Ezra Levant challenges pandemic policies with blunt questions: why mask children but not adults, and whether "vaccines" like Johnson & Johnson’s—effective at just 3% after nine months—are truly protective. He exposes Reuters’ bias (chairman on Pfizer’s board) and the Gates Foundation’s $319M media funding, while citing Pfizer’s $2.3B fine for fraud. Lockdowns forced vaccine passports in Austria, banned unvaccinated students at Western University, and even the Salvation Army—despite Christian values—denied exemptions to staff like Drea Humphrey, risking poverty and job loss for 7,000 affected volunteers. Criticizing O’Toole’s suppression of dissent and Trudeau’s potential corruption (SNC Lavalin), Levant warns against conflating politics with treason, urging support for independent journalism at RebelNewsPlus.com. [Automatically generated summary]
It means questions that a child might ask about the pandemic.
I'll tell you the first one.
If grown-ups can sit in a restaurant for hours on end without a face mask, how come kids can't do that in class?
I got a bunch of those for you.
That's today's show.
And there's some other goodies.
I think today's a great show, great discussion with Dre Humphrey, and then at the end of it, a wonderful video hosted by Mocha.
I think you're going to love today's show, if I may say so myself.
You really would benefit from the video version of it, especially for Mocha's investigation.
We had a bunch of journalists go out there with hidden cameras to see what they tell you when you ask, what are the risks of being jabbed?
And so it's important to see with your eyes, not just hear with your ears.
So if I could encourage you to go to RebelNewsPlus.com and click on subscribe, and it's $8 a month.
You get the video version of this podcast.
And in times like this, I think it really matters.
Get a great value from that video.
You also get access to, besides my daily videos, Sheila Gunnery, David Menzies, Andrew Chapters, on a weekly basis.
And the knowledge that you're $8 a month goes to support one of Canada's few independent journalists.
We just do not take money from Trudeau, and it shows.
All right, here's today's podcast.
Tonight, let's ask some questions about the pandemic and the lockdown and the vaccines that a child might ask.
It's November 19th, and this is the Answerable Man Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're the biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say is the government will buy a publisher is because it's my bloody right to do so.
I'm going to ask some very simple questions.
Here's one.
Why can grown-ups sit down in a restaurant without masks for hours?
But children in school have to wear masks all day long.
Fact Checking Pfizer Claims00:04:59
When they told us it was just two weeks to flatten the curve, did they ever actually mean it or did they always know that was just a trick to get us to accept a shocking change that would be permanent?
Is it honest to call the Pfizer and Moderna and Johnson and Johnson and AstraZeneca shots vaccines if they don't actually stop you from getting sick?
And if they fade over time, like Johnson and Johnson, that falls to a 3% effectiveness just after nine months, according to this study.
Now that Bill Gates himself admits that these vaccines aren't really vaccines, is it okay for us little people to say it?
Or will we still be called conspiracy theorists?
You know, we didn't have vaccines that block transmission.
We got vaccines that help you with your health, but they only slightly reduce the transmissions.
We need a new way of doing the vaccine.
By the way, I just showed you Bill Gates saying what I said he said.
But here's a Reuters fact check.
Fact check.
Bill Gates did not say COVID-19 vaccines are ineffective.
Really?
Let's play that clip again.
You know, we didn't have vaccines that block transmission.
We got vaccines that help you with your health, but they only slightly reduce the transmission.
Can we get a fact check for the fact check?
Hmm.
Here's a page on Pfizer's website.
It's their board of directors.
It includes this man, James Smith.
I'll read the first sentence of his biography.
Chairman of the Thompson Reuters Foundation, a London-based charity supported by the global news and information provider.
Got it.
So Reuters Foundation chairman is on the board of Pfizer, and Reuters is fact-checking a criticism of Pfizer.
Is that ethical?
Is that really even a fact-check?
Or is it more like an opinion check?
So Pfizer has Reuters locked down pretty well, but that's just one media company.
There are countless media organizations.
I wonder if this colors their news a little bit about the big man.
Revealed.
Documents show Bill Gates has given $319 million to media outlets sifting through over 30,000 grants in the company's database.
Mint Press can reveal that the Gates Foundation has bankrolled hundreds of media outlets and ventures to the tune of at least $319 million.
