Ezra Levant critiques the C40 Cities’ 2030 pledge to halve emissions by pushing plant-based diets, calling it unrealistic and dismissing mayors like Toronto’s John Tory as ineffective. He ties this to policies like Canada’s proposed fertilizer cuts and Dutch nitrogen restrictions, warning of harm to farmers without consultation. Meanwhile, lawyer Janine Eunice fights U.S. vaccine mandates and First Amendment censorship, citing Biden officials pressuring tech firms to silence dissent—echoing 1984’s Orwellian tactics. Levant calls pandemic-era divisions Canada’s worst moral failure, worse than residential schools or slavery, while Tamara Leach’s release is hailed as justice. Pope Francis’s apology in Masquez, Alberta, drew mixed reactions: relief for acknowledgment but frustration over unaddressed sexual abuse, with elders demanding real reconciliation beyond symbolic gestures like the war bonnet gift. [Automatically generated summary]
There's a new group of elitists that want you to alter your diet, all in the name of climate change.
It's Wednesday, July 27th, 2022.
I'm David Menzies, and this is the Ezra Levant Show.
shame on you you censorious bug you know folks i used to think that the mayor of a city had certain specific duties when it came to running a municipality which is to say make sure the garbage gets picked up the drinking water is clean
the snow is removed from roads, potholes are fixed in the summertime, and so on.
This might seem to be pretty mundane stuff, but it affects residents directly in a profound way.
I mean, if the garbage does not get picked up, the city will soon resemble a cesspool, after all.
So I was most curious to come across a document called C40 Cities, subtitled, quote, a global network of mayors taking urgent action to confront the climate crisis and create a future where everyone can thrive, end quote.
Now, as an aside, I'm so confused here.
Are we currently living through a climate crisis or a climate emergency?
Or is it a climate disaster?
I mean, can't the Greta Tunberg acolyte settle on one consistent scare word when it's attached to the word climate?
How dare you?
But back to the C40, which is not thankfully a type of explosive.
Rather, it is a collection of almost 100 mayors of major cities who, you know, jet-set to Copenhagen or wherever and assemble like the mighty Avengers, except none of these cats have any superpowers.
Here's an excerpt from their PR video.
I wonder how much carbon was used to produce this opus.
I hear people say, your future is bright, but after this past year, I wonder if that's still true.
When I see the news, sometimes I'm overwhelmed.
What's going to happen to my family, to our planet, to the animals, to my friends, to me?
Make no mistake.
We are in the midst of the fight for our lives, for our planet, our people, and our shared future.
Around the world, we are grappling with an unprecedented pandemic.
Confronting fires on our hillsides, floods in our streets, and entrenched systemic inequality.
A global crisis of this magnitude, one that transcends borders, politics, and ideology, requires nothing less than bold, united, global action to meet the urgency of this moment.
Mayors of the world's greatest cities know that our communities and residents are already feeling the effects of the climate emergency firsthand.
They know we cannot wait this crisis out, so instead, they've raised their ambition by committing to cut their city's fair share of emissions in half by 2030 and are already taking bold steps to make this happen.
Mayors are delivering on a shared vision for a green and just recovery from the COVID pandemic that puts equity and inclusivity at the heart of our decision-making.
Prioritizes investing in crucial public services, creating good green jobs, supporting essential workers, ensuring access to healthy and sustainable food, and giving public spaces back to people and nature.
Mayors know that cities can't do this alone, which is why they are working collaboratively with young people, labor leaders, heads of state, businesses, investors, and citizens.
If we all work together, we're not only capable of leading us out of the climate crisis.
We will build a world where everyone is included and everyone is safe.
Where we can look our kids in the eye and tell them that their future is indeed bright.
The actions we take this decade, starting today, will determine the future of humanity and all life on our planet.
Together, we can, we must, change the trajectory our planet is on.
Join us.
Hmm.
Cutting emissions in half by 2030, eh?
In less than eight years, right?
Well, as ex-Ontario Premier Kathleen Wynne would say, that's a stretch goal.
And that last line in the video about changing the trajectory our planet is on.
You know, that sounds like a job for Superman, not a bunch of very ordinary politicians.
I mean, come on, Toronto Mayor John Torrey is somehow going to change the planet's trajectory?
Give me a break.
I mean, back in 2020, it took Mayor Milktoes three weeks to clear a bunch of hobos operating under the banner of Afro-Indigenous Rising out of Nathan Phillips Square.
