, in a sense, the case for those who are climate change skeptics, i.e. that maybe this is not man-made climate change.
Maybe there are forces that are greater.
But the other thing, Lewis, it dawned on me after viewing that ad much later.
I had an epiphany.
Why would they do this silly dinosaur thing like they plucked it from Jurassic Park?
And I think the reason, Lewis, is indoctrination.
The demographic that adores dinosaurs is children.
And as the Marxists like to say, my friend, get them young, get them forever.
Yeah, and you're completely right.
I've been seeing a lot of the propaganda over the coming days.
In fact, telling you a story, I was actually waiting for the flight home and I was in the airport sitting there.
Quite funny, there were a few people with the UN climate change masks on, which did make me laugh because they were waiting forward for their flights.
And the TV was on and they were playing some sort of drama series, some Scottish drama series.
And you could see it was, I'm going to use the term, it was part of an identity group.
And she sat there to lecture her own mother on how we should be doing for the climate.
Propaganda And Pricing Crisis00:05:54
And each individual person makes a greater difference.
And this was all just being pumped out to everyone in the airport.
So I think we're seeing a lot of this on our own soap operas.
And I don't know who's buying that.
And I don't know who's falling for it either.
And you know, this whole idea that we, the great unwashed masses, we must sacrifice yet more.
I understand, Lewis, in the UK, isn't gasoline and home heating fuel, aren't those prices going through the roof right now?
They are, that's correct.
We had recently a fuel crisis where I believe some, I think it was a particular, I think it was Sky News maybe, but don't quote me on that, just in case, ran a storm and it panicked a lot of the public, which ended up buying a lot of fuel and ended up hoarding, a bit like a toilet paper scenario with COVID not so long ago with various countries.
And now what we're seeing is a hike of energy prices, a hike of fuel prices.
And on top of that, Boris Johnson has a plan to ban diesel and petrol in the UK by 2030.
So we're seeing these radical changes happen in real time.
Oh, so that's very interesting.
How does Boris expect Brits to get around and keep their houses warm by using dilithium crystals?
Yeah, I wish that we're all in a set of a star for me, but unfortunately, not.
I'll be honest, I don't have the answer for that one, David.
I don't know how we're supposed to transfer to electric.
I think what we're seeing is another form of a class system or an elite system where it's only the plebs cannot afford to go electric here by 2030 or after 2030.
And only the people who have invested in climate change and are understanding the message perfectly can afford these great gifts of electric cars.
So we're going to be seeing that.
Yeah, I agree.
And I mean, you know, it just seems so shameful to me, Lewis, that the average Brit, the average citizen in the West, you're being hit with more carbon taxes, more carbon levies, when prices are already going through the roof, when you have suffered so much from COVID-19.
So many people have lost their jobs.
It has caused the world economy trillions of dollars in damage.
And I want to focus on that.
You know, last month we had Glenn Beck speak at one of our Rebel events.
And he was of the opinion, I'm paraphrasing right now, but the climate change hysteria has been going on for well over a decade and it was meant to change our behavior and we really didn't change our behavior that much.
So he, Glenn Beck was of the opinion, Lewis, that those who espouse the whole build back better, you know, the new world order, however you want to call it, they needed something else.
And gosh, has COVID-19 ever been a governor in terms of changing our behavior, making things different?
Do you think that could be the unspoken story here about all these, you know, when it comes to COVID-19 and as it pertains to this climate change hysteria as well?
David, and I believe that it's just trying to understand what better means.
What does better mean when you say build back better?
We don't know.
Only these elites know.
And of course, I'm not surprised if we're going to see Klaus Barb start making more and more strange policies pushing out to other governments.
It's just, it's really quite worrying.
What I said in one of my videos was, are you ready to embrace this new normal under the guise of once COVID and now climate change?
And that's what we're going to slowly start seeing.
We're going to start seeing policies that are going to trickle over from what they've done with COVID.
But now the narrative is changing towards climate change.
And they've already started pumping it out on the TVs with the media, soap shows, everything you're going to start to see.
And it's going to really transform the conversation.
And anyone who either is a denier or doesn't necessarily believe it or even just a bit skeptical are going to be shut down in conversation and possibly even barred as well.
It's just going to be another repeat.
So, yeah, I keep your eyes peeled for that, maybe.
Yeah, no, I think you're right, Lewis.
And I mean, further to what Glenn Beck said, I mean, I'm not pretending I have all the answers, but I think with both issues, climate change and COVID-19, I think there is some kind of nefarious strategy behind the scenes.
I'm not exactly sure what it is, but I'm not buying what we're getting on face value.
But Lewis, I want to thank you so much for doing an excellent report.
Now, I really believe that.
And I really mean that, that those UN gatekeepers did you a favor by not letting you into that boring bun tosser of an event.
And I have factual proof that it was boring.
I've seen this photo of President Biden nodding off to sleep during the conference.
So if such a great mind like that could be bored into slumber, I can only imagine what journalists would do in such an environment, Lewis.