I went through this report.
It is enormous.
It is meticulous.
And it's actually not even a secret.
It's public information.
No one just collected it before.
There's plenty of Canadian media in that list, too, by the way.
If you literally take money from Bill Gates or Pfizer, are you going to report neutrally on Bill Gates or Pfizer?
Good morning, America, is brought to you by Pfizer.
CBS Health Watch sponsored by Pfizer.
Anderson Cooper 360.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
AEC News Nightline.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
Making a difference.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
CNN Tonight.
Brought to you by Pfizer.
Here's another question.
Should we trust big pharma?
Well, Pfizer was caught lying about other drugs, had to pay a record $2.3 billion fine.
They wouldn't be lying about the biggest drug in history, would they?
Maybe we could check up on them.
I mean, they filed a lot of documents with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, the FDA.
The FDA is supposed to be subject to freedom of information laws, sometimes called FOIA laws, which means any American can ask for their records.
And 30 American professors did, in fact, ask for the FDA's records.
Let me quote to you from Biden's Justice Department, which is pushing back on such a request on behalf of the FDA.
The FDA has proposed to produce 500 pages per month, which based on its calculated number of pages would mean it would complete its production in nearly 55 years, the year 2076.
That's actually from a lawsuit against the Drug Administration.
So 500 pages a month they'll release.
Why aren't they publishing 500 pages per day or per hour?
Christmas Conversations Matter00:02:51
Gee, I wonder if they're hiding anything.
I'm sure it's nothing.
We're now into the second Christmas season under lockdowns.
And I'm worried as much about what we're doing to each other now, not just what big pharma and big government is doing to us or what's yet to come.
Here's a super fun, super friendly breakfast TV show in Australia.
You know, that's the happy, sunny TV during the morning.
Listen to their light-hearted feature on how to marginalize your own family members over Christmas.
They even give you tips on how to segregate and push away your own family members.
Just blame it on someone else, like the government or a restaurant.
Seriously, I'm going to play this whole thing.
It's just so astonishing the happy smiling faces here.
Watch this.
As Christmas approaches, many of us will be faced with a new dilemma.
How to handle unvaccinated loved ones and whether you should spend time with them over the festive season sit next to them at Christmas dinner.
So how do you find out who is vaccinated?
And how do you decide whether to invite them over for Christmas lunch?
We've got the tips and the tricks to help you avoid awkward encounters.
They say you can't choose your family and it's never more relevant than at Christmas.
Apart from the glazed ham and stuffed turkey, there'll also be an elephant in many dining rooms this festive season.
The vaccination status of your nearest and dearest.
I'd invite them.
They'd probably need to get a negative test though.
I don't mind actually.
So I'm fully vaccinated so it's fine.
I hadn't really thought about it but probably not.
Now the COVID-19 vaccine is widely available across the country and Australia is reopening.
This year we're all facing a very unique predicament.
These conversations about whether somebody is vaccinated or not can be challenging because it is a personal question.
The past two years has already been divisive enough so it's never been more important to engage in peaceful and respectful conversations with your loved ones about their vaccine status before you invite them to your house or other social events this Christmas.
After you've checked the public health orders for where you live, you need to weigh up the risk.
Everybody's welcome.
Come one, come all, the doors are open.
Or you can decide to say we love you.
However, this year we're deciding to err on the side of caution and only vaccinated people are coming for Christmas.
Anna's top tips are be upfront.
Having the conversation early and directly is paramount.
You can blame the health advice for not having unvaccinated guests over or move the celebrations to a venue.
Erring On The Side Of Caution00:02:53
Then you're guided by their rules.
Alternatively, consider having the celebration outdoors where the risk is less.
The government is making decisions for the broader population, but it's up to us to make decisions for what's safe and right for our families.
Now maybe those journalists really are sociopaths like that.
Or maybe they were sponsored by Pfizer or maybe they were sponsored by Bill Gates.
I mean really, how would you ever even know?
Here are the police sweeping the streets of Austria, combing through shops, demanding that the Jews, excuse me, demanding that the unvaccinated show their papers or go straight to jail, I guess.
Hey guys, look in the attic.
That's where you found them last time you did this.