And once they were booted from the grounds of City Hall, they merely marched northwest to Dufferin Grove Park and turned that parkland into a hellhole for a good chunk of the summer, too.
We were there for cleanup time.
Check it out.
Oh, I'm sorry, ma'am.
I'm just reading your breasts.
What does that say exactly?
It says no justice, no peace.
No justice, no peace.
No justice, no peace.
It's not on behalf of anybody else?
It's not necessarily helping the situation because this is what they're here to do instantly.
They can use any of this footage anyway.
Did they trigger you?
Get out of here.
Get out.
Get out.
Get out of my face.
Get out of my face.
You're not the enemy.
If you have white skin, you're always occupying every f***ing space in this.
Yeah, Mayor Tory can't even take care of his own backyard, but he wants to save a planet that doesn't need saving?
In any event, under the descriptor, what we do, the four-pronged agenda of these mighty mayors is set out.
One, raising climate ambition.
Two, influencing the global agenda.
Three, building a movement.
And four, scaling up climate action.
Call me a nitpicker if you must, folks, but what exactly is the difference between raising climate ambition and scaling up climate action?
And what's this obsession these mayors have with climate, climate, climate?
Gee, I think I'm about to have a Jan Brady moment here.
Marcia, Marsha, Marsha.
Alas, it only seems farcical until you read the nitty-gritty fine print.
For example, under scaling up climate action, there is a notation that 30% of global emissions come from food systems, that one-third of food produced is wasted, and that 14 cities have pledged to reinvent their food systems by 2030.
Gee, there's that new doomsday date again, eh?
2030.
Didn't we learn anything from the Mayans who predicted the demise of the planet as of 2012?
How did that go?
Yeah, the Mayans could see some 500 years into the future, but didn't notice Spanish conquistadors sailing into their neck of the woods in real time.
But I digress.
The C40 people say, quote, the global food system is broken, end quote.
Well, we are seeing prices rise during this period of stagflation, to be sure.
Much of that is due to idiotic policies by both the Biden and Trudeau administrations, depending on where you live.
But to call the system broken, that's a stretch.
Yet, because it is allegedly broken, it therefore must be fixed, even though, as Henry Ford once said, if it ain't broke, don't fix it.
In any event, the C40 mayors are big on, quote, integrating food policies that reduce greenhouse gas emissions and increase resilience, end quote.
And then there is this little nugget, quote, support an overall increase on healthy, plant-based food consumption in cities by shifting away from unsustainable, unhealthy diets, end quote.
Okay, folks, you see where this is going, don't you?
Emissions are bad, plants are good, so it's time to eradicate those flatulent and belching cows and pigs and lambs and whatnot, because those delicious critters are just so bad for the environment and the planet.
The C40 mayors would rather we, quote, align food procurement to the planetary health diet, ideally sourced from organic agriculture, end quote.
The planetary health diet?
Who's responsible for this Orwellian menu?
Is it the United Nations or the World Economic Forum?
They won't say it out loud, of course, but a key piece of the climate food agenda is eliminating meat production in the name of saving the planet.
And indeed, look what is happening in the Netherlands right now.
The Dutch government has declared war on its own farmers by declaring war on nitrogen, a key element when it comes to farming.
And here in Canada, the Justin Trudeau Liberals are proposing a policy that will require farmers to use less fertilizer.
That will mean lower crop yields, less profits, higher prices for you and me, and more family farms going out of business.
Oh, and it should be noted that this proposed policy wasn't concocted by Agriculture Canada.
Rather, it's the handiwork of Environment and Climate Change Canada, all in the name of making Canada a zero emissions nation in the future.
In fact, farmers and agriculture industry groups, they weren't even consulted.
And hey, what would they know about growing crops and raising livestock after all?
And consider this.
I don't think a single week has gone by this year without yours truly coming across yet another glowing article pertaining to humans eating insects.
Here's a BBC feature from July 20th.
It's entitled, Could Grasshoppers Really Replace Beef?
But all you really need to know about the article appears in the subhead, quote, for most people in Europe and the US, the idea of eating crickets and grasshoppers can seem revolting, but they are a popular snack in parts of Africa and Asia.
Not only are they packed with nutrients, but they are less harmful to the climate too, end quote.
I'm sorry, but the sad truth is this, bugs are eaten in third world nations not due to desire, but rather due to necessity.
Are you trying to tell me that a Ugandan would take a mealworm sandwich over a cheeseburger if given the choice?
Come on.
But with the C40 group of 96 mayors, they have clearly signed on to that nefarious agenda of building back better.
