Ezra Levant exposes Justin Trudeau’s $2.5M "disinformation" fund as a tool to silence critics, citing CBC’s alleged bias in the trucker convoy and Ukraine war narratives while mocking pandemic overreach. Joel Pollock warns Zelensky’s no-fly zone demands risk escalation, urging realistic diplomacy like Jerusalem talks instead of symbolic gestures. They blame Biden’s weak NATO stance and Iran deal for emboldening Putin, contrasting Trump’s unpredictability with Western inaction. Meanwhile, Ontario’s Bill 67—passed unanimously—expands racism definitions to include subconscious bias, sparking fears of forced re-education and racial division under critical race theory’s influence, demanding grassroots opposition to protect education and parental rights. [Automatically generated summary]
Today the government, the federal government, Trudeau's government, announced millions of dollars in spending to counter disinformation.
I put it to you, most disinformation these days comes from the government.
I don't want government fighting disinformation.
They're the source of it.
I'll show you the announcement and my reaction to it.
And we'll have a great chat with Joel Pollock about Vladimir Zelensky's speeches to the Canadian Parliament and the U.S. Congress.
That's all I had, but before I show you that, let me invite you to become a subscriber to Rebel News Plus.
It's a video version of this podcast.
I really recommend it.
So much of what we show you is visual.
And you can't get that in a podcast.
Just go to RebelNewsPlus.com, click subscribe, eight bucks a month.
You get my daily video show plus four other weekly shows.
I think it's a bargain.
All right, here's today's podcast.
Tonight, Trudeau announces millions of dollars to attack news agencies that he doesn't like.
Gee, I wonder if he means Rebel News.
It's March 16th, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
Why should others go to jail when you're the biggest carbon consumer I know?
There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.
The only thing I have to say to the government about why I publish it is because it's my bloody right to do so.
Trudeau's CBC state broadcaster keeps lying.
I mean, I suppose you could give them the benefit of the doubt and say they just make mistakes like everybody by accident.
It happens.
But when all of the errors go one way, when all of the errors paint Trudeau as the hero and his opponents as demons, after a while you can say, well, that's not really a mistake.
That's a pattern.
That might even be a plan.
Have you ever seen the CBC make a mistake that favors Trudeau's critics?
They're not sorry.
They're just sorry when they get caught.
Like their nutty claim, this was nuts, that the CBC made that the trucker convoy was paid for by Americans.
When in fact, testimony from GoFundMe and Gibson Go showed that there's about 90% Canadian donors, of course.
The CBC just made it up.
They lied, and that lie actually was used by the Trudeau liberals as a justification for their Emergencies Act.
I'm not sure which is worse, lying to claim Americans paid for the truckers or lying to claim Vladimir Putin did.
That was the lie they actually tried first.
I do ask that because, you know, given Canada's support of Ukraine in this current crisis with Russia, I don't know if it's far-fetched to ask, but there is concern that Russian actors could be continuing to fuel things as this protest grows, but perhaps even instigating it from the outset.
Well, again, I'm going to defer to our partners in the public safety, the trained officials and experts in that area.
Yeah, I just don't think you can trust the CBC for anything, but really, it's not just the CBC.
It was just the CBC for the longest time.
But about 10 or maybe 15 years ago, there were in this country, I don't know if you remember, you have to be old like me, there were privately owned newspapers and magazines in this country, but then everything converged on the internet.
What I mean by that is it used to be that the CBC was into only radio and TV.
That was it.
There wasn't an internet 20 years ago.
And the newspapers and magazines were on paper or newsstands and delivered to your home.
So newspapers and magazines, they were competitors, I guess, with the CBC spiritually, but people consumed them in very different ways.
You didn't go to the newsstand with a couple bucks to buy your CBC.
But both of them went online at the same time, right?
The CBC set up Canada's biggest and best funded and best staffed news website.
And the private sector newspapers and magazines, well, they tried to compete, but they had no chance.
I mean, the CBC was bigger than all of them combined in terms of resources.
So where historically the CBC was only a direct competitor to other TV and radio stations, it now became a direct competitor to the private print media.
And of course, it just crushed them.
They had $1.5 billion a year in government subsidies.
Of course, they crushed them.
The obvious solution was to declare victory and say that the CBC really wasn't needed anymore.
I mean, to take away the CBC's unfair advantages and just say you're like everyone else now.
I mean, the CBC was no longer providing unique things that no one else could do.
That was the original rationale for the CBC 80 years ago.
I mean, that might have been necessary to have the CBC in the 40s or whenever.
But how is it possibly arguable in the present digital age that we need a state broadcaster?
But instead of ending the CBC subsidies, selling them, privatizing them to level the playing field, instead of bringing down the CBC to level of the playing field, they just put the rest of the media, the private media, on government subsidies too.
CBC's Future Uncertain00:05:27
And it shows the media is so obedient now.
Oh, and it's much worse than you even know.
Here's an incredible story in Blacklock CA, one of the few not government-funded media left in this country.
But the government, working with Edward Greenspawn, the former editor of the Globe and Mail, to recruit 25 trustworthy journalists who will properly report on the government, as in properly in the government's eyes, report in the right way.
And they'll be well paid.
Imagine participating in a little get-together for that, flown in at government expense, being one of those 25 journalists who said, sure, we will accept money to participate in a private government meeting to be a part of this new government plan for trustworthy journalists.
Imagine being such a person and keeping it a secret.
And again, from Black Locks, the government is very, very grateful.
Here's Heritage Minister Pablo Rodriguez.
Let me quote you.
He's promising more media subsidies after thanking reporters for their freedom convoy coverage.
Look at the role that the journalists played, said Rodriguez.
