Ezra Levant, Rebel News’ founder, slams Calgary Mayor Jodi Gondeck’s "hate in their hearts" bylaw targeting drag protest critics, vowing legal defense while mocking her labeling of opponents as "horrible people." He skewers Toronto Mayor John Torrey’s press conference admission of a 40-year affair with Rogers-employed Emily Hillstrom, questioning consensuality and timing. Levant also dismisses Trudeau’s NORAD claim as U.S.-led, criticizes his untested fertilizer policy, and ridicules universities for canceling degrees over "wrong think." The episode ties local scandals to broader themes of government overreach and ideological censorship, framing them as threats to free speech. [Automatically generated summary]
I am the Rebel Commander here at Rebel News Network Limited.
What a pleasure to sit in this chair.
You know, we started the live stream idea in 2020 when the pandemic was afoot and there was just so much to cover.
We couldn't cover it all in our normal outlets.
So every day I sat here and yapped for an extra hour or even 90 minutes.
There was so much to cover to go through the stats and to debunk the misinformation.
And by misinformation, of course, I mean the government misinformation.
I think it took us about two weeks to realize that two weeks to flatten the curve meant two years to flatten the curve.
That's how these live streams started, but we've kept it going now.
Unfortunately, over the years, I got a little bit busy with red tapey things here at the company, but I am trying to return to this chair several times a week at least because there's so much to talk about.
And I can't cover it all at my 8 p.m. show.
As you may or may not know, every day at 8 p.m. Eastern, 6 p.m. Mountain Time, I do a scripted produced show.
For example, tonight, I'm going to talk about a new bylaw.
The bylaw is not that new, but it's going to be used in a new way.
There are protests pro and con in Calgary about the drag queen story hour.
They're having all ages drag events, including, I think there's some skating events there.
And so there's some protesters for and protesters against, and that's called freedom.
And, you know, as long as there's no violence or threats of violence, some people might say that the drag queens are obscene, and that's why, for example, we don't allow children into strip clubs.
And maybe that same sort of law should apply.
But actually, the law that is being applied is by the mayor.
The mayor of Calgary says she is going to fine and ticket anyone who comes there with hate in their hearts.
Here's a story by the CBC.
They are thrilled about this.
Calgary mayor threatens to fine protesters after drag event canceled.
City will leverage, I like that word, street harassment bylaw for hate-motivated protests.
Now, I wonder, there's so many questions, and I'm not going to give away my monologue right now, but it's just such a crazy story.
So you can have a protest, but if you protest one day and you have, let's say, sorrow in your heart, and you say there shouldn't be a drag queen story hour with kids, and then the next day you say there shouldn't be a drag queen story hour with kids, but your feeling in your heart is hate.
So one day it was sorrow, one day it was hate.
One of those is against the law, one of them is legal.
In other words, it's the government now determining whether or not you're allowed to do something based on your feelings or your thoughts, because that's hate is a feeling.
Sorrow is a feeling.
It's absurd.
It's against the law.
It's an attempt by the city hall to impose criminal sanctions against peaceful protesters.
It will not surprise you to know that in my monologue tonight, I will offer to legally defend anyone charged with those tickets and to challenge the constitutionality thereof.
I wonder if the CBC state broadcaster, which was absolutely effusive, I wonder if they would feel that way if it was, so, I don't know, Stephen Harper who was ticketing protesters by labor unions if they had the wrong feelings in their heart.
Hey, I see, Olivia, that you're calling up Jodi Gondeck's tweets.
She's the mayor.
Again, I don't want to give away my whole monologue right now, but I just want to play for you the video attached to her second tweet.
She really is an atrocious, appalling woman.
Here she is in City Hall basically saying, if she doesn't like you, she's going to have the police arrest you and ticket you and fine you.
And she is prejudging anyone who dares.
If you are opposed to drag queens and young children together, you are by definition a horrible person, she uses that word, and a hater, and you will be targeted.
Whereas if you come to the same protest to cheer on the drag queens, you'll be just fine.
Don't take it from me.
Take it from this out-of-control woke mayor.
Take a look.
We had a drag brunch at the rec room in the north of Calgary by our community of drag queens in Calgary who have done amazing work promoting inclusion and really raising awareness of how important it is to be a welcoming community.
Unfortunately, some members of our population thought it would be a good idea to protest this event, which is, I'm just going to use my opinion, a horrible thing to do.
I was very happy that CPS was there to provide a buffer and to ensure that everyone was safe and that the show could go on.
My question is, do we have the ability when a protest is rooted in hatred to ticket people and shut this down?
How does it work?
Thanks.
We don't need the answer there.
It's a boring answer by a city manager who says, well, I'll get you that answer because it's really a shocking question.
But you heard her.
How can we shut down protests?
How can we shut down these haters?
How can we shut down?
There are people who disagree with me.
How can I shut them down?
And the city manager was very excited about her project.
And of course, the Calgary police are going to go along with it.
I'm not going to go any further on the subject because I want to save the best for my show tonight at 8 p.m.
I hope you join in.
Tonight I'll also be talking with my friend Sue Ann Levy, who for many years covered Toronto City Hall for the Toronto Sun.
And she was a skeptic, a critic of Mayor John Torrey, especially in the last few years.