Yeah, that's the first thing.
I'd actually agree, Joe, with Joe Biden falling asleep during the conference.
No Fault of Their Own00:02:50
Well, there you go.
Great job, my friend.
I'll look forward to your future videos.
And you have a wonderful weekend, Lewis.
Thank you very much, David.
Thank you for having me on.
You take care.
You got it.
And that was Lewis Brackpool in London.
Keep it here, folks.
More of Rebel Roundup to come right after this.
This is absolutely incredible.
And I think before we start to deconstruct it, let's throw back to that four-minute, less than four-minute clip where you are introducing Farah Khan and things just go right off the rails.
No fault of your own, I might add.
But here it is, folks.
This is what the interaction was like with Mr. Sherman and Ms. Khan back in September.
You know, not too many years ago, I had a relative, a young lady relative, come to stay with us in Toronto because she wanted to move to Toronto from where she lived.
And she stayed with my wife and myself and went about her business, tried to find a job, all the rest of it.
This is a number of years now, and she's since grown up and doing fine.
But when she arrived, she was not a big city girl.
And we had to wrestle with how you behave if you're a young lady, a nice-looking young lady going into establishments where, let's just say you could get into trouble.
You go, you're trying to get social, you're trying to make friends, and you go into a bar.
It might not be the first choice, but maybe it's the only choice.
And I remember finding out that she had been doing things like ordering a drink, leaving it on the bar, going to the washroom, and then coming back.
And when you hear that, you go, you can't do that.
And here's why.
And you have to explain it.
Then you look at these signs that are up on bathroom walls in female washrooms, in public establishments, particularly where alcohol is served.
And you see that there's a drink that doesn't really exist that you can order.
And if you order it a certain way, what you're doing is signaling the wait staff that you're in trouble.
And what kind of trouble is what you're telling them through this encoded drink that you're ordering?
And maybe they'll call the police or maybe they'll help shoe away the guy who's bothering you, whatever it happens to be.
Anyway, these are various approaches to assisting young women who get themselves or through no fault of their own wind up in trouble when it comes to the service of alcohol.
Ontario's mandatory training program for those who sell and serve and deliver and handle alcohol is soon going to include training on how to recognize and respond to sexual violence in a bar or a restaurant setting.
Sexual Violence Training Controversy00:10:05
And this is due in great degree to SmartServe Ontario.
And we're lucky to have with us Farah Khan, who is manager of Consent Comes First at Ryerson University's Office of Sexual Violence Support and Education.
And Farah, welcome to the program.
You had a lot to do with this.
I did in the way of advocating with violence against women organizations and advocates across this province, as well as with city councilor Kristen Wong Tam, as well as Peggy Fattler, who actually did a private member's bill in 2017.
Kristen did a city motion that passed in 2016.
And so we've done a lot of work to really raise this issue for a very long time with SmartServe.
And at first, they were reluctant to do it.
I'm happy that this has come through, but I'm very disappointed in the breadth and depth that they're covering.
I also want to just check you for a second.
Because I heard you say at one point, they get themselves into this trouble, kind of like that kind of naming.
And I just want to be really clear here that the survivor, someone who's affected by sexual violence, someone who is sexually assaulted, doesn't get themselves into trouble.
Oh, yes, they do.
I'm not going to get in an argument on this.
I wound up with sexual violence.
Excuse me.
Excuse me.
The person that's responsible for sexual violence is the person that's committing the sexual violence.
We don't.
Farah, I'm going to remind you that you're a guest on this program.
I'm asking you questions and I'm giving you answers.
And what you heard me say when I introduced you.
I'm going to end this interview now because I don't think you're respecting me.
So, Peter, I read Sue Ann Levy's story in True North, our good friend Sue Anne Levy, about this incident three times.
I listened to the clip.
And Peter, let me give Ms. Kahn the benefit of the doubt.
Let's say there was something somehow, like I said, I don't get it, offensive in how you characterize that anecdote.
In this day and day of cancel culture, it seems, Peter, that, you know, once upon a time in broadcasting, if you said something really egregious, you would do a mea culpa apology on the air, perhaps, maybe a two-day, a two-week suspension, what have you.
Now it is a death sentence.
It is the guillotine coming down on the alleged offender.
How did we get to this point where there is, you know, unlike a first-degree murderer on parole, there is no second chance anymore.
No, there are no second chances.
It's not just broadcasting.
I don't know other than what she does, who Farah is.
So I don't attribute this to Farah.
But I think generally speaking, woke culture, which is trying to turn society upside down and create, instead of equality of opportunity, equality of results, and by adjusting everything from a school test to like an SAT,
for example, to address the different layers of society, to changing rules, generally speaking, to the point where anybody who doesn't get inside the circle that they've formed is a bad guy and therefore guilty of everything.
It goes to why are we pulling down statues in the states of Washington here of, and this is not the Farah thing, this is just what's going on.
Pull down Sir John A. McDonald's statue because he was involved in residential schools.