I'm reading from Black Locks.
I think there are even more things we should be able to do, said Rodriguez.
We're looking into that in the context of supporting the whole ecosystem.
Rodriguez made his remarks in a webinar hosted by Canada 2020 in Ottawa Think Tank affiliated with the Liberal Party.
Canada 2020's executive chair is a past president of the Liberal Party of Canada.
Wow, so it's a meeting at a liberal conference, but with journalists who are receiving money and a nice pat on the head from a Trudeau cabinet minister thanking them for their coverage of the truckers.
And this is all just fine and normal.
Rodriguez went further in stating cabinet will introduce what he calls an online news act to counter misinformation, he said.
He did not define the term, but added, the reality is grim.
Well, that was very recently because today Rodriguez made an announcement to crack down on disinformation and misinformation.
And he specifically cited, so weird, the war in Ukraine, which is odd because that war is between Russia and Ukraine.
Canada is not at war.
Here's his plan to censor using the war as an excuse.
Oops, sorry, that's Putin's plan to censor, using the war as an excuse, sorry, wrong censorship plan.
Sorry, here's Trudeau's plan to censor using the war as an excuse.
There's so much censorship going on, but Canada's censorship is so much better than Russia's censorship.
So Canada to the government of Canada reinforces support to organizations to help counter harmful disinformation.
Got it.
Got it.
Because Trudeau himself never engages in harmful disinformation.
By definition, I mean, if Trudeau says it, it's got to be right.
Here's a clip from the announcement today featuring Pablo Rodriguez.
Since 2019, the Digital Citizen Initiative has been funding organizations that help Kenyans become more resilient to online disinformation.
These organizations help Kenyans think critically about what they read and consume online.
And with the global pandemic continuing into its third year, with armed conflict raging in Ukraine and in other parts of the world, well, we find ourselves at a very fragile moment in our history.
Sorry, did you say year three of the pandemic?
That's not true, mate.
The pandemic is now an endemic.
Every scientist in the world says it's done.
It's burnt itself out.
The Omicron variant is, I'm not going to say harmless, but it doesn't put people in hospital at anything near the same rate.
Mask mandates are falling.
I see British Airlines, British Airways has just ended masks on their planes.
Mandates are ending across the country, except for in Trudeau's hands.
We're not in year three of the pandemic.
It's endemic.
It's local.
It's like the cold, the annual flu season.
But imagine using year three of the pandemic as an excuse to censor.
Imagine using that as an excuse and the war in Ukraine, which we are not a part of, but we are being censored as if we are in a war.
And here is his plan.
So using year three of the pandemic and a war halfway around the world as an excuse, here's what it's going to do.
So today, I'm announcing that the Digital Citizen Initiative will provide $2.5 million in funding for new citizen-focused activities and digital projects.
The goal of these specific projects will be to first increase civic literacy, trust, and knowledge of democratic processes.
Second, to promote critical thinking and respectful engagement online.
De-Radicalization Strategies00:02:08
Third, to provide de-escalation and de-radicalization strategies.
And fourth, promote change in platforms so that we have a stronger democracy.
So here's how they phrase it in their press release.
Funded projects will help increase civic literacy, promote critical thinking when it comes to validating sources of information, and build capacity in Canada to fight disinformation online.
The department will work closely with several targeted and specialized organizations who are already doing work in this area.
Stakeholders will be contacted in the following days.
So they don't even have this planned out, really.
They haven't talked to anyone yet.
They will in the coming days.
They don't care.
This hasn't gone through parliament.
What's parliament?
I mean, Putin doesn't use his Duma Parliament either.
They're all just for show.
They're going to contact the lottery winners, I mean, the stakeholders who will be showered with cash.
I'm going to guess that Edward Greensboro will receive some.
And other anti-hate groups, too.
They'll use that phrase probably.
Hate being defined as anyone who disagrees with Trudeau.
You know, to say that Trudeau is going to teach us a lesson in trust, that Trudeau is going to teach us a lesson in critical thinking, that Trudeau is going to de-radicalize us.
What does that mean?
That's a phrase that's sometimes used for Islamic terrorists.
I don't think de-radicalization particularly has worked against Islamic terrorists, certainly not in Guantanamo Bay.
Many of them have become recidivists.
But Trudeau is going to change how you think in your mind.
Trudeau doesn't think you can agree with him normally, naturally.
If you disagree with him, it's a kind of mental illness that needs to be cured.
No, no, no.
You don't just disagree with Trudeau.
You need to be de-radicalized because you're clearly a radical.
Only a radical would disapprove of the great leader.
Trudeau's De-Radicalization Agenda00:05:45
It'll be interesting to see the meat on the bones as this thing rolls out, but I can tell you it's just one more step down the road to Putin-style censorship, isn't it?
Stay with us for more.
Well, Ukraine's army is outmatched, outgunned, outmanned by the Russian army, even though it is down from its heyday during the Cold War.
It's still a large force with modern weapons, including an air force.
Ukraine just doesn't have the ability to match it, man for man or plane for plane.
But Ukraine is waging a very successful information war in the West.
And that included an appearance by the very telegenic former actor, who is now the president of Ukraine, Vladimir Zelensky, who made an appearance via video link to the Canadian parliament yesterday.
Here's a short excerpt from those remarks.
Canada has always been steadfast in their support.
You've been a reliable partner to Ukraine and Ukrainians, and I'm sure this will continue.
You've offered your help, your system, at our earliest request.
You supply us with the military assistance, with humanitarian assistance.
You've imposed severe sanctions, serious sanctions.
At the same time, we see that unfortunately, this does not bring the end to the war.