And hey, I tweeted a goofy TikTok video about someone molesting a mailbox the other day.
I don't know if you saw that, Olivia.
But when I think of John Torrey, I think of a few things, but the main thing I think of as a citizen of Toronto is how crappy the city has become.
You know, the nickname of Toronto, many cities have nicknames.
Calgary is Cowtown.
Chicago is the windy city, city of big shoulders, butcher shop to the world.
These are various nicknames.
Toronto was called the Big Smoke.
I presume that referred to factories in eras gone by.
But I think the best nickname for Toronto, which was sort of a double-edged nickname, was Toronto the Good.
Toronto the Good meant it was a good place.
It really was a good place, but sometimes it was a little bit too aware that it was a good place.
Maybe its morality was a little bit stuffy and maybe it was a little bit too patrician or something.
So, you know, it's like the nickname that Australia was given, the lucky country.
I love calling Australia the lucky country.
I think it sounds wonderful.
But it was used as an insult as in, oh, everything Australia has, it got by luck.
Well, Toronto the Good.
Yeah, that's it right there.
That's the one there.
So Toronto the Good.
Well, who wouldn't want to live in a good place?
And if it's, you know, New York, the city that never sleeps.
Yeah, I mean, well, Toronto does sleep.
I mean, there weren't quite as many bars open at 4 a.m.
It wasn't quite as wild as New York City.
And I think Toronto liked it that way.
It was very Canadian that way.
And you'd think by looking at him, John Torrey would be a Toronto the Good kind of mayor, focus on order and safety and do the subways run and is the garbage cleaned up.
But this city is no longer Toronto the Good.
It feels more like Skid Row.
Feels more like the decrepit state of San Francisco, LA, Portland, Seattle, what's happening to New York.
And I saw this video the other day, and it goes on and on.
And I really think you should watch it because the fact that it feels so long is half the impact of it.
It's some homemade song, an homage to mailmen, which is hilarious because it's some street person molesting a mailbox for an interminably long time.
And no one cares, certainly not any authority, certainly not any police, because that's Toronto in 2023.
This is the Toronto that John Torrey built.
Play that TikTok video and weep.
Mail delivery person always delivering the man day after day.
It's such difficult work.
Keeping all this stuff in order.
Gotta make sure that everything goes.
In my choice of the word molest, he is molesting that mailbox.
People are driving by.
And people are walking by.
And people are filming.
And that's just Toronto.
And the fact that he feels so confident to molest a mailbox.
And you'll see very soon he starts stealing letters, just random letters.
And what were these letters?
Were they birthday cards from grandparents to children with a little check in them maybe?
Were they thank you letters?
Were they what?
Well, we'll never know.
Were they bill payments?
Imagine if you had to pay a bill and this guy stole your mail right out of the mailbox and the public utility that you paid didn't get the money and so you were cut off.
And how long does this go on for?
The stores behind him.
Would they care if he took that mailbox and threw it through a window?
I don't know.
When I think of John Torrey's Toronto, that's what I think of, except for that was uncharacteristic in one way.
The traffic there was actually moving.
In John Torrey's Toronto, the traffic typically doesn't move.
So John Torrey, I thought, and because he was, we've now learned that he was a deceiver.
We've now learned that he's a shyster, a trickster, a liar, an actor, someone who was not who he said he was.
Because this establishment, ma'am, this Toronto the Good guy, turns out while he was telling you and me not to gather with others, not to mix households.
Remember, he was the fool who drew those little circles on the grass in Trinity Bellwoods Park.
While he was saying to you, you cannot mingle with others, he had a sexual relationship with a staffer half his age, cheating on his wife for 40 years.
Here, take a look at the CAD, the cheater, the deceiver, the adulterer, the rule breaker, the scold, admitting that everything about him was a lie.
Take a look.
I want to update Torontonians on a difficult personal matter.
During the pandemic, I developed a relationship with an employee in my office in a way that did not meet the standards to which I hold myself as mayor and as a family man.
The relationship ended by mutual consent earlier this year.
During the course of our relationship, some time ago, the employee decided to pursue employment outside City Hall and secured a job elsewhere.
I recognize that permitting this relationship to develop was a serious error in judgment on my part.
It came at a time when Barb, my wife of 40 plus years, and I were enduring many lengthy periods apart while I carried out my responsibilities during the pandemic.
As a result, I've decided that I will step down as mayor so that I can take the time to reflect on my mistakes and to do the work of rebuilding the trust of my family.
I think it is important, as I always have, for the Office of the Mayor not to be in any way tarnished and not to see the city government itself put through a period of prolonged controversy arising out of this error and judgment on my part, especially in light of some of the challenges that we face as a city.
I'm deeply sorry, and I apologize unreservedly to the people of Toronto and to all of those hurt by my actions, including my staff, my colleagues on city council, and the public service for whom I have such respect.
Most of all, I apologize to my wife, Barb, and to my family, who I've let down more than anyone else.
I hope the privacy of all of those impacted by my actions can be respected, and that includes me.
I think, as you know, that I am naturally not, I'm naturally a private person, notwithstanding some of the jobs that I've had over the years, and I hope you'll respect that and the privacy of everyone else as well, especially my wife and family.
