DAILY dissects Quebec’s election debate, where François Legault’s pandemic curfews and Bill 101 faced backlash while Éric Duaime’s sharp responses were undermined by moderator bias. Christia Freeland’s lockdown defense—claiming 70,000 lives saved—ignores predictable economic fallout like inflation, while Bill C-11’s Soviet-style censorship risks silencing dissent online. Health Canada’s "woke" memo replaces medical terms with divisive language, politicizing healthcare. Rebel News’ convoy documentary and global freedom rallies contrast mainstream media’s decline, despite $103M in pandemic grants, and accusations of government-aligned bias. Lockdowns and green policies now fuel crises like Canada’s inflation and the UK’s cost-of-living surge, exposing systemic overreach. [Automatically generated summary]
We were having some technical difficulties, but it looks like we're all good now.
So thank you for tuning in here on Friday, September the 16th for our daily live stream before we head into the weekend.
I'm really looking forward to having Saturday and Sunday.
Today is a definite TGIF.
Thank God it's Friday for me.
I'm joined by one of our newest rebels, our Ottawa-based reporter, William Diaz.
How are you doing this morning, William?
Doing excellent.
How about you, Tamara?
Doing well.
Thank you.
Thanks for asking.
So I understand that last night, we're just going to do a quick recap of what happened last night because it was one of your first time live streaming on the Rebel platform.
So that's really exciting.
And it was a Quebec French-based audience and French live stream.
So I guess can we maybe just spend, you know, one or two minutes to quickly run through what that live stream looked like and give a quick translation to all of our English followers.
Yeah, of course.
Yeah.
So yesterday, I should just mention was the first of two debates that were happening in the Quebec election race this year.
So we had François Legaud, the leader of the Quebec, basically all the leaders of every party in Quebec meet together and debate on air live for everyone in Quebec to see.
That was really exciting to see because it was the first time we actually saw François Legault, who is the current premier of the province, debate Éric Duaime and other candidates are there as well.
So it was very exciting.
Some of the topics that were mentioned were the pandemic.
We talked about the French language bills, such as Bill 101 that would push, that would force basically CJEPs and higher education facilities to limit the amount of students that can learn in English in the province of Quebec, all in the name of preserving the French language.
So that was an interesting topic that we talked about yesterday.
We also talked about the pandemic and the curfews.
We know that under François Legault in Quebec, there were a lot of extreme measures taken during the pandemic with ranging from curfews from arresting rebel news reporters that were reporting on the field.
We know that Lincoln J was apprehended by a police.
Same thing for Yankee, who was harassed by the police multiple times.
So the topics were interesting.
I think François Legaud didn't do the best.
He didn't perform the best.
He was shocked.
And even the mainstream media agrees on that.
So that's interesting.
The Sovereignist Party, the Partique Bécois, wasn't very well represented.
Their leader was not convincing in arguing.
And he tried to, he seemingly tried to side with other candidates and play nice, which isn't what you want to see in a leader at all.
Then you had Quebec Ceridat, the Communist Party of Quebec, basically, the Quebec Celida, that were just talking like Marxists.
They were talking like we expected them to talk.
They were talking about restricting the amount of cars that are on the road.
They were talking about putting higher taxes, more government spending to get out of inflation.
The parti liberal, you know, it was so, so it wasn't the best performance, but not the worst performance either.
A lot of non-answers to questions asked by other candidates as well.
And of course, the leader of the Conservative Party of Quebec, Eric Duaime, the moderator was very biased against him and it shows throughout the whole event.
I think he did well.
He got his point across despite the moderator being against him.
He spoke like a true conservative and reflecting back on it, I think he was less honest and direct about certain issues, maybe because he tried to be more politically correct.
That's my guess.
But I think he did well.
And even the mainstream media admitted it.
So yeah, it was great.
And there's another debate coming up next week as well.
Oh, good.
Well, I hope that the coverage continues.
I know that there was such a longing in Quebec and a big gap there that you, yourself, and Alexa now can kind of fill and give our rebel viewers much needed coverage of that province.
And yeah, I'm glad that the pandemic was debated rigorously and discussed rigorously because Quebec saw some of the most draconian measures all throughout 2020 and into 2021.
So that definitely is something that I really like to see scrutinized and vigorously discussed.
So thank you for that little recap.
And just some quick housekeeping things before we get too far into the stream.
So you can join us here on our daily live stream where we're going to discuss some newsy topics of the day.
You can join us on YouTube, Rumble, Odyssey, and Getter on some of those platforms.
You can also engage directly with us by giving a super chat.
So through a small monetary donation, you can share your thoughts with us and we'll either read it on screen or we'll interact depending on the comment or what is said.
That's a nice way to not only support our journalism and engage with us directly and get some feedback on a topic or just let us know what you're interested in, what topics are interesting to you that you want to see us cover more.
So we are a completely donor-funded news source.
And of course, we want to follow the facts wherever they lead in a way that our viewers find interesting and topics that you find interesting.
So I always really like having that option available to super chat us.
I think that this today, we will save some of the super chats till the very end and we'll kind of designate 10 to 15 minutes to run through some of them unless there's something extremely relevant or spicy to the topic that we're discussing on hand.
So we'll kind of use our discernment there to decide what we save until the very end because some topics and some comments, unfortunately, if you're watching us on YouTube, we can't share here uncensored.
So especially as it pertains to the science TM around COVID, we unfortunately will save all of those topics until the very end where we will then move off of YouTube onto some of those other platforms where we don't have to self-censor ourselves because of YouTube's community standards, which basically mean that you can't question any of the science.
So that isn't even science, right?
Science is the constant questioning and evolution and rigorous debate and discussion.
Yeah, you can't question political science on YouTube.