Yet do they even practice what they preach?
The next C40 World Mayor Summit is scheduled for this October in Buenos Aires.
Do you think for one second that Mayor John Torrey and the other mayors will be riding their bicycles to Argentina this fall?
Do you think his honor is going to chomp down on crickets as opposed to a fine Argentinian steak come mealtime?
But that's the thing when it comes to virtue signaling.
You merely have to talk the talk as opposed to walking the walk.
And it is outrageous to think mayors have the power to enact concrete changes in the first place.
Most of the things they are yapping on about fall under the bailiwick of states and provinces and countries, not municipalities.
Soylent Green 202200:02:42
Methinks these mayors surely must take the advice of that WWE scholar, Duane The Rock Johnson.
You know your damn role and shut your damn mouth.
You know folks, what we are seeing now from the elitists who comprise the UN and the WEF and now the C40, it's quite uncanny in one sense, which is the resemblance to the world depicted in the 1973 science fiction movie, Soylent Green.
New York City in the year 2022.
Nothing runs anymore.
Nothing works.
But the people are the same.
And the people will do anything to get what they need.
This is the police.
What they need most is Soylent Green.
The supply of Soylent Green has been exhausted.
Return to your home.
Indeed, Soyland Green is set in our current year of 2022.
And the thing is, it is downright uncanny how many things this film got right despite being released a half century ago.
Case in point, assisted suicide is not only legal in the world of Soyland Green, it's actually encouraged.
And of course, there's the title of the film, Soylent Green, which refers to a synthetic foodstuff.
Now, if you haven't seen the film, I won't say what Soylent Green is derived from.
That would be a huge spoiler.
But let's put it this way.
The product of Soyl and Green makes edible insects kind of look like filet mignon by comparison.
Yet in the here and now, in our real world in 2022, when it comes to the war on traditional farming and when it comes to the global elites dictating what they want us to consume, sorry, but I'm simply not buying what they are selling.
To put another way, to paraphrase the greatest political quote ever uttered by the star of Soyland Green himself, that being the late, great Charlton Heston, I'll give you my hamburger when you pry it from my cold, dead hands.
Mmm.
Vaccine Mandates and Disinformation00:14:54
Well, I'm very grateful to my dear friend and mission specialist, David Menzies, for covering the monologue for me.
And I hope you'll accept my apologies for not being able to do that part of the show.
I am going to be hosting the live stream tonight, co-hosting with my friend Sheila Gunread, covering the United Conservative Party's leadership debate in the province of Alberta.
Very interesting.
And as you know, one of the main reasons that the premier in that province was defenestrated was his extreme lockdowns, including the imprisonment of Pastor Arthur Pavlovsky.
So we'll be watching with an eye to personal freedom tonight.
That's what I'm doing tonight.
But I am in the chair to talk to one of the most interesting people I've met over the past two years.
You know, I have done less traveling in the last two years than I have done since I was a child.
I still am not allowed to go into the United States.
But despite that, I've met some of the most interesting people from different walks of life as people from all backgrounds have done their best to fight against the civil liberties bonfire.
And one of the smartest people that I've enjoyed talking with is our next guest.
Janine Yunus is a lawyer at the new Civil Liberties Alliance, and she joins us now from Washington, D.C. Janine, it's great to see you again.
Great to catch up.
I have a big question I want to put to you in a minute, but first, let me just catch up with you because you're so busy on these things.
Can you give our viewers an update on some of the civil liberties matters that you are acting for as a public interest lawyer in the U.S.?
We always look to the U.S. for public interest law because your system and your courts are more amenable to it than here in Canada.
Can you give us an update on some of the stuff you were working on?
Yeah, so I'm working on vaccine mandate cases still, and I have a case pending in the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals, which covers sort of the Michigan, Ohio area.
So we're appealing a dismissal of the lawsuit there and have hopes that the Sixth Circuit will understand more than the district court what the constitutional problems were here.
Another area of law I've been very involved with is First Amendment issues when it comes to government trying to censor or government using big tech to censor views that it doesn't like.
So for instance, I think one of the most common examples of this is Twitter, where Twitter frequently will suspend people or label posts misleading that diverge from the government's message on various matters, especially when it comes to COVID.
And I think there's substantial evidence that the government is involved in telling big tech what to do and coercing it.
And that turns it into state action.
So far, our lawsuit on this issue was dismissed, but we're also appealing that also in the Sixth Circuit.
It's very interesting.
Both of those are very applicable to our Canadian situation as well.