I've made the Integrity Commissioner aware of the relationship and asked him to review it.
I want to thank the people of Toronto for trusting me as mayor.
It has been the job of a lifetime.
And while I've let them down and my family down in this instance, I've nonetheless been deeply honored by the opportunity to serve the people of this wonderful city.
And I believe that I did some good for the city, that I did make a positive difference for the city that I truly love, particularly during the pandemic.
I'm usually known for taking as many questions as you want to ask, but on this occasion, I think I'll let my statement speak for itself.
Thank you.
So there's a few things going on there.
I mean, you could say, well, Ezra, what's the big deal?
They're two consenting adults.
And it's true.
But of course, when one is the boss of the other, was she hired for that reason?
Was she promoted?
Did she get benefits for that reason?
Were they carrying on their illicit affair on company time with company resources?
They were traveling.
Were they traveling together?
Were the trips arranged in a way that they could have their trys?
You know, so this is the first thing, is the possible improper use of city resources.
And the second thing is when you have a boss screwing an underling, is she willing, is she really willing, or is this some sort of job advancement that he's gifting to her as some sort of sugar daddy, but not using his own resources, but rather promises that she'll get ahead with the city.
City Resources and Promises00:02:52
Of course, there's the fact that he's lying to his wife for 40 years and lying to his children and lying to the world and living a lie just to indulge himself.
But there's two things that came to my mind, and I'm going to ask Sue Ann Levy about these tonight when she's on the show.
Why did he have this press conference now?
Was he have some remorse over what he did?
Did he acknowledge that it was wrong?
No.
He didn't come clean.
The Toronto Star broke the story, and they were calling him and his girlfriend about it.
And he said, Oh, well, it's going to get worse.
I may as well just announce it now.
This happened, and he sought re-election, even with this happening in the background.
He only had that press conference.
He only admitted what he said there, and he only took responsibility after the Toronto Star outed him.
He wasn't apologizing for his affair, he was apologizing for getting caught.
But where is she now, Emily Hillstrom?
Where is she?
She is at MLSE, Maple Leaf Sports Entertainment.
What's that?
Well, they own the Argos and they own the Raptors, and they're owned by Rogers.
And John Torrey and his family, in fact, John Torrey gets paid $100,000 a year by Rogers, if I'm not by Rogers, which owns Maple Leaf Sports Entertainment.
Did he arrange to shut up or to move out his adulterous girlfriend?
Did he put her in MLSE as a way of saying, just shut up?
We're going to take care of you now.
I'm going to pay you off with a fake job at MLSE just to keep you quiet.
Why would you move from City Hall over there, other than the connection of John Torrey himself, who was connected to Maple Leaf Sports Entertainment or Rogers?
I think there's a lot more questions to ask.
Was that a payoff?
Were there other payoffs?
Was it really a consensual relationship?
Did it really end happily on both sides?
I don't believe it.
But I do believe that John Torrey is a big fat liar who didn't mean a word he ever said, including about not gathering or visiting people outside your bubble.
Oh, yeah, he had a bubble, didn't he?
Anyway, I'm not going to talk more about him other than it's a pleasure to see him gone.
Super chat from Annalise 1964.
United States and Chinese Matters00:15:29
How you doing?
Who says, great to see you, Ezra.
Since I like to torment Sheila, today is your day.
Please give my sweet Menzie a big huggy-wuggy for me.
Well, I just might.
You know, it'll probably be a metaphorical huggy-wuggy.
I think it would be uncomfortable for both parties involved if I actually gave him a huggy-wuggy.
But thank you for that.
You know, we're going to take a short commercial break.
I keep forgetting about the short commercial breaks.
I'm going to take a short commercial break, and I'm going to come right back.
And there's so much more to talk about.
So we'll see you in a minute.
I'm speaking to you at a moment of grave crisis, when violent and fanatical men are attempting to destroy the unity and the freedom of Canada.
But after weeks of dangerous and unlawful activities, after weeks of people being harassed in their neighborhoods and small businesses forced to close.
Democracy flourishes in Canada.
We don't always agree.
And that's okay.
Because individual liberty is cherished in Canada.
Our government will always defend freedom of expression and freedom of peaceful assembly.
Has now been demonstrated to us by a few misguided persons.
After evidence of increased ideologically motivated violent extremism activity across the country.
Just how fragile a democratic society can be.
It became clear that local and provincial authorities needed more tools to restore order and keep people safe.
These are matters of the utmost gravity.
And I want to tell you what the government is doing to deal with them.
The federal government has invoked the Emergencies Act.
The public's legitimate right to know why the government proclaimed an emergency and whether the actions it took were appropriate.
It is our view that there was no justification whatsoever to invoke the Emergencies Act.
It's so tough to watch.
There's no reason for that.
They were literally running the horses through the crowd.
The police came straight to me and he targeted me and he took his gun off tear gas and he actually shoot me directly in my legs.
Was it worth invoking the Emergencies Act, ma'am, to trample on the rights and freedoms of Canadians?
Why do you think excessive honking means that the government should strip citizens away from their rights?
Our next and final witness is Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.
order a lot very exciting trudeau on trial I love these documentaries that we're coming out with.