You can see that our cities like Kharkiv, Mariupol, and many other cities are not protected just like your cities are protected.
Edmonton, Vancouver.
You can see that Kiev is being shelled and bombed.
Ivanofran City, Ivanofrankivsk.
It used to be, we were a very peaceful country, peaceful cities, but now they're being constantly bombarded.
Basically, what I'm trying to say that we all need to do, you all need to do more to stop Russia, to protect Ukraine, and by doing that, to protect Europe from Russian threat.
They're destroying everything, memorial complexes, schools, hospitals, housing complex.
They already killed 97 Ukrainian children.
We are not asking for much.
We're asking for justice, for real support, which will help us to prevail, to defend, to save life, to save life all over the world.
Canada is leading in these efforts.
And I'm hoping that other countries will follow the same suit.
We're asking for more of your leadership.
And please take more, greater part. in these efforts, Justin, and all of our friends of Ukraine.
That's Vladimir Zelensky.
He was listing some of the harm done to Ukraine by Russia.
And I don't know if you heard it.
He said it rather quickly and rather casually.
Aerial support.
That's another way of saying a no-fly zone, which is another way of saying that Western Air Forces would be tasked with shooting down any Russian aircraft over Ukraine.
Many NATO leaders have rejected that, saying it would be tantamount to starting a war directly with Russia, a nuclear-armed nation.
That was yesterday in Canada.
Here's an excerpt from President Zelensky's remarks to the U.S. Congress.
And I must say, in both legislatures, he was greeted rapturously.
Here's a little bit.
Remember Pearl Harbor?
Terrible morning of December 7, 1941, when your sky was black from the flames attacking you.
Just remember it.
Remember September the 11th.
A terrible day in 2001 when evil tried to turn your cities independent territories in battlefields when innocent people were attacked, attacked from air.
Yes.
Just like no one else expected it.
You could not stop it.
Our countries experience the same every day, right now, at this moment, every night, for three weeks now.
Various Ukrainian cities, Odessa and Khaki, Chernih, and Zuma, and Viv, Mariupol, and Dikrov, Russia has turned the Ukrainian sky into a source of death for thousands of people.
Well, there you have it, invoking Pearl Harbor and 9-11.
Well, what should we make of this goodwill tour by video?
Joining us now via Skype is our friend Joel Pollock Sr., editor-at-large at Breitbart.com.
Joel, what did you think of President Zelensky's remarks to Congress?
Well, I think the, excuse me, I think the address was quite effective in one way.
Simply to see him there in his military t-shirt, sitting in a bunker and yet speaking to the outside world was very dramatic, very effective.
And I think simply the fact that the speech happened was something that reinforced solidarity on both sides of the political divide for Ukraine in this crisis.
Moment of Unity for Peace00:15:16
But what he's asking for or implying that he wants is something that most Americans are not prepared to give.
There's also bipartisan unity on that.
And there's rare agreement between President Biden and the Republicans in general on not complying with the idea of a no-fly zone for the reason you mentioned, which is that it would create situations in which United States or NATO aircraft and Russian aircraft would encounter one another or where the United States or other countries would be shooting down Russian aircraft.
I would quibble only with one thing you said, which is that it would mean we would start World War III.
I still think the moral responsibility for this is on Putin's side.
He would be the one who effectively started it.
What's interesting psychologically, and this is where I think Biden has failed and continues to fail.
What's interesting is that psychologically we are thinking about it as if we are the ones escalating, when in fact it is Putin who is escalating.
And I've compared it to a chess match in which we are playing with the black pieces and Putin is playing with the white pieces.
And the white pieces always move first.
It has nothing to do with race.
It's just a convention.
But Putin has the first move.
And in general, in chess, if you have the black pieces and you move second, it's very, very difficult to win.
The best you can hope for is a draw.
And it's rare that even a grandmaster can win with the black pieces, at least against another grandmaster, unless the person playing with the white pieces makes a colossal blunder.
Now, it may be that Putin has made some terrible blunders, but he's not going to make many of them.
And I think that we are playing for a draw.
This is the reality of the situation we're in.
It's not something we like, and it's not how we played when Trump was president of the United States with Trump.
We always had the white pieces.
We were always taking the initiative.
And it was Putin who had to worry about what Trump was going to do rather than Biden and his intelligence agencies telling the world that they had no idea what Russia was doing, which is a terrible thing if it is real.
And it's also terrible to admit it, whether it's real or not.
So we are, at best, hoping for a reasonable stalemate here.
And so even though if you look at my record on most foreign policy and military issues, I'm rather hawkish.
I don't think there's a military solution to this other than to continue to hold back Russian forces so that diplomacy can re-emerge.
I think the best idea that I've heard, aside from a humanitarian airlift, would be peace talks and peace talks perhaps in Jerusalem because Israel is the only country that's trusted by both sides in this conflict.
Israel, of course, has a close connection to Ukraine, not just because the president of Ukraine is Jewish, which is a rare enough situation in itself outside of Israel, but also because there are hundreds of thousands of Jews in Ukraine.
It's one of the largest Jewish populations still existing in Europe.
It has very, very extensively developed institutions, close ties to Israel, close ties to Jewish tourism.
I have friends here in Los Angeles who go to Ukraine for the Jewish New Year because there are some holy sites in Ukraine.
And so there's a lot of cultural connection there.
And for all of that, Israel has remained neutral in the conflict, at least neutral militarily.
They've given Ukraine humanitarian assistance, but Israel has not condemned Russia.
That's because Israel has to work with Russia against Iran and against al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups in Syria, where Russia was invited in by the Obama administration, which is really responsible for this present situation in some ways.
And that's the situation we have.