Let me ask you first about the mandate, the vaccine mandate appeal that you're looking at.
My first question is, is there a problem in the United States where the other side, where the government would say, well, that matter is moot because we're no longer enforcing that?
Are they still enforcing vaccine mandates in the areas you're suing?
And if they're not, does that stop you from getting a ruling from a higher court?
Yeah, that's a great question.
So mootness is one of the big issues that lawyers have faced, not just with vaccine mandates, but the COVID restrictions in general.
So what often happens is, you know, you get in front of the judge and the lockdown has ended or the mask mandate has ended, but you know that the governor or the mayor might bring it back in a few months.
But then the other side, the government, argues it's moot.
There's no live controversy is what that means.
There has to be a live case or controversy.
So you can circumvent that by showing that the issue is or the circumstances are likely to be repeated again.
But that's a disputed matter.
Now, in our case, that's not an issue because Michigan still has a vaccine mandate.
Really?
Yeah.
The universities are the worst on this.
The supposed bastions of enlightenment, you know, are just forcing their 30-year-old or 22-year-old students to get vaccines and boosters, often when they've already had COVID.
We know the vaccine doesn't stop transmission.
We know that the risk profile for young people is much higher.
Isn't that interesting?
And I'm going to come back to that question a little bit later, but let me first take the second thing you mentioned, which is Twitter and how government contracts out or outsources censorship to private companies.
And I can see how that would be an attempt to evade constitutional scrutiny.
In Canada as well, our Charter of Rights, which is not as strong as your Bill of Rights, only applies to government actors, not to private parties.
So Twitter and other big tech companies, when they do bad things to you, you don't have a lot of recourse.
Do you have evidence that the government is pushing, is bargaining, is making deals with Twitter or other big tech companies to do their bidding?
Another point of view might be, well, no, they're just like birds of a feather.
They harmonize, they get into formation.
No one's forcing them to.
It's just they're all woke censors instinctively.
So it's not surprising that a Silicon Valley San Francisco-based liberal firm is censoring, but there's no smoking gun showing that the White House ordered them.
How are you getting over that?
Maybe there's confidential things you don't want to disclose to me, but I would imagine that showing some link that the government asked for it and Twitter gave it, as opposed to Twitter doing it organically.
Is that an issue in these court panels?
Yeah, so our case was dismissed along with a number of others, actually all in the same week, even though they were in different jurisdictions.
And that's exactly what the judge said.
The judge said, you know, you can't show that this was happening because of the government.
These companies were censoring people for misinformation prior to COVID.
But I believe the judge got it completely wrong.
And I think that that will come forth in subsequent lawsuits.
We have government officials on record, Biden, his former press secretary, Jennifer Saki, Vivek Murthy, the Surgeon General, Alejandro Mayorkas, the Secretary of DHS, I believe, all on the record making statements like big tech isn't, you know, Twitter or Facebook aren't doing enough to censor this, you know, skepticism of the vaccines, people who spread what's called misinformation, quote unquote misinformation,
which just means something that differs from what the government says that's actually often acknowledged to be right in the future, like, you know, masks don't work very well to stop the spread or the vaccines don't stop transmission.
So, you know, the fact that we have these people on the record saying the companies need to do more, that means that, you know, they were coercing the companies to do more.
And they're making explicit threats about regulation and other legal penalties that could be levied.
I mean, it's my opinion that if the founding fathers, you know, could have envisioned the internet and social media, they would have seen that this was a clear, clear First Amendment violation.
I mean, what you're doing is you're having the government, the government is dictating the messages, what views are allowed to be heard and what views are not.
And the fact that it's using a private company to do so doesn't really change that.
You know, we talk a lot about that same issue in Canada.
I think there was one point where they would attack people ad hominem.
You're racist, you're transphobic, you're what.
I mean, that used to be a response, including by our own prime minister, by the way.
Then it was you're inciting an insurrection.
They were trying to piggyback off the January 6th event in Washington, D.C., which of course has no relation to Canada.
I don't think that worked very well.
Although they tried to call the truckers the trucker convoy in Canada.
They tried to equate them to, although it was completely peaceful.
But I think they've settled on what you've just mentioned there.
Misinformation, disinformation, trying to swallow up entire arguments as crime think.
If you remember the book 1984, some ideas, you didn't debate them.
You just swallowed them up and say we can't even debate them because the idea is illegal and it's foreign and it's immoral.
The idea itself is a crime.
So we're not going to engage with it.
I think that's what misinformation and disinformation is.