I think that one's actually having its premiere this week in Calgary.
Very exciting about that.
Excited about that.
Hopefully we'll get it in a few other cities too.
I'm really proud of the work our documentary team is doing.
It's getting better all the time.
You know, I want to show you a few other videos on different subjects.
It's 122, so I think we've got some time to go through a few things.
I want to go to a U.S. clip of their press secretary, Corrine Jean-Pierre.
And it's a tough job being press secretary to the President of the United States because there is no subject in the world about which he might not be asked.
As in the he could be asked about literally anything in the world, from the Super Bowl to domestic politics to party politics to, I mean, literally any one of 200 foreign countries.
He could be asked something.
And the press secretary has to be ready to answer as well as possible and to go on the offensive against his enemies.
So it's a, I can't imagine a tougher job than being president himself.
But you'd think he would know a little bit about NORAD.
Do you know what NORAD is?
It sounds for North American Air Defense.
It's a treaty between Canada and the United States that basically defends our northern continent.
And we talked about this the other day.
After the Cold War, we set up the distant early warning line, which was the Dew line of radar in the north, to catch glimpses of either Russian bombers or Russian ICBMs, intercontinental ballistic missiles, bringing war to our continent.
And it was a team effort between Canada and the United States.
And the Dew Line was replaced with the more modern Northern Warning Line.
And I don't know how the cooperation goes between Canada and the United States.
Obviously, the United States does the heavy lifting in defending the continent, but Canada has some respect, I imagine, because we are half the continent.
Would you know what NORAD is if you're the spokesman to the president?
I would hope so.
Would you know how to say the country Canada?
I would hope so, but that hope would be too much.
Listen to Corine Jean-Pierre just butcher both subjects in this super-friendly interview by the left-wing MSNBC.
This is embarrassing.
Take a look.
Why is the American military shooting something out of the sky over Canada?
Because it's part of NORAD.
NORAD is part of like a part of what you call a coalition.
Exactly.
And so that's why we were able to do that.
Again, we didn't do it on our own.
We did it clearly in step with Canadia.
Why is Canadia?
Hey, I'm coming to you live from Toronto, Canadia.
And I'm here to say that the pact, the consortium, the coalition, yeah, I guess it's a coalition of two.
I guess it is a consortium of two.
You know, I'll grant her that.
Here in Toronto, Canadia, it's a pleasure.
So speaking as someone from Canada, it sounds like the jets that took down these Chinese hot air balloons were F-22s, I understand, which is an American jet.
Canada doesn't have them.
The other day, Trudeau tweeted that he's the one that gave the order for the F-22 to be taken down.
Trudeau said, I ordered.
Do you believe that?
Do you think Justin Trudeau is the one that made that order?
Did he, what, get on the walkie-talkie and say, Breaker Dan Forest, this is Justin Trudeau over to you, F-22 captain, copy.
Broker Breaker, F-22 over Canada, waiting for your instructions, sir.
Okay, here it comes.
I ordered the takedown of an unidentified object that violated Canadian airspace.
NORAD Command shot down the object over the Yukon.
Canadian and U.S. aircraft were scrambled, and a U.S. F-22 successfully fired at the object.
Now, I am sure there was some courtesy communication between the United States and Canada.
I'm sure there was.
But do you really believe that the decision here?
I can't even say it with a straight face.
Do you really think that it was Justin Trudeau who put down the bong pipe, read the briefing notes, got up to speed, and gave the order?
Do you really think that's how it's happened?
I do not think that's how it happened, my friends.
I think that the order was given by the United States, not by Joe Biden either.
He was probably sleeping.
Yeah, I'm a bit of a skeptic.
I think we have, I think we have a video of that same thing.
Do we have a video?
Here's Trudeau telling you just how much of a boss he is.
Let's take a listen.
Yesterday, NORAD confirmed that an unidentified object entered unlawfully Canadian airspace.
It represented a reasonable threat to civilian aircraft.
So I give the order to take it down.
Canadian and American fighter jets were scrambled, and an American F-22 successfully shot down the object.
Recovery teams are on the ground looking to find and analyze the object.
Yesterday afternoon, I also spoke with President Biden and confirmed together that we will continue to do everything necessary to protect the sovereignty of our shared North American airspace, but also to do everything necessary to keep our citizens safe.
I want to thank the members of the Canadian Armed Forces and all those who serve in NORAD for doing everything necessary to keep us safe.
Their service is extraordinarily important to all of us.
Well, it's a pleasant change to have the Canadian military deployed against a foreign adversary as opposed to the truckers, which is the main use that the Liberals had for the meeting last year, as we saw through their text messages that were released through the Trucker Commission.
Yeah, I don't know what to make of these balloons because I think part of me says, well, there's so many Chinese satellites here.
I think China has 300 satellites in the air, a good portion of which are spy satellites.
I understand from a friend, Gordon Cheng, that a balloon is at a much lower altitude than a satellite and can spy in interesting and novel ways.
Okay, I believe that.
But I think here in Canada, we're already deeply compromised.
You can spy on what our MPs are saying, but what if you actually install a spy in Parliament itself?
So many news stories today.
I don't know if you have the morning note that Jason sends out at 7.30 a.m.
Olivia.