And speaking of political science, we have a great clip first and foremost to share with our viewers of our deputy prime minister, Christia Freeland.
So she's justifying the COVID lockdowns here in this little clip.
Let's have a look.
Canada was going to have to put in place extraordinary measures to get through this pandemic.
We did something that I don't think a country in history has ever done.
And our peers, the wealthy industrialized nations around the world, did the same thing.
We literally shut down the economy.
With hindsight, I am very confident we did the right thing.
And there was actually a study over the summer led by David Naylor and a couple of other academics.
They found that if Canada had had the mortality rate of the United States, 70,000 additional Canadians would have died.
That's more than the population of Fredericton.
So I think all Canadians, like it was very hard those two years, but I think we should all remember that that saved at least 70,000 lives.
What it did mean, though, for Canada's small businesses is we asked them to shut down to save their parents and their grandparents and my parents and grandparents.
Well, I don't have grandparents anymore, but certainly my parents and aunts and uncles.
And that was an extraordinary thing we asked them to do.
Yeah, Christia's grandparents, there's some intertwining connections in there.
Maybe she didn't want to go down that rabbit hole, but that was interesting that she mentioned her grandparents.
No, of course, it's so ridiculous how that woman is so non-self-aware.
Like what she says right here is exactly the reason why the Liberal Party is being criticized over the way they reacted to the pandemic.
They're being criticized because they shut down everything.
And she's talking as if she is proud of having shut down the economy.
How is that something one can be proud of?
Shutting down the economy, freezing bank accounts, shutting down small businesses that the Liberal Party claims to want to defend.
You know, the left always talks about how much the government needs to defend and help small businesses.
Well, you literally just admitted that she hasn't shut down, you're proud of it.
How is she able to say that without laughing at herself?
I find it so unbelievable.
Well, and the fact that she says we asked small businesses to shut down, it's like, no, you put down the full force of the hammer of the government on those businesses and forced them to close under threats of fines and imprisonment.
This isn't, that's not asking.
That's telling and threatening to comply or else you're going to lose your business anyway.
And the other thing that, you know, she clearly notes that we shut down the economy.
Well, what repercussion has that had now on the economic landscape that we have currently in Canada now?
You know, this inflation and supply chain issues.
These are not things that back in the spring of 2020, economists weren't saying, hey, this is the fallout of such a harsh, heavy-handed policy to shut down the global economy.
It was coordinated and it was orchestrated.
And Canada wasn't alone in that.
No, Canada was a key player in that.
And as our finance minister, you would think, yeah, like you said, that the lack of self-awareness of this individual to know that the fallout of that shutdown is exactly everything that we are facing here today, coming from the mouth of someone who literally didn't miss a paycheck, right?
She, her paycheck kept on rolling.
She was never affected by the lockdowns or the business closures.
Christia Freeland continued to get paid.
So she has no skin in the game.
And it just shows how out of touch the Liberals are.
I keep saying it, just living up in their ivory towers and imposing all these mandates and restrictions on the little guy who, as you mentioned, they're supposed to be representing and protecting.
Well, exactly.
And I think this clip right here shows exactly the way of thinking of the Liberal Party of Canada currently.
What she said right here, it's a 30-second clip, I believe, one minute perhaps.
In this one minute, you can see the whole Liberal Party of Canada philosophy.
The fact that they do not care about what they do, they don't understand the actual struggle the working class of the small business owners because they shut down their economy.
They shut down the small businesses and they're proud of it and they don't, and they think they did the right thing.
I'm not sure, but I think Florida is doing quite well right now.
And I don't recall them shutting down their economy.
Actually, they did quite the opposite.
And I believe that the state of Florida is doing immensely well at the moment.
So I don't think it was necessary as she's claiming, as she's using fearmongering to prove to have shut down the economy.
And I think that was just a draconian measure.
And the Liberal Party of Canada is proud of having done that.
They're proud of having shown the power they're able to have on Canadians.
That's a really interesting take.
And another thing that Seems very outlandish to me is for her to make this claim that we saved X amount of lives.
What about all the lives that were devastated?
What about the increase in overdoses, in suicides, in mental health crisis?
This is that is a huge segment of the population that seems to just being entirely ignored when we discuss the effect of lockdowns and how we saved so many lives, but simultaneously devastated how many others.
I would love to see a clear comparison of that.
And we know that a lot of people didn't actually want to comply.
Many, many didn't comply.
We have a Black Locks article here, which unfortunately is behind a paywall.
So we can share it with our viewers here for you.
I won't read all of it, but we'll go through some of it.
So they researched the COVID scoff laws.
So those who didn't comply with the mandates.
And this was undertaken by Statistics Canada.
And the analysts said that they were able to identify a handful of characteristics shared by Canadians who defied masking orders and other mandates.
It says that Canadians were generally compliant with COVID cautions in the earlier waves of the pandemic.
But I think that, you know, as those waves continued on and the restrictions seemed endless and never ending, more and more people got fed up, right?
It didn't make sense.
Like Christia Freeland said, we closed all these small businesses.
Meanwhile, you could still go to Walmart and super centers to get those same items while the little guy got squashed through the lockdown.
So it's so some of the analysis was that younger Canadians were found generally to be less compliant as per this report.
Rates of compliance were highest in British Columbia, Ontario, and they were lower in Quebec and Atlantic Canada and lowest in the prairies and territories.
I mean, I think that's to be expected, especially in the prairies and Alberta and some of the territories.
Something else that I found really interesting in here.
So it took 11, just over 11,000 people and they surveyed 11,000 people across Canada.
But men, they say, are more likely to engage in risky behavior.
The gender-based findings followed some psychographic research led by the Privy Council office.