Austria demanding people show their papers and widespread compliance.
It's not just the police who are shocking, it's Austrians.
Just happy to go along with it.
They don't remember anything from their own past, do they?
Why should we remember their past even they don't?
You may have seen this student literally pulled out of a classroom at Western University in London, Ontario.
The school is appalling, the police are appalling.
But what about the classmates just sitting there?
Here's the Toronto Star on the subject.
Students on involuntary leave due to non-compliance are deregistered from their classes and unable to sign up for courses, access their grades, or apply to graduate for one year.
They are notified not to trespass on campus.
Tuition is refunded.
Is that normal?
Does the Toronto Star, Canada's largest newspaper, by readership, think that that's just all normal?
That's fine.
That that student will not only be kicked out, humiliated, arrested by police with guns, and he'll be banned, and he can't even do courses from home, and that he won't even be allowed to access his grades anymore.
He won't even be allowed to graduate.
So it's a social punishment, an educational punishment.
It's a punishment.
It's meant to hurt him.
And that's just fine now.
Western University has endless policies against bullying, against harassment, against mean words.
I mean, like most woke leftists, they just won't shut up about inclusivity and diversity and safe spaces and human rights and microaggressions, no bullying.
Salvation Army's Moral Stand00:14:46
Hey guys, do you think they ever actually meant it?
Stay with us for more.
Have you ever heard the phrase conscientious objector?
It's someone for whom there is a deep moral reason why they cannot do something.
Conscientious objector often refers to someone in a wartime situation.
There are pacifists, for example, who for moral or religious or creed reasons simply refuse to harm another man.
Often they are accommodated in a reasonable way.
For example, if they're in the armed forces, they're not on the shooting side of the armed forces.
Perhaps, for example, they might be a doctor or even working at a desk.
For a long time, we have recognized the idea of a conscientious objector.
Although we may in any particular instance disagree with them, we understand that freedom of religious, freedom of conscience are extremely important.
In fact, if you look at basically any Constitution or Bill of Rights or Charter of Rights in the world, freedom of opinion, thought, belief, and religion are first.
And after then, freedom of speech.
And after then, freedom of expression and assembly and association.
And it makes sense that way.
Because if you do not have the right to your own conscience and your thoughts and beliefs, then what difference does it make if you do or don't have the freedom of speech?
We believe in the right to be a conscientious objector.
Of course, you don't need any explanation for why you ought to have a medical exemption from certain things too.
If you are allergic, if you have some pre-existing medical condition, you may not want to have a particular medicine, especially one whose side effects are not yet fully known.
And yet these two exemptions that I've just discussed, a conscientious exemption and a medical exemption, are being restricted beyond anything that we've ever seen before.
I hear cases even just today of a lady who told me her doctor had warned her against taking the medicine because it would reject a transplant in her body, and yet he had been instructed not to write her an exemption letter by lawyers.
And very few places accept conscientious objections to vaccines as if they are the arbiters of what is or isn't a religious belief or an appropriate point of view for you and your own conscience.
One case that fits this description is a bizarre case.
A company, a charity, called the Salvation Army, Christian in nature, all about conscientiousness, all about belief.
and religious belief.
It's a Christian organization, and yet it turns out that they themselves refuse to grant exemptions to their own staff.
Joining us now via Skype from Vancouver is our friend Drea Humphrey with more on the story.
Drea, great to see you again.
Good to see you as well.
Hi, everyone.
I respect the Salvation Army.
I grew up aware of them, knowing a little bit about them.
When I was a young child, of course, I didn't know what salvation meant.
I didn't realize.
But that was a religious concept, and that this was a religious mission that was a charity.
Many of the people who work there do so for religious reasons.
Can you tell me how they're treating their own staff who have religious objections to taking the vaccine?
Well, like you, I have a background, a soft spot for the Salvation Army.
I've been a volunteer on and off since I was a teenager, so it's quite shocking.
We have, through the Democracy Fund, hired Leighton Gray, an awesome lawyer.
He is representing one of their staff that represents many others, which is someone who has strongly held religious convictions for not being able to get the vaccine and also an issue with consent.
And as you mentioned before, we just simply don't know what to expect, what could happen with these vaccinations.