Just half the stories in there are about Chinese intervention in our parliament, Chinese intervention in our elections, China compromising MPs, the police on several occasions warning Trudeau about compromised politicians.
Like if you literally are an MP or a cabinet minister federally, provincially, who is, yeah, look at this.
CESIS warned Trudeau about Toronto area politicians, alleged ties to Chinese diplomats.
That's in the Globe of Mail.
And there's so many stories like that today alone, aren't there?
If you've got one or two more, let's just show them.
So my point is, there's a politician that the CESIS is so worried about.
They're telling Trudeau about.
Here's another one.
Oh, yeah, we got that one already.
Here's one from Blacklocks.
Were the Chinese federal election, no cop probe of vote claims.
The RCMP yesterday said it did not conduct any criminal investigation of alleged Chinese intelligence in the 2019 federal election.
Members of the House Affairs Committee said the testimony was not reassuring and repeated claims of illegality.
I'm very, very frustrated right now with the lack of information.
So there were MPs who were critical of Communist China, who, according to reports, were targeted by China in the election, and China managed to replace the skeptical pro-freedom MPs with pro-CCP MPs.
And the RCMP doesn't have a word to say.
And I can understand why, because CESIS warns Trudeau about it and he doesn't care.
So my point to you is, all right, which is more dangerous?
Having a hot air balloon 60,000 feet in the sky, okay, or having a bag of hot air literally inside parliament, in the Senate, in the provincial parliament.
I think having actual infiltration in our government is far more dangerous.
So that's Canada for you.
You know what?
There was an interesting moment in committee, and those are words that aren't often said together.
The government, besides having debates and question period and things like that, they have committees that examine matters and sometimes call experts.
And most of the time, the experts are practiced at what Orwell would call duck speak, just blah, saying very little, very long.
But the other day there was Canada's chief science advisor was called to testify and asked about this crazy idea.
You know, Trudeau wants to transition away from fossil fuels.
The world is not ready to transition away from them.
Trudeau personally loves his private jet more than just about anybody, but he wants to transition off fossil fuels.
Apparently, he wants to transition off farming also.
So between energy and food, I'm not sure how anybody's supposed to live, but don't worry, Trudeau won't go hungry.
But the chief science advisor was asked about a proposal that they're following in the Netherlands and that Trudeau has expressed support for here in Canada, which is to require farmers to reduce the amount of fertilizer by 30%.
Well, that's ridiculous.
You're going to reduce crops.
You're going to reduce yield.
You're going to reduce food.
You're going to reduce the supply.
So, you know, supply and demand, why are you making food scarcer and more expensive?
So look at this exchange between Conservative MPs, I believe, and Canada's chief science advisor on the question of: hey, by the way, did the government even study what the consequences would be if this insane ideological rule were passed?
Take a look at this.
Dr. Neymar, my questions are for you today.
Your mandate includes, and I quote, advising on ways to ensure that scientific knowledge is considered in public policy decisions and that the government science is fully available to the public.
End quote.
Exchange on Food Production00:02:59
Has the government asked you to produce any scientific reports or advice on the impact that reducing fertilizer emissions by 30% would have on Canada's food production?
The short answer is no, not on that particular topic.
That's a good answer.
Couldn't be clearer.
And it stuns the MP.
He wasn't ready for that.
The answer is no on this particular topic.
Okay, thank you.
Have you personally seen any scientific reports or studies to suggest that the government's 30% fertilizer emissions target can be met without decreasing food production?
Well, I can tell you that if we want to go seriously about our targets, we're going to need to consider actions in many different sectors, including agriculture, including transportation, including housing.
But I think that in terms of the agriculture and agri-food, there are huge opportunities for the country.
I think that we need to change our behaviors in terms of food wastage.
But there are great areas of potential innovation in terms of agriculture, of precision agriculture, that we can reap all the benefit of the genomic revolutions, of even traditional knowledge that we talked about a lot.
We know how we integrate it with other things and determine how we can decrease a lot of the fertilizers that we're using, enhancing the soils in natural manners.
I think that science can support us in incredible ways in this.
So you have not personally seen any scientific reports or studies to suggest that the government's 30% fertilizer emissions target can be met without decreasing fertilizer or food production.
Correct?
You haven't seen any science on that?
You have not seen any science on that.
Well, I haven't seen any report on this.
You know what?
That was an incredible exchange.
Her first answer was the most honest.
She said, no, there's no studies.
We haven't studied it.
No studies on it.
We're going to demand farmers use 30% less fertilizer, but we don't know what that's going to do for the amount of food out there.
Well, what do you think?
And then the MP asks a second time, and she goes on some long tangent about we have to change your behavior.
Okay, no, thank you.
No one asked you to change my behavior.
Waste less food.
Yeah, okay, it's a good idea.
I don't think that's a major problem.
And then she said, oh, and there may be some traditional knowledge about these things.
Okay, I thought you were a chief scientist, not sort of a folklore lady, but fair enough.
And then the MP asks a third time and gets the real answer again, which is no, we don't know anything about this.
This isn't science.
This is politics, which we sort of knew.
Wear The Castro Shirt00:13:27
Well, it's 137.
What a good time to take a short commercial break.
We'll see you in just a moment.