And COVID compliance was most popular among women under 34, retirees, francophones, and the least popular among working-age men, visible minorities, parents of children, and prairie residents.
What do you make of that, William?
How does that ring true for you?
Yeah, well, before we get to that, I just want to make sure.
Are you talking about people that identify as men or actual men on the study?
Are you not sure?
I think they're assuming some genders in this report.
Such bigots, it's unbelievable.
No, I do agree.
And I do agree with the point that she said earlier at the beginning.
Promoting Free Speech: A Battle Against Censorship00:12:21
A lot of people seem to be able to take it, to take the mandates that were imposed on them, the measures that were imposed on them, because it was the beginning, we didn't really know what was going on.
So I think at the beginning, people were really compliant.
But towards the end, I mean, at some point, Lincoln, Jay, and I, we went in front of Parliament Hill and we asked Omar Algebra to comment on the fact that Canada is alongside China and North Korea as the countries that do not allow their unvaccinated citizens to travel through plane.
They were the only country in Omar Algebra wasn't able to answer the question.
I think once you get to a certain point where the individual person is pushed too far, they're not willing to comply anymore.
They're not willing to be good anymore and follow along what the government wants them to do and follow along with the restrictions imposed by the government.
I think that's really what we saw during the pandemic.
Government seems to have so much power and they actually use their power, but they push it a tiny bit too far, which made Canadians less comply.
And that's what the study shows.
Well, and Canadians were also pushed to comply based on straight propaganda from China.
You know, you saw those videos of people dropping like flies in the street, and the warning from the media and the government was that that was coming here to Canada.
So they terrorized and terrified people into thinking that this was going to be the reality of how the pandemic unfolded.
And so people were like, please, let's stay home and save lives, right?
The two weeks to flatten the curve, and then third week, fourth week, fifth week, sixth week, no one's dropping like flies in the street.
The hospitals are empty.
The nurses are making TikTok videos instead of actually being overworked and overrun, which they are now, but weren't back then.
So it started, I think a lot of people started to recognize that this doesn't make sense, what was being espoused by the television versus what was happening in real life.
And so naturally, they hopefully would start to question the narrative more.
I would have liked to have seen even more of it, but I guess I lived in a province where people were heavily compliant here in Ontario.
So yay for that, I suppose.
Yeah, in Ontario, no, definitely.
And talking about government power.
And we're going to throw to a little ad before, but afterwards, we can talk about Bill C11 and how the government will actually be able to use their power to regulate content online.
Very concerning.
Yeah, let's check out this quick ad break for our Kamloops documentary by Drea Humphrey and Matt Revner.
The remains of 215 children have been found in a mass grave in Canada.
Do you want to get closer to the truth about what was actually buried at Kamloops Indian Residential School last year?
So do I. That's why the Rebels are doing a live screening in Calgary at Canyon Meadows Cinemas, and we want you to join us.
We'll be there to watch this documentary with you, meet and greet you, and answer any questions that you have.
I can't wait to see you.
There's more info below.
I am so excited for that documentary.
And I think the timing is perfect, especially as I think it's this coming Monday, or maybe it's the next, where there's the All Children Matter Day, the Orange Shirt Day.
I know there's the reconciliation, truth, and reconciliation type of day on the 30th of September.
So it'll definitely be interesting to you.
I actually cannot wait to see that documentary.
It'll be so great to watch.
Yeah, Andrea is so thorough.
And Matt is an amazing videographer and editor.
So I have really high hopes for this documentary.
And I tickets, I was looking just this morning.
Tickets are only $17.
So I think that's a great price.
And I'm sure that there is a Zoom option as well.
If you can't make it directly to Calgary, we won't be there.
But some of, of course, Drea, Sheila, Ezra, they will be there in person.
And I always urge people to go out and meet people in person, talk, shake hands, get out, get mingling again.
It's been a long two years, two and a half years of that all being essentially stolen from us.
So it's always fun to get out in person and meet and greet.
But yes, so now we're going to discuss this Bill C11, which basically was they tried to pass through prior to Justin Trudeau poroguing power limits, right under the guise of C10.
Now it's just being reinvigorated and re-envisioned.
And you, before we throw to a clip on this, you, William, had shared with me that you had read the entire bill.
Can you bring us some highlights of what you found was most concerning about it?
Bill C-11, the censorship Soviet Union type bill introduced by our great liberal party here in Canada.
Bill C-11 basically will give the government the power to decide what content online is promoted.
One content online is censored to Canadian viewers on YouTube and on other platforms, which is very alarming.
What time in history did the government have that much power in terms of what content will be shared and what news would be shared to Canadians?
And it worked.
It never happened apart from the Soviet Union.
And we know how the Soviet Union turned out with their Ministry of Truth.
Bill C-11 is probably the most dangerous bill since Bill C-16 that Jordan Pearson talked about a lot, the bill regarding gender pronouns and the compelling of language, right?
So basically, that's what Bill C-11 is.
It is a bill that government that will give the government the power to censor speech and decide what content to promote first online.
So if they don't like rebel news, if they don't find rebel news to be Canadian enough, well, they will have the power to censor us online and to promote CBC, CTV, global news, or other mainstream media channels.
We know that the bill currently passed the third reading in the House of Commons and is now in the Senate.
They had a comedy yesterday and they had a comedy on the September 14th as well regarding the bill.
They discussed it at the Senate and they brought in some interesting guests.
We clipped a few.
We got a few clips of this.
I don't know if we would be able to display it later.
But you know, one of the main advocates for the bill is Pablo Rodriguez, the heritage minister of Trudeau's Liberal Party.
And he says he claims that Bill C-11 will promote freedom of speech.
Now, I don't know how you draw censorship, how you draw a line from censorship to freedom of speech because it's non-existent.