And like this particular client, the Salvation Army, which is not just a charity, it is also a church, one of the largest churches in the world, is denying some of their own staff.
I have yet to find a client or somebody who works there who has had their religious exemption accepted.
All the ones that I'm talking to from across the country are saying that it has been rejected.
Their own pastors or religious leaders within the organizations have been told they're not allowed to write religious exemptions.
And this isn't something that the government has imposed on the Salvation Army.
They have their governing board of people that sat there, made the policy, and now is combing through people's religious beliefs of the same faith and saying, nope, not this one.
You know what?
I find that mind-boggling and hard to understand and contradictory and denying the very nature of the Salvation Army of all the places in the country that you would think would respect a religious objection, a religious exemption.
Would it not be a church whose own members say, this is what I believe?
And here you have a board saying, nope, nope, we're going to be not only reject you, but we're going to be more anti-more critical, more hostile to your religious views than even the government required.
Like there's this saying in the New Testament, you know, render unto Caesar that which is Caesar.
That's taken to mean there's certain things that are the domain of heaven and certain things that are the domain of man and Caesar or politicians.
All right, fine.
But what's incredible about this church, the Salvation Army, is that they are going beyond what Caesar demands.
They're going beyond what politicians demand.
That is weird to me, and I'm not even a Christian, Drea.
Well, it is super weird.
And what's next?
Are we going to have Religious people investigators like you have in China, for example, walking around making sure you're following the right religious rules according to the government.
The Salvation Army and their statement points to government policies as the reason they're doing this.
But again, this is a choice.
And even their founder, William Booth, I mean, the politicians of the time were completely against his idea of going to the needy and helping in this way.
He had a simple philosophy.
I think it was soup, soap, and salvation.
Now we're looking at soup, soap, and segregation.
It doesn't align with their values, and they can't use the government as an excuse.
This is their choice.
Well, I know you've been a volunteer, and your whole family is dedicated to the Salvation Army.
So I'm sure you actually have mixed feelings about it.
The fact that the Democracy Fund is hiring a lawyer, not just a lawyer, by the way, I know Leighton Gray a little bit.
He's what they call a Queen's Council.
So actually, when you write his name, it's Leighton Gray, QC, because that's a very fancy designation.
It means he's one of a very select group of senior lawyers that are being granted that honorific by, I think it's the lieutenant governor of Alberta in his case.
So he is actually one of only two Queen's Councils that we have working at the Democracy Fund.
He's a top gun.
He really is.
With other cases with CN Rail, for example.
So I was really glad when I heard he'd be taking this on.
I'm sure you don't want to be fighting with a charity that you've been helping your whole life, but they need a course correction.
And if they don't listen to their own congregants, maybe they'll listen to a QC.
Well, and that's true.
I mean, it gives me no great pleasure to have to do this.
And that's why I haven't worded as sort of a fight in the first report that went out.
I said, you know, everybody makes mistakes, and that's the truth.
I mean, that's the whole thing with salvation.
We're all sinners.
We all fall short from the glory of God.
So let's just help the Salvation Army get back on track.
You know, focus on the needy.
Many of the volunteer positions and the positions that people have been laid off as of November 15th without pay.
I mean, where's the grace in that?
You know, can be done from home or they can be done in certain ways, distanced from people, wearing PPE.
They already have rapid testing.
And I'm hearing from again across the country that vaccinated people are testing positive in their rapid testing.
So, you know, everybody has the opportunity to make things right.
And I hope that's what we see happen here.
You know, it's, I mean, Salvation Army does different things in different places.
I know, for example, they in some places have soup kitchens.
In other places, they have sort of a secondhand store that they just sort of raise money.
So they do different things in different places.
And it reminds me a little bit of our conversations we've had with firemen and policemen.
That the work you're doing is so important, it actually might even save a life.
And I'm not talking in the spiritual sense of saving someone.
I'm talking about, you know, if you're a homeless shelter, if you're a homeless shelter, if you're a soup kitchen, you might actually be the difference between someone living or dying on any given night.
I don't want to be dramatic, but these are marginalized people.
And to be so dainty and so exquisite to say, no, You can't help this person who is lying in the gutter, metaphorically speaking, because you're not jabbed.