Israel is basically pro-Ukraine sentimentally, but hasn't broken with Russia.
That could allow it to be the host for peace talks in Jerusalem.
And I know that Naftali Bennett, the prime minister, who is not the strongest leader, has at least comported himself, I think, very well in positioning Israel in a unique circumstance where Israel could actually broker some kind of peace arrangement between the two sides.
I think any peace deal would most likely involve a commitment not to join NATO and probably some autonomy, although not independence, for the eastern regions of Ukraine that Russia claimed as its own.
I think they have to leave Crimea off the table.
It's too difficult to resolve, and this war really isn't about Crimea.
So I think they can probably declare an armistice if they agree to not have Ukraine as a member of NATO.
It's no great loss for NATO because NATO is already on the border with Russia.
It's no great gain for Russia either for the same reason, but it will allow Putin at least to claim victory and then withdraw.
The actual victory belongs to the Ukrainian soldiers and civilians who stepped up to fight.
Unfortunately, I don't think they can fight for very long, and I don't think they're going to get the broader military support they need to have a decisive victory because it would simply draw too many other people into the conflict, and it would trigger a conflict with Russia, which would be profoundly destabilizing.
Well, you said so many things there, and it's very interesting about Israel being one of the countries that has not piled on Canada has absolutely, rhetorically at least, gone all in Canada's Deputy Prime Minister, Christia Freeland, whose own grandfather was an actual Nazi in the Second World War, and who herself, as part of the Canadian government, has supported the anti-Semitic Azov battalion.
I mean, she has been probably one of the most aggressive leaders in the world promoting the Ukrainian position.
I find it difficult, Joel, I'll be very candid with you.
All the people who for two years have been brutal against their own citizens and brutal against civil liberties are now talking about freedom and civil liberties in Ukraine.
I wish they wouldn't because I support Ukraine's right to self-determination, a sovereign country.
I don't like to see a country being invaded.
But I just can't put aside the fact that all the cheerleaders now were moments ago pitted against their own people.
I just find it hard to suddenly sign on with the Christian Freelands and Justin Trudeau's and Joe Bidens of the world.
I have to separate that from what's actually happening on the ground, obviously, and be compassionate to the Ukrainian people and to realize that Putin is a KGB agent.
That's what he was before.
And he's an imperialist and he wants to violently expand Russia to get some of its glory back.
I find it difficult to cheer, though, when I'm in the company of some of the folks I've just named.
Maybe that's just a problem on my part for over-politicizing right and wrong.
I think that coming from where you're coming from in Canada, where we saw one of the most egregious violations of civil liberties anywhere in the civilized world just a few weeks ago with the state of emergency to deal with a protest.
I mean, Justin Trudeau used almost Putin-like tactics to deal with his political opposition.
I mean, I'm glad you haven't ingested any polonium, but that's just about where he drew the line.
I mean, using the emergency powers to deal with a protest that was peaceful and that was breaking up anyway, there's really no excuse for that.
So I understand the wounds of that are very raw.
I would also say I don't think Canada is being very helpful.
I don't think the United States is being terribly helpful.
Yes, there's military weaponry going there and that sort of thing.
So we're being helpful in that sense.
But I don't think this stance by the West of uniform, undying opposition to Russia is particularly productive.
I do think we have to oppose what Russia is doing.
But for example, there's a cultural boycott that has started to happen where Russian tennis players and Russian opera singers, even dead Russian composers and writers are not allowed to be present in any way.
They're canceling Tchaikovsky concerts.
They're delisting the brothers Karamanazov.
They're taking Leo Tolstoy off of lists and things like that because people are somehow triggered by anything Russian.
I mean, it's completely ridiculous.
First of all, because nobody Russian, dead or alive, has any influence whatsoever on Vladimir Putin, not even the oligarchs.
And secondly, this is just a ridiculous way to unify Russians behind Putin.
If you oppose what he's doing, you have to be able to reach into Russia and speak through cultural ambassadors.
You've got to be able to have some kind of communication.
It's virtue signaling, it's overreach, and so much of it actually helps Russia.
There's also a hypocrisy to it.
Biden is imposing all kinds of sanctions on Russia and that sort of thing.
Meanwhile, he just gave in to Russia on the Iran deal.
Russia made a last-minute demand before this second Iran deal is finalized, much to my chagrin.
But they're about to finalize this deal.
Russia nearly threw a wrench in the works by saying, Well, we want our trade relations with Iran to be exempt from all the new sanctions that the world has put on us.
And the Americans initially hesitated, and so the deal was looking very much in doubt.
But Joe Biden has never stood up against the Iran deal, and his negotiator, Rob Malley, has a noted record of appeasement.
And so they just gave Russia what they wanted.
Sergei Lavrov, the foreign minister of Russia, announced today that Russia is pleased with the American concessions and the negotiations can resume.
So while Biden is taking away with one hand, he's giving back with the other, and he's doing it in a way that will strengthen one of America's worst enemies, Iran.
So this is all just theater to some extent.
And I can understand your distaste at it.
I also think there's a lot of pressure on Israel, because of its Holocaust history, because of its connection to Ukraine, to join Canada and the United States in its condemnation of Russia.
And I don't think every country needs to react in the same way.
You can't have a resolution unless there's some flexibility.
Some countries need to be available as negotiators.
Likewise, if you cut Russia off from the world financial system, there has to be some sort of incentive to reverse course.
Has there been any conversation about what incentives the world might provide to Russia if it pulls out of Ukraine?
What damage it might try to undo?
What connections it might try to repair?
There's none of that.
We're all sticked right now and no carrot.