It's instead of saying you have an opposition to me, you're contrary, you're a dissident, we just have two different points of view.
You're saying your point of view is from the root, a poisoned point of view that's not even authentic.
You are a shill for Vladimir Putin is the most common one we have today.
I see that really becoming an issue in Canada.
In Canada, you have the Department of Defense funding that kind of work.
You have our equivalent of your Homeland Security.
We have our public security minister.
I fear that disinformation, that whole shtick, it's really a weaponized, a harsher version of the epithet fake news.
Like fake news you could laugh about, but disinformation sounds scary.
Is that being funded by, I don't even want to use the word military-industrial complex, but when the money's coming from the Pentagon, when the money's coming from the Department of Homeland Security, maybe it is.
Are military and foreign affairs and CIA-type organizations funding it?
I'm not talking about speculation.
Like, do you know if money for this disinformation campaign is coming from the military?
So that is not something that I know.
I know that the DHS, the Department of Homeland Security, has formed a disinformation governance board, a lot of people may have heard of.
And it's sort of been on hold because people were, there was a lot of public outcry about it.
It sounded very Orwellian, as you've mentioned.
But no, I don't have hard evidence of what you just asked.
Fair enough, and that's the right answer if you don't have it.
I should tell you that we were startled to discover that the U.S. Navy has funded research into us as an information operation.
I was just shocked.
I mean, we're Canadian, we're loyal.
Frankly, I'm very pro-Navy.
It was really weird.
So we have, through access to information requests, discovered that the U.S. Navy intelligence side is funding research into rebel news as an information operation.
So you never know, which I find really creepy.
And I would have thought that maybe they needed all their money to buy Navy ships to fight against the Chinese aircraft carrier.
But I guess a little website in Canada is more dangerous.
Here's the question I really wanted to ask you, Jeannie.
I'm glad for the updates on those lawsuits.
I wish you good luck in those appeals.
be following it, frankly, as a role model because we do at a modest scale what you're doing down there.
We try and do up here too.
I want to ask you about something I'm hearing from people who are in the battle.
For example, I heard this from my friend John Carpe, the leader of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms, which is a public interest law firm in Western Canada.
And I hear this from others.
Justin Trudeau signed a contract for 400 million doses with Pfizer, and there's only 38 million Canadians.
So that's 10 for every man, woman, child, and baby.
His health minister said the new standard for being up to date, there's no such thing as fully vaccinated anymore.
They're calling it up to date, and they say it means every nine months.
So it's a rolling, constantly deteriorating standard that you always have to meet.
You theoretically would never be fully vaccinated because their phrase is up to date now.
And I see these things, and I see that they're maintaining the tracking app that Canadians and foreigners are required to fill out to come into Canada.
I see that they're retaining, for example, the ban on unvaccinated people coming into Canada.
And so some of my friends and very thoughtful and very educated people say, Ezra, you're just in the summer reprieve.
But when it is fall again and when it's flu season again and when it's not as much fun to be outside again, because as if they could tell young people to stay inside in the glorious summer in Canada, that there will be a return of masking requirements and possibly even a return of vaccine requirements now that we have the new standard, quote, up to date.
And I'm just asking for the feeling in your bones.
I mean, none of us are prophets, but you've been in this battle for two solid years, as have I in my own way.
I'd like to be more hopeful than my friends.
I think, well, geez, that's a pretty dark view of the future that we're doomed to repeat this in eternity.
Do you think that we will head back into another round of this, or do you think maybe the U.S. midterm elections is a protection against that?
I think we will head back into another round, but it won't be as bad.
Each successive one is kind of less bad than the last.
What's happening is they're losing public support.
I mean, most Americans are over COVID.
There's just a small contingent that's clinging to this, and it gets smaller and smaller every day, I think.
But, you know, LA, for instance, is claiming they're bringing back their mask mandate.
I am hearing again from students.
There had been a reprieve where I wasn't really hearing from people about vaccine mandates.
Now I'm getting emails again.
It's much less than it was a year ago.
But, you know, because they have to have had their full vaccine course by the end of August, I'm getting those emails.
So I do think it's not over.
I don't know how long it's going to go on for.
I think they're going to keep losing more and more support the longer it goes on.
But there's obviously just a contingent of the population that for some reason embraces this and is accepting it.
So I think there will be certain Democratic strongholds where, I mean, it seems like it might never go away.
Yeah.
I mean, I think that you could feel a pivot when Democrats, I think, sensed that this wasn't a winner for them in the polls anymore, that they were out of sync.