It's literally antonyms.
You cannot have freedom of speech when you have censorship.
It's unbelievable.
And when I went to confront him in Ottawa to ask him the question, he told me that I was disrespectful for asking him the question.
He wasn't able to give me one way Bill C11 will promote free speech.
So it is just an extremely dangerous bill that will allow, that would give so much power to government.
It's actually alarming.
And I hope that the Senate votes against it.
Yeah, let's, I think, can we throw to you that quick clip of William there with Rodriguez?
Is there any sound that we can cool guy, Pablo Rodriguez?
How would it promote Canadian content?
Promote free speech.
It censors speech.
It will give the government the power to censor speech.
Who are you?
I'm with Rebel News.
My name is William Diaz.
Well, read the bill.
Did we?
Yeah, I read it.
Where is it written that the speech?
I'm asking you a question.
How would it promote?
No, I'm the journalist.
I'm asking you a question.
How would it promote free speech?
How on earth can it promote free speech?
I'm asking a question to you, sir.
You're our minister.
You didn't answer anything about my question.
How would it promote free speech?
You didn't answer anything.
How would it promote free speech?
Read your stuff.
How would it promote the speech?
Sir, the Canadian people elected you.
Can you give them an answer?
How would it promote free speech?
Will you be gracious enough to give me an answer, sir?
Or are you just going to ignore the country?
You're very disrespectful.
I'm asking you a question.
How would it promote free speech?
It's a super quick question, sir.
All right, thank you for not answering.
Have a good day.
Standard liberal logic, right?
Yeah, exactly.
So you see, he's not able to defend his bill.
He's not able to actually provide answers as of why it will promote free speech.
And it's because it won't promote free speech.
It won't.
And he knows it.
He knows that it's not something that is going to happen.
It will give the government the power to censor speech.
It is extremely dangerous.
I think if we can throw to later on that video, I spoke to Pierre Polyev about the bill.
And I think Pierre Polyev had a great thought on the bill.
The fact that he tried to push me away will be what they're going to do online.
They are going to push rebel news content away.
They're going to push content that goes against their government narrative away.
Can we throw to that second clip?
We even have to, oh, there it is.
A question.
And what are your thoughts on Bill C-11?
Well, first of all, the fact that he pushed you away is symbolic of what they want to do on the internet, which is to push away any contrary viewpoint, shut down anyone other than the view of the government media, CBC and other subsidized outlets, and of course the corporate media controlled by Bell Canada and other big oligopolistic corporations.
They have a very tight-knit group of well-controlled media that reports what the government wants people to see.
And this bill is designed to ensure everybody watches them and ignores all the other independent voices.
So it's no surprise that liberal MPs encourage this kind of censorship.
It will protect them from criticism the way the same way they want it to protect themselves from criticism by pushing you away.
And just Samara, before I throw on to you, I just want to mention one last thing, then I'll let you give your thoughts.
There's also something extremely alarming when I read thoroughly the bill this morning for a second time.
I saw under part 2.4, prohibition 34.997.
It is prohibited for any person to knowingly make a material misrepresentation of a fact to a person designated under paragraph 37, 30, 34.7, which basically means the viewer.
So if the bill passes through, it will be prohibited for people to say something that the government considers to be misinformation.
This is exactly what is written in the bill.
It's literally written black on white.
So it will give the power to the government to decide what and what isn't misinformation.
And we all know how professors and academics and government like to label rebel news misinformation, even though what we say 99% of the time, four months afterward, it's confirmed as the truth, right?
So it will give them the government, it will give the government the power to censor us because they consider us to be misinformation or any other alphabet for that matter that they consider misinformation.
What do you think?
Well, and of course, as per all the ambiguously worded liberal bills that come through, they don't even define misinformation.
And the thing that really maddens me about this term misinformation is that our own government throughout the COVID narrative has been the leader of misinformation.
I mean, even back early 2020, Teresa Tam, our public health officer, our federal public health officer, flip-flopping on masks and the mask mandate and the border closures and calling them racist and pandemic control measures.
They were the purveyors of misinformation from the onset of the pandemic that confused people and made them further untrusting of government institutions.
So I think that this is just another case in point where the liberal government has to take a good, long, hard look in the mirror and see what they've done over their ruling the last several years.
C-11 Controversy: Liberal Government's Mirror Moment00:15:48
And really, I really hope that this doesn't, like you said, make it through the Senate.
I guess it could go either way.
But we have, for instance, this clip here of the former CRTC commissioner, Tim Denton.
I posted a clip yesterday of him, his comments around C-11.
And then I posted another video just this morning where he basically laughs when he's asked by a senator whether or not the CRTC could even enforce a bill of this magnitude.
So maybe let's throw, if we have that clip where he laughs in response first, let's throw to that one because I thought that his response and his reaction was really telling on what this bill entails.
Yeah, the Senate hearings are very interesting.
Okay, we have the other clip ready, but let's look at that one first where he laughs.
Because again, I just think that his response, and I shared that on my Twitter just about an hour ago, his response there, it's so candid and just natural.
You know, he's just a regular guy, and they ask him this question, and he just bursts, he's just laughing.
If we have it pulled up, let's have a look.
That's not the issue.
Let's say this legislation goes ahead.
Is the CRTC even capable of this?
Is the Inquisition capable of being an inquisitorial agency?
Is the CRTC capable?
It'll certainly try a lot.
The CRTC is composed of, you know, at the bottom, ordinary, reasonable human beings trying to do a good job in the light of a statute which is enormous and which carries with it in highly intrusive powers.
And they are being set to regulate the terms and conditions under which people shall communicate across the internet for most of the purposes which we use the internet.