Of course, if you leave aside the fact that we're still providing silent carrots, a lot of corrupt deals with Russia regarding Iran and so forth.
But we're not doing anything to encourage movement in a positive direction.
So I think that in terms of the diplomacy of the West, the Justin Trudeau's of the world, the Joe Bidens of the world have been completely appalling.
If it weren't for Biden's weakness and Obama's weakness, we wouldn't be in the situation in the first place.
And they've done an absolutely horrible job.
So they are responsible for this.
But nevertheless, I do think that there's a lot of reason to feel empathy and support for the Ukrainian people.
What has really determined the course of events is not what we say or do, but it's really just been the strength of the Ukrainians on the ground.
I think Putin was surprised because when he invaded Crimea, Ukraine was in the middle of a political crisis.
And so the Ukrainians just left without a fight.
I think he thought that he could do the same in the rest of Ukraine, particularly because there's a sizable Russian ethnic minority.
What he didn't realize was that once you cross into Ukraine proper and you're going after Ukraine's historic cities and you're going after people who've enjoyed a taste of freedom for the last 30 years, you're meeting an entirely different kind of resistance.
They also have a president that they elected who they like, who's a reformer, and who you can see from those speeches has at least some rhetorical capability, some persuasive ability.
And they're absolutely motivated by his example to stay in the capital.
There were news reports that the Biden administration was offering to evacuate him.
And he, of course, turned it down, saying he doesn't need ammunition.
He needs a ride.
That's a nation on its home turf.
And they are not going to allow themselves to be governed by Russia.
Even if Russia overruns Ukrainian forces, which they may very well do, we are already seeing that the Russians cannot govern the cities that they're occupying.
They can't maintain order.
There are thousands of people protesting in the streets.
The Russians can't shoot all of them.
So Russians are not going to be able to govern Ukraine.
Ukraine, in a sense, has already defended its independence.
Now we're at a point where diplomacy has to take over because if it doesn't, we are going to see more civilian deaths and we're going to see a huge expansion, possibly a World War III.
I don't want to be alarmist about it because I do think Kuwaitz will prevail before then.
But that's on the horizon if we listen to some of the more hawkish people who are not really thinking about how to resolve the problem.
They're thinking about how to look tough on television, perhaps how to have future political careers, presidential campaigns, and so forth.
But I understand your reticence and reluctance.
I mean, when Nancy Pelosi greeted the Ukrainian president, I had the same reaction.
She greeted him by shouting, Slava Ukraina, which is their national rallying cry.
But you would never catch her dead saying the words America first.
She would never say that.
So you can see the hypocrisy of it all.
And yet, I think what Vladimir Zelensky is showing us, and maybe, you know, ironically, perhaps, because Jews have a very terrible history in Ukraine, a rich history, but a recent history of persecution and the Holocaust and so forth.
But what he is really showing us is that nationality, national sovereignty, they really do matter.
They can be inclusive.
I mean, Ukrainian sovereignty includes, as you point out, the Azov battalion, but it also includes a Jewish president that the Azov battalion is defending.
So, you know, Ukrainian nationalism is at least broad enough to contain those two, I suppose, extremes.
And national sovereignty is still a thing.
Canadian national sovereignty, American national sovereignty.
You and I have spoken about this a lot.
So you can have a nation, you can have a world of nations living in peace that don't have to lose their national identity and that can still be inclusive and that can have a minority from someone as small a minority as the Ukrainian Jewish community leading Ukraine.
I mean, Vladimir Zelensky is basically the leader of the free world.
That doesn't mean we have to throw ourselves at his feet and do everything he tells us to do because his interests may diverge from the rest of the world at certain points, especially when it comes to a no-fly zone.
But I do think that we're at a very unique moment where the West is united, not because of Biden or Trudeau or Bennett or anybody, but just because Putin has stunned everyone into a sudden show of unity.
Now the Germans are going to spend on defense.
Now they're going to cancel Nordstream.
All of this could have been done under Trump.
This is what Trump was telling them to do.
Maybe if they had done it when Trump was president, the Russian invasion would never have happened.
But there's a rare moment of unity, and it creates a situation where peace is possible.
If Putin understands he's going up against a unified West, it's a very different calculation than simply picking on a former Soviet republic.
So I think we're in a position where some good things could happen.
But, you know, the grandstanding of some of the Canadian politicians you mentioned, Joe Biden pretending to do something mean to Russia while giving them everything they want on the Iran deal, that's not helpful.
What is helpful, I think, to his credit, and I'm a critic of his, but to his credit, Natalie Bennett offering Jerusalem as a site for peace talks and that sort of thing.
So I think it's a very, very hopeful moment.
And we owe that to the Ukrainian people themselves who have really led the way and shown us what standing up for your country, what patriotism is really about.
You know, you mentioned Trump and how he was telling NATO to boost their spending and get off Russian oil and gas.
I want to play you just a very quick clip, and I know you got to go soon.
Trevor Noah's Safety Concerns00:03:21
But here's Trevor Noah, who's originally from South Africa.
He's a very liberal late-night talk show host and comedian.
But I think he realizes that although Donald Trump had mean tweets and whatnot, he, as she, I was thinking of your chess analogy, he was always the one who was causing the other side to react or to worry.
He was not a reactive person.
He was a proactive one.
Here's a quick clip of Trevor Noah, and we'll come right back and I'll take your thoughts on it.
There's no denying that Saudi Arabia isn't playing ball with Joe Biden.
And you know what?
You can say what you want, but this would have never happened to Donald Trump.
Never.
No one was ever ignoring Donald Trump's calls.
Yeah, because if you ignored Donald Trump's calls, you didn't know how he would respond.