And the midterms are looming large in the minds, I would imagine, of Democrats.
But once that's over, like that's in November, I suppose literally the day after that, you could see the president who at his, you know, he's an old man who is very frail.
If he could power through COVID, I mean, I'm not sure why anyone younger would be afraid of it, but let's say he gets through the midterms in whatever shape his party is, he could theoretically push the panic button again a day after the vote and do what he could to put things within his federal purview back in a state of emergency again.
I mean, I'm just daydreaming.
Pivotal Midterms Looming00:16:18
I don't know the American scene.
I mean, it depends a little bit what happens.
If the Republicans sweep the midterms, as I had expected that they would before Dobbs overturned Roe, then I don't see how that would be very smart politics.
But on the other hand, I think the Democrats know that they're going to lose the election.
And I'm a little surprised that some of the sort of people we know, they're not necessarily political actors, but people like Anthony Fauci we know are supportive of the Democrats, are really insisting on bringing, you know, on continuing these measures.
Fauci's continuing to push the idea of mask mandates.
He said we should have locked down harder.
So they're not repudiating what happened.
They're not really listening to what's going on with the American public.
And I'm perplexed as to why Biden hasn't told Fauci, you know, this isn't the message we want to be sending.
So I don't really know what's going on with those Democrats.
I don't know if they're living in an echo chamber and they don't understand that most of America has moved on, but hopefully they'll get the rude awakening they deserve in November.
Yeah, I want to ask you one last question.
It's a personal question.
I follow you on Twitter.
That's how I've discovered your work.
And you're sometimes personal.
You remark sometimes on how the lockdowns and the psychological response people have to the virus itself has caused ruptures in friendships and even amongst families.
And I think everyone has detected that.
I mean, I do too.
And I think that that has been a devastation to our society.
It's pitted people against each other.
I first saw it pitting store owners against customers.
Like there was a little Italian bakery block away I would go to every morning.
Every morning I would go there for a little bite and a little coffee every day.
I wouldn't say we were friends, but I was a regular.
And then, where's your mask?
Where's your mask?
I'm sorry, I'm not your friend anymore.
I have never been back.
And I regret that because part of life, part of a neighborhood, part of a feeling of community is, oh, that's the shop where I have my coffee.
And that's the place.
And there's a nice lady there.
And there's a friend.
Like, you feel the connect.
And you're pitted against these people.
And they probably don't want to be against you, but they're afraid of something.
Or maybe they're afraid of their more zealous customers and families and friends.
And I think it's been, you know, there's been tremendous objectively measurable harms done.
But I think that it's hard to measure the harm amongst people and between friends and between family members.
And I want to know if you think that that has healed it all.
And I ask you that because I found your tweets on the subject quite poignant and very sad, actually.
And you were very candid and honest about that.
Is there a interpersonal healing that has happened?
Or is this like a war and people will just never forget it until they die?
My experience, I would say, is the latter.
I don't think the friendships that ruptured in my life, I don't think are going to come back.
And part of it, I admit, is because of me.
Actually, I had sort of blamed them because they told me I was a bad person for not wanting to wear a mask or for thinking that lockdowns wouldn't work or questioning the whole idea of this virus mitigation, government-imposed virus mitigation.
And Ann Bauer, who's also on Twitter and has a large following, she said something that I sort of recognized and I hadn't been willing to acknowledge myself, which is I think a lot of them.
I think much less of a lot of them, and I don't want them in my life.
I saw how they've reacted.
I saw that, you know, I saw selfishness.
I saw people who didn't really care, you know, purporting to be leftists, who didn't really care about the working class, who didn't really care about children from disadvantaged homes, who just, you know, were terrified and wanted to stay at home on Zoom.
Which, and, you know, I have empathy for people being terrified, but to be nasty and cruel to other people and to refuse to listen when they have, you know, thoughts that might differ from the approved messaging and to tell them they're bad people, I don't think it's forgivable.
And so, you know, I have to say, a lot of it is me.
I don't want them back in my life.
Very interesting.
We're in very strange days.
Well, Janine, we salute you and we're fans of the new Civil Liberties Alliance, your public interest law firm.
And I love that name, the new Civil Liberties Alliance, because it is true.
It is a new coalition of people who are, you know, you talked about where were the people who cared about working class folks, where were the people who cared about children.
You're so right.
It's an interesting, even our company here.
We have people working for us today who I think in the before times would have said, oh, you're too right-wing or something.
But what does it mean to be right-wing if you're for privacy?