It is not humanly possible, even if the CRTC were composed of double doctorates in communication, law, and philosophy, for them to do the job that is being called upon for them to do.
And the staff themselves are not capable.
And this is not because they're dumb or bad or misled.
It's because they're human beings.
And there is no sufficiently enlightened body of people able to carry out the delicate and subtle tasks that are required.
That is my belief.
Yeah.
And then he also, so basically, a big part of this bill is that they're basically redefining the term broadcast.
And so it's funny where, you know, you're taking words that previously had a meeting, you're redefining it while simultaneously imposing new words and restrictions that you're not even defining.
So again, who did that before in the past?
Redefining words.
Who did that in the past?
Yes, exactly.
And I hope many Canadians are asking themselves that.
So I want to just throw to the second clip that we have too of the same Tim Denton.
Again, he's the former CRTC.
That's the Canadian Radio Television Broadcasting Corporation.
They're a former commissioner.
This is what he said to them.
He basically calls this bill a reverse takeover of the internet.
C11 declares all audiovisual and audio content on the internet to be broadcasting.
It's a kind of reverse takeover of the internet.
The tiny Canadian broadcasting system can take on the world of the internet by the mere trick of redefining broadcasting.
C-11 is that bold and that absurd.
C-11 is about protecting the economic interests of an obsolescent niche of Canadians, Canada's music and video industries.
It is not about bringing broadcasting regulation up to date.
It is not even about streaming.
It is about controlling content on the internet, the persons who transmit content and what reaches the persons who access internet content.
Instead of introducing an actual online streaming act, one that would have considered the unique nature of internet-delivered content and the functioning of the markets for that content, C-11 tries to stuff the most vibrant and adaptive marriage of technology and culture within the cellifying embrace of the regulated broadcasting system.
Bill C-11 seeks to prolong and reinforce the supply-side dynamics of broadcasting regulation.
C-11 fails to affirm or even acknowledge the primacy of the audience and its right to choose the programming that suits it.
Yeah, I like that he really touches on the fact that they're like stuffing technology and culture in together under the guise of requiring regulatory oversight.
And you know that things are bad too when YouTube themselves sounds the alarm on the potential repercussions of such a large, again, ambiguously worded bill aimed at censoring and redirecting people's access and the content that becomes available to them.
So Sheila reported on this back in, I think it was June or July.
And in that video or in that report, sorry, there is the first part of it is YouTube sounding the alarm on Bill C11?
I don't know.
I guess we have a few minutes.
Let's just watch a few quick minutes of what YouTube has to say.
Yeah.
And the reason why it's so important is that it's so ironic.
YouTube is such a huge censor in our days.
They censor, they censor rebel news, censor a bunch of people on YouTube, and they're the ones speaking against censorship bill.
So it just gives you an idea of how terrible and horrific the bill actually is and how dangerous it is.
Because if YouTube, who is an extremely huge censor, talks against it, it's extremely radical.
It is a radical censorship Soviet Union style bill.
And it seems that the only people who are really in defense of this bill or want to see it go through are mostly irrelevant Canadian artists, you know, actors, musicians who otherwise and the liberal politicians, of course, how could we forget?
But people who wouldn't otherwise be platformed because they're just not actually talented.
They're not people that the Canadians are naturally gravitating towards to choose to watch.
And so their content would then take preference and precedence over the content, you know, like you mentioned before, like what you get from rebel news and dissidents.
And that's really concerning.
And it seems to be that the only champions that are real, you know, on the ground Canadians that are championing this sort of censorship bill are the lackluster actors and musicians that would potentially benefit from it, right?
Once it's actually enacted, you see how this unfolds in real time.
That may not actually be the case, as we see with so many other pieces of liberal legislation, how it works in real time.
Anytime anything the government touches, in my opinion, somewhere along the line fails.
Yeah, well, that's what Ronald Reagan did.
And I think he has some great wisdom when he said those words, the nine most terrifying words in the English dictionaries.
I'm the government.
I'm here.
I'm here to help you.
But no, I hope I spoke to Blaine Calkins a few months ago in June, I believe, and he told me that he hopes the Senate is actually a room for second thought in regards to the bill and they would actually vote the bill down.
I hope they do their job.
I hope the Senate does its job and really thinks that this bill through nice, I do have hope that the Senate will vote it down because we know that it can be in a sober second thought chamber.
So, I hope that's what they do and they do their actual role by doing that.
Yeah, and I think definitely based on the testimony of people like Tim Denton, that will help facilitate hopefully the squashing of such a far-reaching bill.
Now, before we get to our next ad break, we also just wanted to touch on this headline from CTB News: that right-wing extremism in Canada, there's anti-hate experts urge action, right?
So, here's more government action against right-wing extremism in Canada.
And the thing that always gets me about these sorts of buzzwords and labels is, you know, how do you define right?
What is right-wing extremism?
Yeah, yeah, no, definitely.
Don't we have a thing?
I think.
Sorry, go ahead, William.
Okay.
Well, no, that's the thing, though.
You know, the left likes to use those buzzwords, alt-right, all-right, fascist, racist, extremist, bigoted person.
How do you define that?
I have some trouble finding leftists that are actually able to find these terms instead of just using it to label someone that way and try to discredit everything that they say.
They're not able to find a definition.
I totally agree with what you said right here, 100%.
Well, they source Evan Balgord from the executive director of the Canadian Anti-Hate Network, which, in my opinion, the Canadian Anti-Hate Network essentially just fuels and facilitates hate.
I mean, I don't know what they've even done to connect or reconnect Canadians over the last years of the reign of Justin Trudeau, where we've seen more divisive language than ever before, at least in my lifetime.
And I've spoken to some elderly people too, and they've seen in their lifetime the divisive nature of the language used by this government to fuel that divide among Canadians.