Maybe he'd send an angry tweet, or maybe he'd just like ban your country from everything.
You don't know.
That's why I bet in these situations, Biden actually wishes that he could hire Trump to step in as President Wildcard, you know, just keep everyone on their toes.
Because if Trump was calling, you'd best believe the UAE.
They'll be racing to pick up the phone.
Oh, Mr. Trump!
Mr. Trump, we're here.
We're here.
Hello?
Jule Dahmed!
You made me weigh two rings.
We're bombing the UAE and the UFC just in case.
Trevor Noah is no fan of Donald Trump, but I think he's realized that those mean tweets were actually quite powerful.
And you didn't know if Trump was going to tweet at you or sanction you or lob a missile at you.
And you knew that you wouldn't catch him snoozing and he wouldn't have a seniors moment.
I think that I think a lot of the things that Trump predicted, high gas prices, Russian imperialism, unfortunately, he can say, I told you so a lot.
And I think people who were soft-hearted realize that maybe they got a downgrade with Joe Biden.
Last thoughts on that.
Well, Trevor Noah comes to this country from South Africa, which is also where I'm from.
And South Africa, in many ways, is a failing state today.
There are portions of South Africa that are doing very well.
The Western Cape, Cape Town, that region is doing very well.
The rest of the country is failing.
And I think what Trevor Noah understands, that few Americans understand, is that things can really go bad very quickly.
So it's all well and good to make fun of Donald Trump when you trust that America is strong, when you can trust that America will always be safe.
But once you start to see the leader of America go wobbly, if you're a South African or you come from any country that's experienced socialism and decay, you understand that these things can fall apart far more quickly than you can possibly imagine.
And so I think there's a little panic bell going off in Trevor Noah's imagination saying, hey, I came to this country because I thought it was safe.
I can make fun of the president here and things aren't going to fall apart.
Now I'm not sure that's true anymore.
I can't really be who I am.
I can't be as free as Trevor Noah wants to be, he's saying to himself, I'm imagining, because the guy who's supposed to run everything isn't doing it, and I know how bad things can get.
So I think there's a realization on the left that the security they've enjoyed, and you can only make fun of Trump in those particular ways if you are tacitly accepting that he's doing a decent enough job.
The security they've enjoyed is dissipating, and it's dissipating because of Biden's weakness.
Patrick And Jean's Pitch00:03:45
You know, I think you're right.
I see Bill Maher of HBO and even Jon Stewart.
It's almost like their Eden time is over and now they realize what the world is really like and they realized how luxurious it was for them to mock and criticize because they were perfectly safe.
And now I think both of them are seeing through.
That's very interesting.
Listen, Joel, it's great to talk to you and thanks for your very thoughtful views on things.
It's great to have so much time with you.
We look forward to reading your stuff on Breitbart.com and we'll talk to you again soon, I hope.
All right.
Thanks so much, Ezra.
All right, there you have it.
Joel Pollack, Senior Editor at Large at Breitbart.com.
Stay with us more ahead.
Hey, welcome back.
Your letters to me.
Barry M says this about Patrick Brown.
The crowd there screaming with glee are all his hockey buddies and family and friends who got special privileges and got to go to the ice rinks to play hockey on our tax dollars while the rest of us were locked down by his regulations.
Well, certainly some of them would be.
I tell you, this is an odd way to phrase it, but I think it's true.
I think Patrick Brown is the most corrupt politician in Canada who is not in jail.
He's been atrocious with his conduct in Brampton, running it like a little fiefdom.
We had a run-in with him.
Imagine a man who can command five police cars to arrest a journalist for asking questions.
That's what he did to David Manzies.
Yeah, I think Patrick Brown is slippery and slimy.
And I'm not saying that casually.
I mean, I think that Patrick Brown is actually ethically more challenged than Justin Trudeau.
William Robinson says Rebel News needs to figure out Jean Charay's angle on running for the PCP leadership.
He was once a liberal, and in my eyes, he always will be a liberal.
Well, I mean, he was once a liberal, but he started his career as actually one of the youngest conservative MPs under Brian Mulroney.
I think he honestly doesn't really care about party labels.
He just is an ambitious guy who has had some success.
His campaign motto is not, I'm a real conservative.
It's, I know how to win.
I'm built to win, is I think his phrase.
That's his pitch.
It's really the pitch that Aaron O'Toole had, which is, sure, I'm a little bit liberal.
Sure, I don't really care about carbon taxes.
I like them.
I don't really care about conservative things, but you want to beat Trudeau, right?
You can run a perfect conservative, but if he loses, how's that any help if we have Trudeau again?
So I think Jean Charais is actually fairly honest.
He's saying, here's who I am, warts and all.
I'm not really conservative.
I'm pretty liberal.
I worked for Huawei during the Hmong One Zoe 2 Michaels debacle.
But I know the system and I know how to win.
I don't particularly think it's true.
I showed you those poll numbers from Quebec suggesting it's not true.
But I think, you know, I think it's going to be a bruising battle.
I think it already is.
I think you can see Patrick Brown and Pierre Polyev trading barbs.
I mean, in some ways, they're similar, young guys who got in politics very early and they served together under Stephen Harper.
It's quite something to watch them go at it.
I think Jean Charé is going to be elbows up there too.
I don't think Leslie Lewis or Roman Baby are going to get in on the fight.
But those first three, Pierre Polyev, Jean Charé, and Patrick Brown will.
And you know what?
I say it's a good thing.
Let's have it out.
Let's know who the leader is and what he is not.
Part of the problem with Anderschir and Aaron O'Toole is that we're all things to all people.
Let's know who the leader is.
Only Voice Against Bill 6700:14:21
Frogman 2 says the Ukraine distraction is being played out as planned.