Have you checked out the fresh new swag we have at RebelNewsStore.com, like this nifty resistance trucker sweater?
We have warm, cozy sweaters, t-shirts, mugs, hats, phone cases, you name it.
Everything to fit your freedom-loving needs or maybe even trigger a liberal family member or friend.
And for a limited time, you can use code Tamira10 at checkout to save 10% off of your total order.
So head on over to RebelNewsStore.com, check out all of our new designs, make some purchases, and use code Tamara.
That's T-A-M-A-R-A 10 at checkout for 10% off your order.
Head on over, check it out.
If you want to look good and shine like me, you can do so at our store.
Go to RibbonNewsStore.com on this website.
You have so much different style to wear as this one, my favorite one, Justin Castro.
With my code Alexa10, you will have 10% off on your next purchase.
So don't hesitate, go now and look so good like me.
Well, I tell you, Alexa looked so chilly in that little video there, but it looked like she had some really fun gear on.
That Justin Castro shirt is by far our bestseller.
If you don't have one, I really recommend it.
People love it.
I give it as a gift all the time.
It works in all languages.
Last gift I sent, I sent it to a friend of mine in Quebec City.
He loved it.
He immediately took a selfie of it and sent me this selfie.
If you can go to rebelnewsstore.com, there's actually two versions of our Castro shirt.
On the left is just Castro.
And you can see Castro is spelt E-A-U, so it's blending how Trudeau is spelt with Castro.
And on the right, Justin Castro.
Both of them are equally funny.
I'd have to check which one of these is the better seller because in a way you want both of them because they're two versions of the same joke.
That is such a great shirt.
I think I've given that as a gift to five people.
It's such a good one.
It's such a good one.
And you know what?
Who was I talking to the other day?
I can't remember who was telling me that they were wearing that shirt out in public and someone started hollering at them, thinking they were for Trudeau because that was their first reaction.
And only a little bit later did they realize it was a joke mocking Trudeau, prickling at Trudeau.
So this person on the street went from outrage to see a Trudeau shirt to right on, where can I get one?
That's a fun experience to have on the street.
You know what?
Yesterday I went for a walk and I encountered three Rebel fans along the way and it really put a spring in my step.
It was fun to chat with people from all different walks of life.
It was just really fun.
I was with a friend who got a chuckle out of him.
If you wear the Justin Castro shirt, you will get that same reaction.
Now, you got to be ready to meet strangers.
Like, do not, if you are shy, do not wear the Justin Castro shirt because it is a conversation piece.
It is a conversation starter because it's funny.
And look at that thing.
Glance at it.
And people are going to think, oh, you support Trudeau?
They're going to be mad for one second while their brain processes what they're looking at.
And then they're going to get it.
They're going to sort of laugh again.
They're going to be slightly embarrassed that they were mad a moment ago.
And then, of course, they're going to want to talk to you about it.
So if you are an introvert that does not want to talk to people, do not wear this shirt outside.
The house you can wear it in the house you can wear it to sleep in.
Some people wear t-shirts to sleep.
I wear shirts like this when I work out at a very small gym, tiny gym.
There's almost nobody there.
And that's where I wear my shirts that have strong opinions on them.
Yeah, we got some V Have shirts.
These are great shirts.
We got some trucker shirts.
I have a different shirt that's not a Rebel shirt.
That's a raccoon eating garbage because that's sort of what Toronto's like under John Torrey.
Now, I'm not blaming him for the raccoons.
They were here first.
Some shirts, you know what I wore this morning?
I wore to the gym this morning.
I wore my shirt that I got from the Rebel store that said, please don't eat me.
It was the Catherine McKennell shirt.
So that's the kind of shirt I don't wear too widely because that one takes a lot of explaining and I'm just a little tired explaining it, to be honest.
The moment on that shirt has passed, but I still have the shirt.
But that Justin Castro shirt.
If you're up for it, if you want to make friends, if you want to have high fives, if you want to get thumbs up, if you want someone even to honk honk on their horn, if you're pedestrian, you get that Justin Castro shirt.
That will happen to you, even in a liberal city like Toronto.
And I tell you that from personal experience.
And if you wear that Justin Castro shirt in a place, like I sent it to my friend in Quebec City, I'm trying to think who else I gave them to.
You wear that shirt in Alberta, the BC interior.
You wear that shirt.
Well, a lot of places, you are going to make friends who have something in common with you.
And those are great friends, even if it's just like high five for a moment.
All right, don't mind me.
I just was impressed with the shirts that were going on there.
A couple more super chats.
Fraser McBurney says, let's have some fun this week.
What is your guess?
How many UFOs this week are shot down?
What did say you?
Hey, that's a good one.
You know, UFOs makes me think of the word aliens, like from another planet, but they're just not aliens.
They're just spy planes or something.
Yeah, I'd say there'd be a couple more this week.
That's a good question.
Time says, Thank you, Ezra.
Read Tori Veil.
How deep does this go?
How many other politicians went partying and more during the pandemic, i.e., Boris Johnson?
Yes, and why now?
Well, that's the thing.
I don't think there was a single politician that didn't cheat because they were absurd rules.
And the politicians on the inside knew they were just making it up.