You may actually have got sick already, recovered, and thus have strong natural immunity.
You may be actually no threat at all.
And by the way, if you're not vaccinated, that doesn't mean you're sick.
But we're going to be so punctilious, so lawyerly, that we're going to say it is better that you do not feed that man, that you do not house that man and clothe that man.
better to abandon them and hold to some, you know, pharmaceutical Ten Commandments, thou shalt wear a mask, thou shalt take Pfizer, thou shalt take the boosters.
They've replaced the existing morality of the Salvation Army with a counterfeit morality that I understand it from Big Pharma's point of view.
I understand it from a bureaucratic control point of view, but it makes no sense to me from a moral point of view, a charity point of view, or a Christian point of view.
I couldn't agree more.
And the client in this situation, whose identity we're keeping privacy or private, is also naturally immune and had a doctor's note as well for that.
So what's going on?
You know, it's just the wokeness of the time.
Well, Drea, we have had 7,000 people ask for help at our fightvaccinepassports.com site, 7,000.
And to look at those people and to read, and it's too painful to read them all.
Some of them will be fine.
Some of them will lose their jobs.
Some of them will be thrown into poverty.
Some of them will lose their careers, won't be able to graduate from school.
There are 7,000 terrible tales there.
We will not be able to help them all.
But to be able to help not only this one client of the Salvation Army, but I think there's about 10 people at the Salvation Army in the same boat that have reached the COVID-19.
I think there's more than, yeah, there's more than that.
Yeah, well, there's probably hundreds across the country, but I think we know of, let's call it 10, maybe there's more.
And so not only do I hope that Leighton Gray can help the particular client, but anyone else in that same situation.
And one of my hopes is that by choosing cases for institutions that have hundreds or thousands of people, even if we only take one case, like we took the case of the one flight attendant at Air Canada, well, there's hundreds of people in that same situation.
So I'm hoping we make the difference here.
Have you talked a little bit to the client about the fact that we're able to put a lawyer on the case?
I've heard through the lawyer that it's just nothing but gratitude.
And like you said, it's extending to other people who are very concerned.
They don't know how they're going to pay their bills.
Depression.
Some of them are off on sick leave because this has just been so hard even beforehand.
And so it takes a mental and physical toll on them.
These are people who have, like you said, dedicated their time for many years to work in an industry that not everybody can.
And they're in that industry for a reason, because they're good at it, but also they're the right person for the job.
So it's concerning when we see these gaps in healthcare.
Now we're going to see them in shelters.
We're going to see them with people who work with rape victims and the needy.
So a lot of holes to fill now.
Well, Drea, you're the right person for the job on this file, and you're doing it for the right reasons.
And we're so grateful for your reporting.
And I hope you keep all our viewers up to date with this case.
For folks who haven't supported it yet, just so you know, these civil liberties cases, they are being managed by the Democracy Fund, which is a registered Canadian charity.
And so if you go to fightvaccinepassports.com and make a contribution, the funds go to the Democracy Fund.
They don't actually go to Rebel News.
They go to the Democracy Fund, which retains these lawyers directly.
And the benefit to you is you get a charitable tax receipt.
Rebel News is not a charity.
So if you make a donation to the Rebel, we're very grateful, but it's not a charitable donation.
On the other hand, if you donate to the Democracy Fund through fightvaccinepassports.com, it goes straight to the charity that pays the lawyers and you get a receipt.
So, for example, for $100 donation, you actually get $20 off your taxes.
So it's only like an $80 donation.
So please consider supporting it.
I'm very proud of our journalists.
Drea, you're doing a great job.
And our journalists across the country who are connecting victims of this civil liberties crackdown with civil liberties lawyers.
So please keep us posted on this story in the weeks and months ahead.
Criminalizing Dissent00:05:54
For sure.
And I just want to add one more thing to the fightvaccinepassports.com.
There's also a petition.
It'll just take you a second to go to.
If you go to honorexemptions.com, there you can sign up for the petition and share that.
And that lets the Salvation Army know exactly how you're feeling about this policy that they've imposed on their staff and volunteers and contractors.
That's great.
Thank you for the reminder of that.
All right, Dre, keep up the great work on the West Coast.
All right.
All right.