I really think there is no choice other than show up at their door.
God bless the truckers.
I don't know whose door you're talking about.
God bless the truckers.
I'm with you on that.
I think Ukraine is a bad news story, like when Russia seized Crimea and Eastern Ukraine in 2014, like when Russia invaded Georgia.
These things happen almost always on a Democratic watch, as I showed you that video from Trevor Noah.
No one would mess with Trump.
But I don't think it's worth going to World War III over, do you?
That's a show for today.
Until tomorrow, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home, good night.
And keep fighting for freedom.
And let me leave you with our video of the day from Dakota Christensen talking to Belinda Karahalios, the MPP in Ontario, on Bill 67.
What's that about?
Here, watch for yourself.
See you later.
Dakota Christensen here for Rebel News.
I live in the great Canadian province of Ontario, and I regret to inform you that critical race theory, in its most pernicious of forms, has arrived in Ontario, here to take up a permanent place in our province's schools from kindergarten all the way to post-secondary.
It comes now to Ontario in the form of Bill 67, titled the Racial Equity in the Education System Act, which recently passed its second reading in Ontario's legislature.
Every single member of provincial parliament in attendance from every party voted in favor of this bill.
Well, that is every MPP except for one.
The lone holdout who stood against Bill 67 was Belinda Karajalios of the New Blue Party of Ontario, who is the sitting MPP for the riding of Cambridge.
I had the opportunity this past weekend to sit down with Belinda to hear her side as to why she voted against this bill and why she thinks that Bill 67 in fact poses a serious threat to racial equality in our schools.
We here at Remble News have launched a petition to fight back against the implementation of critical race theory in Ontario schools at stopcrt.ca.
Be sure to check out that site, sign our petition, and you can also send an email to Ontario MPPs calling on them to stop Bill 67.
Again, at stopcrt.ca.
In December of last year, the NDP MPP for Kitchener Center, Laura May Lindo, tabled this bill, Bill 67, entitled An Act to Amend Various Acts with Respect to Racial Equity.
And it's about infusing critical race theory into our education system, into our schools.
But the most concerning part about the bill is it talks about finding people.
And that's the language it uses, people.
So students, teachers, parents, when it comes to subconscious racism.
And they've actually changed the definition of racism in the bill to include subconscious racism.
So, you know, it's very, it's a very clear bill.
It's a six-page, simple bill, very clear, probably the easiest one I've read in the four years that I've been in the Ontario legislature.
And we saw, as you said, every single MPP that was present, PC, Liberal, NDP, and independents, voted in favor of the bill.
I was the only MPP to vote against it.
I didn't understand why the other ones were voting in favor of it, especially our Conservative Party.
And, you know, I even was subjected to a little bit of chuckling from the government benches.
One of the cabinet ministers thought it was funny that I stood up by myself to vote no against the bill.
But upon reading it, and like I said, it's very simple, it's a very dangerous bill because, like I said, it allows you to find people based on subconscious racism.
And so you talk about penalties here for subconscious racism.
Does this also impact what children are being taught in schools and training and education?
Like, does this change the way that things are actually being taught to children and teenagers and others in our system?
So they want to infuse like different aspects to the learning.
So it's interesting.
So teachers will actually have to go through a re-education program if they are caught with subconscious racism.
And the thing is, what's interesting about it is, you know, it includes hiring, you know, new officers onto different levels of education, whether it's our public school board, the Ministry of Colleges, Trading Universities, the Higher Education Quality Council of Ontario.
So you're hiring all these new left-wing, for lack of a better word, left-wing woke lobbyists onto this to push this agenda.
And, you know, who's responsible for what subconscious racism is?
So the bill is just, unfortunately, it's a big government bill that's just going to cost more money and does nothing to actually address racism.
Yeah, and so, I mean, to the point there, like you said, you were the only member of Ontario's parliament to vote against this.
Every single other person of every party did it.
I watched the actual feed of the vote.
It was, I believe, 72 against just one, just you.
I mean, on the note there, only 72 MPPs were there to actually vote.
73, I guess, including yourself, were there.
Out of, I believe the number is 124 actually sitting.
So only 73 members of provincial parliament actually showed up to vote on this bill, which I think kind of speaks to the current state of Ontario's legislature.
But also, so you were the only voice of opposition, which I think is far too common these days, on this bill.
And watching that video, I felt like it was like sort of this peer pressure mob mentality rule in our province's legislature where everyone did the thing of the same thing as a person standing next to them.
They all stood up and we're all proud to be part of the in crowd.
You're the only person to stand up against this.
I mean, do you have anything to say about that about sort of that peer pressure mob mentality that seems to be taking hold in our halls of power in Canada and in Ontario?
Well, first, I want to thank you for actually interviewing me about this because it seems like a lot of intellectuals and advocacy groups have completely ignored the fact that I voted against this.
But the mob mentality, I don't want to give them an out because some of the MPPs who are there who have voted on this have been there for over a decade.
I mean, and like I said, this is a very simple bill.
It's six pages.
Someone with a grade five education could read it and understand it.
And it's just what's happening.
What we're seeing is the PC party is moving farther and farther left.
And they're working together with the Liberals and the NDP.
And they just keep all their policies, left-wing policies.
And so the New Blue Party of Ontario, the party that I'm part of, we're the only true opposition in that legislature.
And so I tend to be the only one voting a lot of the times for things because I read the bill, I understand it, and I'm saying, well, hang on.
Like, no one's talking about or fighting for these issues.
You know, it was the carbon tax I was fighting against.
I'm fighting against voter fraud.