So, I don't know what the Canadian Anti-Hate Network has actually done to rectify any of that other than promote increasing hate toward, I guess, what they consider to be right-wing extremism.
But, you know, I never thought that upholding things like freedom of choice would be labeled as a fascist ideology, right?
Extreme far-right.
That's fascism.
Well, since when is freedom of choice far-right fascism, upholding the rule of law?
So, you know, for instance, when the mask mandates were in effect in 2020 and 2021, I was really reporting heavily on the fact that mask exemptions, which were built into that piece of legislation, were not being honored and people were facing reprimand for not masking despite having medical or whatever kind of mask exemption.
So, you know, upholding that rule of law, the fact that, hey, this exemption clause is built into this legislation.
Who's responsible for enforcing it?
And why aren't they?
When did that become fascist and far-right?
There's so much.
Not only fascist, but also misogynistic.
Remember to Tamara, you are a misogynist person.
Yeah, you're racist, misogynist, all the Labels that the anti-hate networks like to push on rebel news journalists.
Yeah.
And this article, I mean, I tried to find like the highlights, the keys to pull out of here to read, but honestly, it's the whole thing is just mind-blowing the connection that they draw.
And I mean, of course, they reference Pierre Polyev once again, right, as like this far-right extremist, that he's the model citizen of far-right extremism.
And it always makes me wonder: well, what does his Venezuelan immigrant wife and his Venezuelan, you know, half Venezuelan children, what do they think of this label of Pierre Polyev being a white supremac, a racist, grouped in with, you know, the far-right extremism in Canada and being the leader, apparently, of this group.
They fail to mention those facts in this article.
And anyone who knows any better to think critically would see this article.
And you could pick this apart with a fine-tooth column, really.
There's a lot in here that needs to be debunked.
And unfortunately, it's too much, I think, for us on this live stream here, especially starting late.
And Tamara, we would have an hour worth of content just going through every lie that this article and every lie of this leftist ideology says.
I mean, we don't have that.
Even one thing, let me just search it out because they said that he Polyev, or where was it here?
Oh my gosh.
Anyway, he marched with someone who refused the soldier, right?
James Top that refused to be vaccinated.
And it's like, even that language that you use, refused to get vaccinated.
No, he made a personal choice not to get vaccinated.
When did we, this refusal of vaccine, start to take precedence over people who exercised their bodily autonomy?
I mean, bodily autonomy was never traditionally a far-right extremist ideology.
And here we are as the ones who are upholding that and espousing that.
And if I recall correctly, yeah, if I recall correctly, it's the left that has been pushing for, you know, legal abortion, shouting your abortions on top of the rooftop.
And they were the ones claiming that the supposed right of a woman to have an abortion is bodily autonomy.
And now it is the right that is actually talking about actual bodily autonomy in terms of COVID mandates and COVID vaccine.
And the left labels this view of bodily autonomy as an extremist, fascist, bigoted, misogynistic, racist view, extremist view.
You know, there's such a double standard.
I guess this might come down to the fact that once you start to point out the holes in their logic, you're automatically a far-right extremist.
Of course.
Of course.
I think I have it figured out now.
Good job, Tom.
All right.
So we're going to go to a quick ad break and then we'll come back and get through a few other highlights and maybe some of these super chats.
Talk David Atkin.
Yes.
We started off this convoy calling it taking back our freedoms.
But our freedoms are nobody's to take away.
So we're going to restore everybody's freedoms.
Lots of people came here wanting to only do a day.
And the word with all the truckers is they're now staying for many days.
You know, like a lot of people now are planning on days and days in Ottawa.
So, my body,
you know, not yours.
Daylong Trucker Gatherings00:03:03
Win your job and your life.
There you go.
You can hear them chanting, my body, my choice.
There it is, those far-right extremists.
Yeah, I know those bigoted, fascist, racist, misogynist people.
Yeah, I love that ad so much.
Man, the music is so great.
Such a great person, Mocha.
He's really good at making those documentaries.
And it's no longer just exclusive to Rebel News Plus.
So, that I don't, if you didn't catch it, we have released it or we will be releasing it to the general public on September 19th.
So, that is, I'm just checking my calendar, Monday.
Three days.
Yeah, so that's exciting.
That's convoydocumentary.com.
And of course, you can click there to support our journalistic efforts and the development of these kinds of documentaries.
And, you know, it's a way for us to really gauge how much people appreciate our work and where our efforts are best spent, too.
Right?
If you, depending on what page you donate to or where you decide to contribute your assistance to us financially, then we can at least see what the viewers are into, what they appreciate the most of our coverage, and give you more of that.
So, thank you for people to people who help us and support us financially because without you, we wouldn't be able to do this important work.
We have one super chat here from Fras Bow.
He says that the countdown is on.
Just one more day before we tell our government we don't want the new world order or agenda 2030.
If you live in Hamilton, sorry, if you live in Hamilton, join us Saturday at Hamilton City Hall, 12 noon.
Bring signs if you don't have signs.
I have lots to hand out.
So, thanks, Frasier, for the $5.
So, what Frasier is talking about right here is the worldwide freedom rallies occurring on September 17th.
There are some in Montreal, there are some in Ottawa, Toronto, Calgary, Edmonton, Hamilton, I believe, as he just mentioned.
There's some all across Canada and all across the world as well.
There's also some in England and the UK.
So, that'll definitely be interesting.
I believe that we will be covering more than one freedom rally.
I might be mistaken, but we will be bringing in each province.
Oh, yeah, I think we'll have a recorder in each province, depending on the turnout, how things go, and who's committed where.
But, as always, Rebel has been the leaders in covering these freedom rallies since they began, right?