Well, Pierre Elliott Trudeau was involved in residential schools.
100.
And so was Jean-Christian, as Minister of Indian Affairs.
It doesn't make them bad people.
It makes them people who followed a dogma of the times that nobody can justify, but you don't change a dogma of the times 20 or 30 or 150 years later.
You recorded this history and you try not to repeat it.
But folks like this are saying, no, if you want to say or suggest in any way, shape, or form that you have to teach a young girl not to leave her drink on the bar because she'll be in danger, you're part of the problem because she should be able to leave her drink on the bar.
Well, another one bites the dust thanks to that oh, so despicable virus.
No, I speak not of COVID-19, but rather something that is perhaps even more insidious, cancel culture.
The latest victim, veteran broadcaster Peter Sherman, who had been filling in as a talk show host at AM 640 Toronto for the past five years, alas, Peter was fired last month due to an absolutely baffling incident that occurred during a broadcast on September 24th.
Peter was introducing Uber woke activist Farrah Khan.
The interview was supposed to be about how SmartServe Ontario's new training program will include training to recognize sexual violence and drug-induced sexual assault.
Well, as you heard, just prior to introducing Khan, Peter spoke of a young family member, a female family member that is, who once stayed with him years ago, and Peter advised her not to leave her drink unattended when using the restroom.
Well, can you believe it?
That innocuous anecdote triggered Khan so much that she lamp-basted Peter for mentioning it and then hung up, thereby terminating the interview.
And because this spirit unicorn social justice snowflake had her feelings hurt, well, the cowardly, gutless managers at Global News threw Mr. Sherman under the bus.
Pathetic.
In any event, you had plenty to say about another example of someone being deemed to be, well, a non-person due to cancel culture.
True83 Full Enough Said writes, this is absolutely effing insane.
You can't even disagree with somebody anymore nowadays without getting canceled.
Well, two things.
You know, the best kind of talk radio is when there is a rousing debate taking place.
But these days, such content might offend some people if, God forbid, someone utters something that's deemed to be even remotely politically incorrect.
So terrestrial radio in Canada makes for a biosphere of blandness and boredom for the most part.
But what's really outrageous is that Peter was passing along an anecdote in which he was giving good advice to a young lady so that she would remain safe.
You would think that a feminist like Farrah Khan would be on side with that kind of advice.
You know, the idea of keeping women safe, yet this offends her for reasons that, well, completely escape me.
Richard Allen writes, he has nothing to apologize for.
He should sue the pence off that media company, ASAP.
Well, Richard, I'm not a lawyer, but I think Peter has an excellent case for wrongful dismissal or breach of contract here.
And get a load of this, to add insult to injury, after Peter Sherman was sacked, Farrakhan was then invited back onto the AM 640 morning show, in which host Greg Bootlegger Brady offered her a groveling apology.
That's a fatal strategy.
You cannot keep bending the knee to these woke warriors because it is never, ever enough.
They are never, ever satisfied.
Hey, I'd call the executives at Global News spineless, but really, folks, I don't want to offend the jellyfish community.
Sneaky Sleets writes, she was triggered so fast, haha.
But what she fails to understand is that he isn't necessarily saying women get into these situations of their own, but sometimes the things they do opens up the opportunity for these things to take place.
Simple as that.
Indeed, Peter wasn't blaming the victim here, just pointing out the sad reality that in the bar scene, there might be a predator afoot who will spike someone's unattended drink.
But this is where we are in terms of political correctness, folks, and cancel culture.
Even stating a truism will get you fired today.
Ken Leishman writes, She pre-planned this for free publicity.
She was a nobody.
Now she thinks her name is worthy at Sherman's expense.
She sued for damages.
Ken, I think you might be onto something here.
That was a publicity stunt from the get-go.
And when it comes to vilifying someone today, well, let's face it, a white heterosexual male is perfect when it comes to someone playing the oppressor role.
Just one thing though, Farrakhan was a nobody before this interview.
And post-interview, guess what?
She's still a nobody.
And Peter Donicello writes, 640 news sucks anyway.
I stopped listening to them long ago.
Well, Peter, you're not the only one.
You know, some 20 years ago, AM640 was known as Mojo Radio, its slogan being talk radio for guys.
It was irreverent.
It was funny.
It was purposefully politically incorrect.
It received international publicity, but I think such a format wouldn't last a single day in today's crybaby woke environment.
In fact, the reason why Mojo died was that even back then, cowardly management types couldn't handle the heat, even though the ratings Mojo got then far surpasses what the new and unimproved AM640 gets today.
Indeed, do you know folks in the last ratings book, AM640 was second from the bottom of all AM and FM Toronto radio stations?
A Dead Dog with Fleas00:00:18
This station is a dead dog with fleas.
And yet again, another example of the truism, go woke, get broke.
Well, that wraps up another edition of Rebel Roundup.
Thanks so much for joining us.
See you next week.
And hey, folks, never forget, without risk, there can be no glory.