It's the taxpayer-funded subsidies that political parties are getting that all the parties voted in favor of, even though the PC party campaigned against it.
And now all of a sudden they're getting $5 million from the taxpayer.
Bill 12, the marriage code of conduct from 2020, all things that I stood up against and blew the whistle on as a new Blue Party.
And it was only then after we say things that everyone else piles on and says, well, hang on, yeah, actually, this is not a great idea.
So I'm very much used to doing things on my own.
If you remember July 2020, I was the only former or current PC MPP to vote against the Reopening Ontario Act.
And I got punished for that.
And, you know, it's just, it's par for the course.
I'm here to do a job and I'm doing my job.
Well, I, for one, am very grateful to see that opposition because it's so important in Canada.
You know, we have our federal government and Parliament Hill where all the federal MPs are sitting.
And there's a lot of attention paid to federal politics I find in Canada.
We often ignore the issues provincially because it's our provincial parliaments that are in charge of the two major areas would be health care and education that are exclusively provincial issues when it comes to legislation.
And that's often kind of falls by the wayside more paying attention more to federal politics and otherwise.
So issues like this in our schools, that's completely provincially.
And I find provincially a lot of conservative-minded people have sort of given up on provincial politics a lot.
They're more focused on federal politics.
And it does come down to just, you know, I see you sitting there and you're one of the only ones, if not the only one, who's actually in there debating and voting.
So I mean, I'd just like to commend you for that, for one.
But I mean, coming back to the bill here itself, yesterday it caught my attention that Jordan Peterson, the very well-known, outspoken author, academic, clinical psychologist, he put out a video, essentially, I think it was just titled Warning, Bill 67.
And he called this something along the lines here of, he called it the most pernicious and dangerous piece of legislation that any Canadian government has attempted to put forward.
I'm going to read something that I wrote about this as a warning.
A warning to citizens of Ontario and Canada.
Bill 67, which purports to be nothing but an anti-racist bill, is in fact the most pernicious and dangerous piece of legislation that any Canadian government has attempted to put forward.
And I hope I'm not saying that lightly.
It will make mandatory the subversion of the entire education system in Ontario, K-12, as well as colleges and universities, to the radically leftist doctrines known as critical theory, a thoroughly anti-Western ideology, both postmodern and Marxist in its derivation, based on the idea that all our extant institutions are racist, sexist, and discriminatory.
in their essence.
That's a very bold statement.
And his whole video is just going through talking about this bill and just how dangerous it is from his perspective at least.
And so, but he didn't really put anything forward as to what we can do about this.
He said it's very dangerous.
He wanted to, you know, put the issue out there, speak out from his platform, say, guys, this is really an issue.
We need to pay attention to this.
But I mean, from your perspective, as someone who has been in the legislature debating and voting against this bill, what can we do if we're concerned about people instilling critical race theory, which is such a buzzword now, but instilling these essentially racist and harmful, I mean, it's like weaponizing guilt and stoking racial divisions and pushing these ideologies on school children, go up to university level.
This is something that I find very concerning myself and anyone who has children in our education system.
So all that to say, you know, what can we do?
If you're someone concerned about this bill, concerned about critical race theory in our schools and other harmful ideologies that are being pushed like this almost unanimously, what can we do to fight back?
Because I know a lot of people feel pretty hopeless against this sort of thing that's creeping into all of our institutions.
What can we do?
So first I just want to say with the Jordan Peterson podcast, it's interesting because it took three PhDs and 80 minutes to kind of delve into this bill.
And let me tell you, that's not required.
This is a very simple bill, as I mentioned before.
And it seemed, again, I didn't watch the whole thing, but it seemed like they were trying to give the PCs an out.
And Rick Nichols, he apologized for voting against it, trying to give these guys an out.
There's no excuses.
There's no excuses.
You know, a lot of these people have been here in Rick Nichols' case for a decade.
And to say that you read the bill and didn't understand it, it was tabled in December.
We voted in March.
It's a six-page, simple, simple bill.
If you have trouble understanding that, we have a bigger problem on our hands.
But what we're seeing is people like Rick Nichols and other PC operatives and the PC party, they're all just going to the left.
And what we need to do as Ontarians is you get behind people who are going to stand up for you.
So like myself at the New Blue Party, but it's also making your voice heard.
And so, you know, when it came to Bill 12, for example, like I mentioned before, the New Blue Party put out a call to action.
And Ontarians, you know, they all contacted their MPPs.
And sure enough, that bill failed.
The PCs voted against that bill and it failed.
And we need to continue doing that and let them know that this is unacceptable.
The thing is with a bill like this, people are nervous to speak up about it because they don't want to be labeled.
And, you know, I've had people contact me at the constituency office thanking me.
You know, I'm one of the few female MPPs who's recognized by the Coalition of Black Trade Unionists.
I mixed my dad's Trinidadian.
And unfortunately, people said they felt safer that I voted against it because of that.
And that's so sad.
Like, it shouldn't matter about my ethnicity.
It's something as simple as reading this legislation, this very simple legislation, and understanding that this is not something that should be introduced into our school system.
And so I would encourage parents and just people in general to speak up about this and get in contact with your boards and with your MPPs and let them know to vote no against this bill if it gets through committee and comes to third reading.
If you believe that this twisted form of critical race theory and any such perversely racist ideologies have no place in our schools to be forced on our children, if you believe that no one should be singled out or taught to feel more or less than anyone else due to the color of their skin or punished for their subconscious ideas, then please go to stopcrt.ca and sign our petition.
Bill 67 is a radically harmful piece of legislation cloaked behind the thin and misleading veil of racial equity, and it must be stopped.
So, please do sign and share our petition again at stopcrt.ca.