David Menzies was at Queen's Park early in May 2020, covering the bunch of Yahoos out on the lawn there.
So, yeah, we'll have Rebels all over tomorrow at 12 noon, I guess, in your city centers.
Yeah, exactly.
I'll be here in Montreal with Alexela What's Cover, the ones happening in Quebec here.
So, that'll be fun.
All right, and then we just have two quick topics to run through before we end our time here.
So, if you want to super chat us, we have 10 minutes left.
Feel free to send us a super chat and give us your comments.
Or if you have any questions, just want to chat with us.
It's a great way to engage with the live stream.
Society's Gendered Titles Debate00:11:18
Global news.
So, one of their report is, yeah, one of their reporters has been in the news, and you've covered it pretty extensively, William.
So, maybe you should take the lead on this.
But this Black Locks article, first and foremost, highlights that global news is quote on the brink.
So we've seen, you know, the mainstream media has really lost the plot on a lot of different areas throughout the last two years and failed to hold the government and the health bureaucracy to account.
And Canadians are obviously waking up to that.
So this Black Locks article notes that the executive vice president of Global's parent company, so that's Chorus Entertainment, he's testified that news is a challenging business and there's no longer a feasible strategy.
So that's obviously financially.
Despite the fact that, and I'll highlight here, Global and other TV broadcasters from the outbreak of the pandemic received $103.6 million in direct cash grants, including federal wage subsidies, according to an August 23rd CRTC report.
Regulators also waived $36.5 million in mandatory industry licensing fees.
And they still can't keep, apparently, their head above water.
What do you make of this, William?
Well, first of all, just to show the level to which global news is at, Efron, or anyone in the studio, can we put the clip of David Atkin being the Global News chief liberal heckler at Pierre Polyev's little statement on Parliament Hill?
Can we show that first of all?
Yeah, we have this new angle, right, that really shows just how aggressive he was.
Yeah, let's take a look at that.
Thank you very much.
I appreciate it.
Appreciate your presence here today.
Before I begin, let me just say that.
Thank you very much.
I'm being heckled here by the by thank you very much for your congratulations.
Thank you very much for your questions.
I'm going to begin my remarks now.
But will you take some questions afterwards?
Justin Trudeau is out of touch and Canadians are out of money.
The cost of government is driving up the cost of living.
A half a trillion dollars of inflationary deficits have bid up the cost of the goods we buy and the interest that Canadians pay.
The cost for workers and businesses to produce the goods that we buy.
On top of that, Trudeau proposes yet more spending to bid up costs even further.
The more he spends, the more things cost.
It is just inflation.
Their homes and to buy a home in the very first place.
I'll put my hand back.
The reason that I can ask your question is that we have basically a liberal heckler who snuck in here today.
Well, apparently.
Are you going to let me make my mistake?
Are you going to let me know?
Let's just like ask a question.
Say, I've actually never seen you heckling the prime minister.
Ask Minister.
Look, bottom line is this.
We're going to take some questions at the end of this statement.
Yes, I'll be taking two questions at the very end.
Thank you very much.
Thank you very much.
So I'm going to start my statement again.
How rude.
That's just unbelievable.
Yeah.
And I'd like every viewer at home to take just five seconds to think what would have happened to the reporter if the person giving his press conference was Justin Trudeau and the reporter was a rebel news reporter.
Like the reporter would have been shot or something like that.
Something would have happened.
But David Atkin, Pierre Polyev respectfully spoke to him.
They debate it together.
And David Atkin was just unbelievable in that clip.
I mean, I remember someone at Rebel News telling us that if a Rebel News reporter did that, it would have been ground for dismissal.
Like that's not a professional thing to do as a reporter, especially as a reporter receives money from the government and that receives money from our hard work.
You know, he's partially paid by us.
So it's just unbelievable to see that happen, but it shows what level.
The mainstream media is at right now and what level Global NEWS is at right now.
Just what David Action did right here is unacceptable and Pierre Polyev handled it well.
I found he handled it.
It reminded me the way he handled it like.
It reminded me of Run The Census in Florida or Donald Trump.
When they are faced with biased reporters that don't report the fact or that do unacceptable things in press conference, they don't let them step on them, they respond to them and they argue with them.
And I I like the way Pierre Polyev responded on that clip.
Yeah, regardless of comparisons, I think it just shows strength of character and the uh, you know the, the inklings of a real leader that you can take charge and you can stand and be assertive in what you're doing and what you're saying enough to denounce that despicable behavior by a supposed journalist and supposed to be somewhat neutral reporter, political correspondent.
Yeah, it just shows that they've lost the plot right and and further evidenced by this Black Locks article, the Global NEWS is on the brink and they're in full toddler tantrum mode as a result.
So it's funny, it's it's funny in a way to see in real time, but had they have conducted themselves differently over the last two years, then this probably wouldn't be the state of affairs within the mainstream media.
Um, so we have one more thing to get to that was in the headlines, so we have to get to it, and that was the this Health Canada memo that went out.
Um, they released a Woke language guide and so this was published by our friends over at the Western Standard and they actually link in here.
Um, the Jonathan Kay posted some direct screenshots.
So if you want to go back and search and see this directly for yourself, I would suggest going there.
But we just will read um, some of them from this website, because it's just easier to uh, stay organized that way.
But basically they Health Canada under the guise of, you know, our health officer, Teresa Tam, who again was a giant failure and spreader of misinformation throughout the whole COVID pandemic.
In my opinion, she released this guide or maybe I shouldn't assume her gender, but Tam released this guide to apparently promote diversity and health equity, and I just want to say, what about health equity for the unvaccinated right?
We just continue to forget that the unvaccinated are denied various forms of equity within our society, especially as it pertains to what we still pay into, which is our socialized medical system.