You don't want to fill out Trudeau's spyware app.
What does it mean if you believe in bodily integrity?
That used to be a liberal thing.
So it is a new alliance.
And I like it myself.
I like dealing with people who I hadn't known before.
It's stretched me as a person.
We work with an interesting coalition.
I think you're part of that.
I mean, your nickname is lefty lockdown.
Like you call yourself a woman of the left, or maybe you used to be and no longer do.
I mean, there are some wonderful things that have come out of this horrific two years, but I think on the whole, every one of us is poorer and sadder.
Not every one of us, but I think most of us are.
And it's been a very troubling time.
I think it has been the worst thing to happen, the worst thing to happen to Canada in our country's history.
We didn't have slavery, because I would say American slavery was a greater violation of civil liberties than this, of course.
But I think that this lockdown and the government going to war against its own people and pitting people against each other is actually the worst thing to ever happen to Canada.
And I think most Canadians failed the moral test of the moment.
And I'm not saying that to push myself up.
I'm saying I'm shocked and sad to see how easily everyone else tumbled.
And I'll stop being so pessimistic, Janine.
That's very similar to how I feel.
I was surprised that people were so weak and so easily terrorized into turning on each other.
Yeah.
Well, you're one of the fighters.
You're one of the good ones.
Thank you, Janine.
Great to see you.
Thank you.
There you have it, Janine Eunice, one of our favorite people.
Stay with us more ahead.
Well, folks, a lot of responses regarding Ezra Levent's interview with Sheila Gunn-Reed regarding the fact that Tamara Leach is now a free woman once again, at least for the meantime.
A few responses to read to you.
Dean Tate writes, unfortunately, the tyranny didn't fail.
It's unbelievable that how reasonable people have to celebrate a simple justice.
Yeah, a simple justice, my friend.
And really, what was the crime?
I was there when Tamara Leach back in June was getting that Freedom Award in Toronto and there was no incitement to violence.
There was no call for demonstrations, nothing.
I am still baffled why Tamara Leach was arrested just days before Dominion Day and incarcerated in the first place.
It is shameful.
And Janice Fiamingo writes, listening to the CBC gives me severe nausea.
Bravo to Tamara Leach and to the Rebel for being one of the very few journalistic outlets to tell the truth.
Yeah, and I feel your pain, Janice, and to think that you are paying for the CBC traumatizing you in such a fashion.
Talk about insult to injury.
Well, folks, thank you so much for tuning in.
The big boss man, he'll be back tomorrow.
In the meantime, stay sane.
Celine Gallas here for Rebel News.
I'm in Masquez, Alberta, where Pope Francis is here to deliver apology to the Aboriginal communities here on this territory.
I'm asking people if they believe that this apology tour has been too over-politicized by the Trudeau government, or if this is something that the Indigenous communities here inherently need in order to move on.
It's good to see them come here and apologize to us.
I mean, we've been looking for that for a long time.
A lot of our people suffered through all this.
I'm one of the survivors.
That one was in there.
I went through a lot of trouble through this.
Just listening to him makes me feel better.
Maybe he'll start up a better life.
I wouldn't know.
It's really hard to say what's going to happen after this.
It's good to go back to the people and talk to them, see what the elders say about it.
It's really hard.
But it's good to see that.
It's happened.
I thought it would never happen, but it did happen.
I'm glad it's happened.
I know there's some people out there that are not too happy about what's happening here.
A lot of my people did show up.
Why they're so unhappy with what's happening here with this resident school.
But it's happened.
We can't do nothing about it.
It's here.
We heard about it.
We asked for it.
We got it.
Now we're just going to deal with it as best as we can.
Go back home and let the people know what we thought about it being here.
That's why I've been sitting, standing here, really doing a lot of thinking.
What are I going to say back to people when I get back home again?
Yes, it's going to be all important because it's the only concern to do with our children.
Like now I've got four grandchildren.
Now I've got three great-grandchildren.
So I got a lot of teaching to do.
It's a lot of stuff with my children and my family.
It really tore up a lot of the people in our community.
But we're slowly coming back together.
I mean, it's hard to take this all back together.
It'll take time, but it'll be back.
It's incredible.
I mean, we need that as a people.
When somebody hurts you, you have to apologize and accept forgive protocol in native culture.
If somebody apologizes, you have to accept it.
That's what I believe.
First thing I'll start out with is there was no mention of the sexual abuse and the protection of nuns and priests that committed those offenses against children.
That wasn't included in his apology.
He mentioned every other abuse but that.