There were some people on the outside who, you know, ordinary people who were so trusting of government and wanted to be part of a team spirit moment that they went along with it.
But I really felt early like the whole thing was a bit of a scam.
Speaking of scams, you know, have you heard about this 15-minute city business?
In China, they call that social credit.
They have all these checkpoints where you got to show your data, show your card, or you won't be let to the next zone.
Of course, in prison, they call that a cell block.
Oh, you want to go to that next cell block?
Sorry, you got to be in this area here.
But free people are not supposed to live that way.
Maybe communist China lives that way.
Maybe a prison lives that way, but you and I are not meant to live that way.
If we want to hang out in our neighborhood, we will.
If we want to go visit our friends in another neighborhood, we will.
If we want to, you know, it's a very Canadian-American way of thinking.
There are parts of the world that are not car-first.
But America and Canada was quintessentially automobile.
Because what does the car say?
It says, I can go when I want, where I want, how I want, and I don't have to answer to anybody.
There are some places that try and force you to do public transit, try and force you to do bicycles.
Here's a video from GB News.
Actually, the one you have there was a good one.
The one you just had there.
They set up these ballards or big planters to block roads.
And, you know, how does that work when there's an ambulance that needs to get by?
You know, there's all sorts of great video out there you can find of people in the dead of night destroying those.
Like, what they're basically, they're blocking off roads in cities.
I think, yeah, GB News, it was the fifth vid you had.
Yeah.
Let's read that one.
Let's read that.
Let's read that tweet there.
Is that Mark Dolan?
I think.
These deeply illiberal, un-British 15-minute cities are beyond the pale.
They're hurting communities, hurting small businesses.
And they've got to go.
And it didn't take me 15 minutes to work that out.
Mark Dolan on the dystopian plans for so-called 15-minute cities.
I don't want to play the whole thing, but why don't we play just two minutes of it?
This guy's so good.
He's very funny, by the way.
He's on GB News.
Take a look.
What can you do in 15 minutes?
Empty the washing machine and hang up your fresh laundry?
Read a couple of chapters of your favorite book.
Watch half an episode of How I Met Your Mother?
Well, creepy local authority bureaucrats would like to see your entire existence boiled down to the duration of a quarter of an hour with the arrival of so-called 15-minute cities.
This dystopian plan will see roads in some of Britain's most iconic towns and cities being blocked off with cars being restricted to certain areas all overseen by number plate recognition cameras installed everywhere with a surveillance culture that would make Pyongyang envious.
In some places, your car would have an allowance to drive on certain streets for a fixed number of days in the year.
Some roads out of bounds to all.
Many consider this idea laudable.
15-minute cities make everything walkable.
You can go by foot to grab a coffee, do your grocery shopping, have a pint.
And if you don't fancy walking, everything you need is just a five-minute bicycle ride away.
Lovely.
Fans of this scheme say it will deal with traffic and congestion and make life easier, more convenient and sustainable for locals.
Except that, as the MP Nick Fletcher, who's raised a question about this in Parliament points out, these low-traffic neighbourhoods are having an impact on small businesses, given the lack of passing trade they now receive.
Take a listen.
Will the leader, please set aside some time in this house for a debate on the international socialist concept of so-called 15-minute cities and 20-minute neighbourhoods.
Ultra-low emission zones in their present form do untold economic damage to any city.
However, the second step after these zones will take away personal freedoms as well.
Sheffield is already on this journey and I do not want Doncaster, which is also a Labour-lung socialist council, to do the same.
Low emission zones cost a taxpayer money, simple as.
However, 15-minute cities will cost us our personal freedom and that cannot be right.
Well, the minister who answered his question, Penny Mordant, did not disagree.
So projects like ultra-low emission zones in central London and other British cities is arguably impacting enterprise and is most certainly curtailing our way of life.
The Telegraph today report that a low-traffic neighborhood scheme in Haringay in North London has blocked off certain residential streets with cameras or planters to stop motor traffic using the neighborhood as a through-route.
The council defended its actions, saying it aims to make it safer and easier to walk, wheel, scoot, cycle and shop locally.
Six months on, however, and the paper reports that three quarters of traders on one Haringay street in particular are thinking of leaving in the next 18 months and three have already shut up shop.
One of them is MY Little HOME Emporium, a once bustling vintage furniture shop that now stands shuttered and derelict, with low traffic neighborhood planters blocking the road next.
Universities Selling Credentials?00:07:12
It goes on a little bit, I'd tell you.
I highly recommend GB NEWS.
If you don't already watch it, you can download the app here in North America.
Obviously it's based in London, but I've been following it literally since its debut.
It was started by Andrew Neal, who's a very famous journalist and interviewer.
He left pretty soon after he launched it and frankly, badmouthed it out the door, but they've lived on.
They're thriving.
Mark Dolan was new to me.
Neil Oliver, the Scot, is new to me.
Really, they introduced me to so many amazing Brits who care about freedom and who've been given this amazing platform.
It really is on normal tv.
It's not just an online entity, it's uh, And it's done so well, like in the ratings.
So I'm just delighted by their success.
Pardon me.
So, oh, by the way, my point is download their app and you can watch it at any time or just follow them on Twitter.
Now, it's 1.52.