You know, they can't get organ donation, they can't be organ recipients.
They can donate their organs, but they can't receive one.
So there is so much flawed logic Chicken here, first and foremost.
But regardless, that's not exactly the point that I'm trying to make here.
It's just some of the things that they say.
So, you know, they're telling people that they should not say women and men, guys, ladies and gentlemen.
They should be replaced with people of all genders, everyone, and just people.
I don't know if you found any highlights in here, William, that you'd like to touch on, but I'm trying to find again.
There was one that was really good.
Oh, here we go.
The guide, and this is right beside Tam's picture.
I don't know if it looks different on the, yeah, right beside to the left of her picture.
The guide said public servants should not say vulnerable populations, populations at risk, and targeted groups/slash populations.
It said these people should be called key populations, priority populations, and equity-seeking groups.
And it's just enough to make your minds just explode because it's like, how can we have discussions when we're just constantly trying to check our political correctness?
And now it's gone so far as to infiltrate into the medical system as well.
It's just getting to be so ridiculous.
And again, if you want to fact-check any of this, yeah, you can go on Jonathan Kay's Twitter because he posted direct photos of the memo.
Namine, you told me that two years ago, I wouldn't have believed you, but it's just the peak generation, it's the peak generation of a society, like degradation, sorry, the peak degradation of a society.
It's what's the purpose of that?
I'm being politically correct, not offend some people.
It's unbelievable.
You care more about political correctness than the actual health of your patient.
That's what medicine is nowadays.
It is politicized science.
It's just unbelievable.
I can't believe it.
Yeah, it's really sad, actually.
And one other point in this article: Health Canada said gendered titles might lead to people assuming genders.
And just my personal experience here.
So I gave birth in the hospital in March 2021.
And they on the board there, they have, you know, boy, girl, the name, the weight of the baby, all the things, right?
All those little key details when the baby's born, they document.
Well, now they've scratched out that boy-girl section.
So that's completely the whiteboard on the wall.
I noticed is that the gender, the boy and the girl portions of that chart are just completely scratched out on the whiteboard.
Now they don't even write it or document it.
I have no words for that.
It's unbelievable, Tamara.
It's just so ridiculous, the length that our society is going to go through to be supposedly politically correct.
And then that language turns into legislation, which turns into Bill 16, which turns into imprisonment of people for being mean to other individuals and hurting the feeling of other individuals.
Like, how can you have a functioning well-being society when you are in prison, when you are arrested for being mean to other people, when you are ostracized from society, because you dare to say an actual factual claim that there are only two genders, men and women?
How can you have a functioning well-being society when you follow those woke PC ideologies?
It's unbelievable.
And who defines mean, right?
That's who defines how what classifies as mean or nice or far right or hate or discrimination or misinformation or so again, the ambiguously worded things.
Redefining Reality00:03:18
And then, of course, once you have a definition, as we see with Bill C11, the Liberals can just propose a new bill that redefines those words, like broadcasting and what that means.
So, yeah, well, anyway, we're redefining the words.
The Ministry of Truth, I know Orwell would just be living his best life in 1984.
So, we have one other super chat.
Ivo gives $5.
And if an election were held today, Polyev would become our next prime minister.
Yeah, I mean, I don't doubt it based on how many votes that they garnered and additional CPC members that they garnered throughout the leadership election.
So, yeah, I don't doubt that that would be the reality.
And that's why I think we're seeing mainstream media having a complete meltdown because they've lost the plot.
They really are.
Yeah, they're not doing the job they've been hired to do.
I mean, they're paid by the liberal government.
I mean, we're accused of being Russian propaganda.
First of all, we're not paid by Russia.
We don't receive any money by Russia.
We're not receiving any money by the Russian government.
It can assure that.
But if the leftist logic is that since we receive money from the Russian government, we are Russian propaganda.
CBC and those mainstream media outlets receive money from the Kuhnyan government.
Therefore, following their logic, they would be a liberal propaganda.
But we never hear that ever from the left.
Yeah, no, that's a good analogy.
Yeah, just to be extremely clear on that one, right?
But like we said in this Black Box article, like $103.6 million in direct cash grants, plus they waived $36.5 million in licensing fees.
Like this is millions of dollars in subsidies and fee waiving that they've received, and still they can't stay afloat.
It just goes to show the sad state of affairs, the mainstream propaganda arm of the Liberal government here in Canada.
With that, imagine if they had to hustle like Rebel News.
Imagine if they had to work like Rebel News to find donations and everything.
They wouldn't survive.
But also, imagine if they had been on the ground reporting on those freedom rallies all throughout 2020 and featuring the devastating effects that these policies and mandates and restrictions were having on just everyday working Canadians.
Maybe they wouldn't be in this mess now.
No, of course.
Anyways.
But anyway, we're at time now.
So thank you, everyone, for joining into our daily live stream.
If you aren't heading out, well, tomorrow will be a big day and we'll have lots of reports to follow after all the freedom rallies that take place tomorrow, apparently starting at noon, depending on where your local city center and your city hall may be.
So have fun and be safe out there, everyone.
Thanks for joining William and I on this Friday and have a good weekend.
We'll see you next week.
Yeah, thank you, everyone.
I'm Lewis Brackpool reporting for Rebel News.
And you're probably wondering why I'm in a kitchen.
Well, unfortunately, the British public are in the midst of a cost of living crisis, also known as a cost of lockdown crisis and our obsession with green policies.
Expensive Energy Crisis00:00:23
Now, normal things such as making a cup of tea or putting the washing on and even keeping the lights on is going to be extremely expensive this winter.
Offgem, the UK's energy regulator has warned that the energy price gap is set to go up by 80% from October the 1st this year.