And that's where many, you know, suffered at the hands.
Like that was the worst type of abuse they could experience in those schools.
And that was cloaked in religion.
And why do you think that he wouldn't address that?
Because they're responsible for covering up those actions, as far as I'm concerned.
Yes, they didn't want to mention the names.
I know they made one arrest, but there's like 5,000 other more, something like that, of these people that are alive that we haven't felt like seemed to get justice for, you know what I mean?
Like with the children, yeah.
It's hard to say.
You know, sometimes it's really from the heart, just like our prime minister, too, when he talks about some native issues and stuff.
You just wonder how deep from the heart it actually comes.
And I think it's got to be way deep inside the heart to really take effect.
And talking to a lot of elders and stuff and the deep words.
It's basically the same deal.
It's very, I really enjoyed it, the way the words that he used and apologizing to everybody and saying that he's going to support the healing and the reconciliation and with all and to be the indigenous people to be respected with their culture, their language and everything.
It was very emotional because my mother was in residential school and she kind of passed down how she was treated to me, the oldest daughter.
Yeah, but I have forgiven.
I had worked on myself already.
But there's other people that need to start their healing tour.
And this one is a big step.
And they have to accept the apology.
As Jesus said on the cross, forgive them, Father.
One of my favorite lines from one of my old Christian songs.
It's called Before the Throne of God.
It's written by, I forget who, but one of the lines is in the Course is, to look at him and pardon me.
And that's a funny way to say, I look at God and pardon myself.
But no.
Today I stand here to fully say and surrender everything and to say to look at him and forgive thee.
I will continue to forgive, but I will not, I will not in this lifetime forget.
And do you think with Chudo being here that this event is being maybe a little bit too over-politicized with his apology tour?
Well, everybody has their agenda, right?
So everybody's here for a reason, right?
And I don't think it's all because of us.
But yes, you know, so what was important to me was the names of the children that we carried in in the procession.
Is that these people look and that these were living human beings.
These were innocent children.
They didn't deserve what happened to them.
And they're not here to tell their story.
And those are the ones that they can find.
You know, these are not the ones that they're thinking they're finding in unmarked graves.
Yeah.
So yeah, that part was very hard.
Yeah, because for some people it doesn't mean nothing to them.
You know what I mean?
That's their opinion.
Like they're here for their agenda.
And then there's these children that, you know, never got to live a full life.
Yeah.
No, the apology is over.
The Pope has now left.
What did you make of the apology?
How do you feel about him being here?
Well, that's a loaded question because it's important that he was here.
He apologized again, said he felt the deep shame, and that's critical that he feels that.
But what he also said was really important.
Although he didn't denounce the Doctrine of Discovery, he said there was going to be a serious investigation and that there was policies that were detrimental.
And so he knows that.
That is the Doctrine of Discovery.
How do I feel?
It's a mixed emotion.
I feel anger.
And because my parents survived Indian residential schools, I'm here for them.
I'm here for my grandparents.
I'm here for my daughter.
And there's a lot of emotions.
And he was gifted a war bonnet.
And I sat there and wondered what my father as a chief would have said today watching that take place.
I personally have a mixed emotion about that.
And it concerns me.
What's he going to do with it?
Will there be reconciliation as he wears that?
Will there be reconciliation as he carries that sacred peace from our people?
So it was interesting to watch, but I'm not sure.
We'll see.
If there's action to the words, if there's true healing and reconciliation, and he asks us to forgive, that's a big ask.
And it's going to take courage, but we know our people are resilient.
We know we're courageous.
So that's something to ponder.
And that's our next business and step of responsibility.
But we'll see.
I'm not totally convinced, but we'll see.
Can I ask you one more thing?
Yes.
What do you make of Justin Trudeau and Jagmeet Singh being here?
Government Canada's Response00:00:59
Do you think that this apology tour that they've ordered is a little bit too over-politicized?
I think it was important that they were here because they play the role of the genocide, the colonialism, the legislative destruction of our peoples.
And the words of the Pope are universal, so Justin has to respond as well.
The Prime Minister of Canada, the government of Canada has to respond to this and do something to undo those detrimental policies and that serious investigation he talked about.
So those words were meant for him too.
And I think it's important that he participates in this to undo all of that.
It now seems that the event has wrapped up.
The Pope has finished his speech, has finished his apology.
We've seen a lot of mixed reactions today that we're able to show you.
We got those interviews on camera.
Overall, I think that a lot of people feel that the apology is really positive and that it's going to be really important for healing going forward.