Take it easy, everyone.
There you have it.
Drea Humphrey in Vancouver.
Stay with us.
more ahead.
Hey, welcome back.
Your viewer feedback.
Fordly says, I sure do hope that if there are any true conservatives remaining in the party, they're opposed to O'Toole.
O'Toole is the reason why the Conservative vote was split and will continue to be until there's true conservative leadership in the party.
Listen, there's a lot of problems going on.
I just don't think that a circular firing squad is going to work.
The beatings will continue until the morale improves.
It's not going to happen that way.
You know, in my entire monologue yesterday, I think I forgot to even refer to the case of Marilyn Gladyu.
She was a leadership contender for a while there.
She wanted to start a little freedom caucus of MPs who are concerned about civil liberties and privacy.
She wasn't anti-vax in particular.
She just wanted to talk about freedom.
She put out a statement.
She was crushed by Aaron O'Toole, forced to go out and eat her own words.
That's not a healthy organization.
I hate to use the phrase toxic organization, but it seems to me like you're not allowed to dissent even by one millimeter in that party.
And I don't even know if that's dissent.
When you're a conservative party and you talk about things like civil liberties and privacy and freedom of choice and, you know, opposing the carbon tax, you're not the dissenter.
The dissenter has seized control.
He's an underminer.
He's an entryist, to use a word.
If a liberal had infiltrated the Conservative Party of Canada and wanted to weaken it in terms of its policy and demoralize it in terms of its people, what exactly would they be doing differently than Aaron O'Toole is doing?
Someone nicknamed Private Property says, O'Toole is a coward and a bully.
He bullies his caucus and party members.
He won't face the rank and file in a leadership review.
He won't be tough on Trudeau in the media.
Is O'Toole a Liberal Party plan?
Well, it's like you just read my mind in the previous answer.
And that's the thing.
If he was this hard line against liberals, leftist, NDP, whatever, I'd say, all right, he's a tough guy.
But he couldn't be meeker in the face of the media and the liberals.
He shares, he restricts his rage to people on his side of the aisle.
Someone with a nickname Crusade Wisdom says, Pierre should replace O'Toole.
He would actually get things done and help restore Canada from treasonous Trudeau.
Well, a few things in there.
You're referring to Pierre Polyev.
I agree.
I think he is really the Only serious contender, I would say, out there for party leader.
I think he would do a much better job than O'Toole.
I want to object to your use of the word treasonous, though.
And I know you mean it as an insult, and you mean it because you feel that Trudeau is defying Canadian values, and I think he is in many ways too.
But I try to be careful about using words like treason and traitor and terrorist and criminal.
And I think it's because those words actually do have a meaning, and I don't think that Trudeau has reached that depth of meaning.
And that's important because we don't want to criminalize differences of opinion.
We want to get Justin Trudeau out of the prime minister's office, not because he's actually a criminal that we know of, but because he's just so morally wrong, politically wrong, ethically wrong, financially wrong, economically wrong, socially wrong.
But we don't want to say that being wrong in those ways is a crime, because I have to say, if you allow for the criminalization of your opponents, well, if you accept that, that'll be done to you too.
And we can see that in the United States.
Merrick Garland, Joe Biden's Attorney General, is trying to criminalize passionate parents who disagree with craziness going on in schools across America.
Transgender extremism, critical race theory.
Merrick Garland has instructed the FBI and Department of Justice to use counterterrorism tools and techniques against parents.
That's what happens when you try to criminalize a difference of opinion.
They'll come for you.
So oppose Trudeau vigorously.
I do.
But don't go into saying he's a criminal.
He may one day be revealed to be a criminal.
In fact, there may have been a corruption crime involved in what he did with SNC Lavillan and Jody Wilson Rabel.
There may be.
But simply being wrong on everything is not a crime.
And we can't let it be a crime because there are some people who think we're wrong on everything.
Well, that's our show for the day and for the week.
What a pleasure it's been.
So much going on.
I want to leave you with a magnificent piece of work done in collaboration amongst so many of our journalists, edited and narrated by our friend Mocha Bazirga.
And here is his investigation, our investigation, into whether or not there is actually informed consent at these vaccination stations.
I'll leave you with that.
And until Monday, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, see you at home.