We don't have too much more time left, but there's some crazy news out there, isn't it?
You know, the New York Times had an op-ed the other day by a Yale professor.
You know, what is it with the left and suicide?
Like, why are they pro- Well, the answer is because they're pro-death.
You know, on the one hand, you know, there are people who are called pro-life, and they're generally against abortion, against euthanasia, and they often are against the death penalty too, by the way.
You could call them pro-life.
They're often Christian, but not always.
But the left, the culture of death, pro-death, pro-Ethanasia, pro-like, just why?
Why?
In some cases, like Bill Gates, they just think there are too many people in the world.
Let me read to you the headline from the New York Times.
A Yale professor suggested mass suicide for old people in Japan.
What did he mean?
Yusuke Narita says he is mainly addressing a growing effort to revamp Japan's age-based hierarchy.
Still, he has pushed the country's hottest button.
And, of course, they're going to give him a glowing platform in the New York Times.
They're so excited about this.
This is the same New York Times that, was it Tom Cotton or Josh Hawley had an op-ed in there talking about perhaps using the military to stop the endless antifa riots, and that caused a struggle session, and the editorial pages editor to be fired.
That's beyond the pale.
But someone's saying, well, let's just kill our old folks because they're old.
Why would you kill the elderly?
Because they're elderly.
Duh.
Oh, well, it sounds like a real intellectual.
Sounds like a real intellectual.
Of course, he's a Yale professor.
Unbelievable.
Speaking of universities, I didn't know this, and I don't know if I believe this, and I've got some thoughts about this, but I see that universities claim to be able to cancel.
Well, here it's in the Telegraph of London, perhaps one of the most prestigious papers in the world.
Universities can cancel your degree for wrong think, and there's no right, no real right to appeal.
The government's free speech reforms may let students sue, but they will be no use to those who don't have the money to do so by Juliet Samuel.
You know, this kind of after-the-fact unpersoning of people is really gross.
Either you earned your degree or you didn't.
You paid your money.
You completed your contract.
In fact, you may have even signed a contract.
Let me read a few lines from this story in the Telegraph.
Imagine this scenario.
You're a fifth-year doctoral student.
You've done everything you're meant to, studied, researched, and completed a dissertation.
You're on the cusp of getting your degree, but in the final months, a fresh batch of complaints about your conduct services, and the university decides to deny you a PhD.
What, you might wonder, could this student possibly have done to deserve such a crushing punishment?
Did they break the law?
Was their work subpar?
No, it's nothing like that.
In fact, to read through the investigatory evidence on this real case, as I have done, is to delve into a litany of pettiness that almost defies belief.
I wish I could name the student, but the person is reluctant to have their name associated with a penalty they are powerless to overturn.
So I'll instead try to summarize the case.
Anyhow, you can imagine the political correctness.
Now, that's someone still in school.
But what if you're done school?
I don't know.
I would imagine that these universities need to be sued.
I think they need to be shaken up.
I think that the universities, and Jordan Peterson says this a lot, they really are a scam.
When Jordan Peterson spoke at a Democracy Fund event in December, he said that one of the real purposes of university, he said this, and I don't think he was joking, and I don't think it's a joke, is to find a spouse.
What?
Well, because you're going to be, they're vetting people from the right background, and are they smart enough, and are they wealthy enough, and do they have the same sort of station in life?
And if you spend $150,000 in tuition or whatever, but find a wife or a husband, said Jordan Peterson, well, maybe that's worth it.
That's not actually what they're selling, but if that's what they're delivering, that's not a bad thing to deliver.
He said, obviously, the main thing they deliver is a credential.
You're one of us.
You jump through the same hoop.
You're our kind.
You're not some grubby, unwashed, blue-collar person.
You're part of our club, our clique.
You have the same aesthetic sense we do.
You have the same, you listen to the same music.
You go to the same restaurants.
You have the same political opinions as us.
You watch the same news.
You watch news at all.
So you're our kind.
Really, it's that credentialism that the universities are selling.
And you could say in a way that getting married is the ultimate credential.
It's the ultimate job application.
You're being vetted just like an employer would vet you.
A future spouse is vetting you.
So, yeah, I think that the value of university, I mean, this engineering is still a profession and a kind of trade.
You know, there are real things to learn and not just to expand your mind, but so much of university these days is just daycare for grown-ups.
You know that's true.
Well, it's almost the top of the hour, and I've got to go.
I've got to do other things here at Rebel News.
It's been a pleasure to hang out with you.
Thanks to Olivia in the control room for furnishing the videos and the stories as I read them.
Thanks to our super chatters.
I appreciate it.
Until next time, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters to you at home, goodbye and keep fighting for freedom.
American Jets and NORAD Interceptions00:00:50
Some would say that there is no greater example of the weakness of our Air Force capacity than watching American jets destroying flying objects over Canadian soil.
Why was it American jets that shut down the object?
NORAD is a joint commitment, which means we do things together over North America.
And there were Canadian and American fighter jets scrambled to intercept the object and to take it down.
It was very much based on the context and the situations of who was there, who had the capacity to do it before we lost the object into darkness or into situations.
Our focus was not on which side gets credit for what.
Our focus was on running the operation smoothly and successfully.