Ezra Levant exposes CBC President Catherine Tate’s 2021 letters pressuring Twitter to censor critics of Trudeau and Israeli policies, invoking Bill C-36 fines up to $20K. Rebel News reveals threats of ad pullouts and coordination with "net zero" advocates like Gates, Soros, and the UN, pushing insect-based diets amid 258M global food shortages. Tate’s campaign mirrors broader elite-driven efforts to reshape Western freedoms under climate or public health pretexts, while BC’s history—from Amor de Cosmos’ defiance to modern secessionist whispers—underscores resistance to centralized control. [Automatically generated summary]
Tonight, CBC's president repeatedly threatened Twitter, demanding that they censor Canadians.
We've got their internal documents.
It's May 3rd, and this is the Ezra Levant show.
Shame on you, you censorious thug.
Today is World Press Freedom Day, which means it's the day that all the world's censors gaslight you to pretend that they actually care about your freedom of speech.
Just last week, Justin Trudeau ran through a massive internet censorship bill called C-11.
Just today, Trudeau's CRTC regulator announced that it will be drafting and reviewing ethics guidelines for newsrooms across Canada.
Politicians will now go into independent news organizations and tell them how to do journalism.
Boy, that didn't take long, did it?
But I have big news for you today, an exclusive scoop for Rebel News.
And it has to do with the CBC state broadcaster.
As you know, Elon Musk briefly put a warning label on the CBC's Twitter account, calling them a government-funded news agency, which is true.
The CBC say that themselves.
It's obvious.
It's not just government-funded, it's president.
An entire board of directors is chosen by the government.
You just don't get more government-y than the CBC.
The CBC squawked about this for some reason.
It's weird.
And Elon Musk then changed the label to partly government-funded.
But now it looks like that label is gone.
I don't know why.
I think Elon Musk should reconsider that label based on what I'm about to show you.
Because you see, on this World Press Freedom Day, I've got documents to show that senior CBC executives, including the president of the CBC herself, the American named Catherine Tate, they engaged in an ongoing campaign to pressure Twitter to censor people the CBC didn't like for content the CBC didn't approve of, who just happen to be the same people Justin Trudeau doesn't approve of.
And it gets worse.
The CBC's president, Catherine Tate, makes a veiled threat against Twitter that if Twitter doesn't ban the people the CBC wants banned, the CBC might stop doing business with Twitter, stop advertising on Twitter.
And incredibly, the CBC threatens Twitter obliquely, implying that they have a direct line to Trudeau's government.
And if Twitter doesn't do what they want, the CBC will sick the government on them.
Yeah, I'd say that's pretty much a state broadcaster in the most Soviet sense of the word.
I'll show it to you.
You can find the entire document on our website, rebelnews.com.
By the way, we are appealing the pages that they have hidden from us.
They sent us 14 pages, but five of them were completely blanked out.
Imagine the embarrassing things they didn't want to show us considering what they did show us.
You can find that on our website.
Let me start in chronological order.
This is a letter dated May 6th, 2021.
And I should mention that Elon Musk owned and bought Twitter after all these letters.
So this is how they were trying to pressure even the pre-Elon Musk company.
Imagine how bad they are now.
So May 6th, 2021, a confidential letter written to Paul Burns, the managing director of Twitter Canada.
I am writing to you about an issue affecting the women and men who work at Canada's public broadcaster, as well as journalists working in Canada and around the world, who are increasingly targeted for harassment and abuse on your platform.
In particular, the daily barrage of online misogyny, including threats of physical attack against women, people of color, and their families, is toxic and terrifying.
This is from Catherine Tate, the president of the CBC.
Unacceptable abuse on social media platforms has been a growing problem for members of the media, as well as for politicians and even medical professionals.
A 2018 troll patrol report by Amnesty International found that female journalists and politicians are targeted for harassment or abuse on social media roughly every 30 seconds, and that women of color experience even higher levels of abuse.
No working journalist today can afford to ignore the power of social media, whether she's using it to amplify her work or engage with the audience.
Forced silence through relentless and vicious intimidation cannot be an option.
Okay, so there's no particular complaint here.
She's not talking about any particular tweet.
The head of the CBC is just running a campaign.
Is that her job to get other companies to see the world the way she does?
And it just happens to be identical to Justin Trudeau's campaign at the same time.
That's weird.
And here she criticizes Twitter.
She says, your infringement process is haphazard and inconsistent.
It can often take days to get a response.
And too rarely does your company actually act to take down harassing material.
And most often, it is too late.
The harm has been done.
So let me get this straight.
The CBC is complaining.
The CBC, a government agency that sometimes delays access to information requests by years, by years.
They're complaining that Twitter sometimes takes days to get back to them.
As you are no doubt aware, Canada's Minister of Heritage will be tabling new legislation to address online hate in the coming months.
What are you mentioning that for?
Why are you promoting what the Minister of Heritage is doing?
What's that got to do with anything?
That, by the way, was Bill C-36, a law that would fine people up to $20,000 for any statement they made on social media, even if they made those statements as a kid.
You can look it up yourself.
She continues, I am asking to meet with you so that we can agree on a clear, effective, and rapid process for removing hateful material targeting journalists when it appears on your platform.
This will be an important step in improving the online world for our democracy, for all of us.
So she's against online hate.
But hate is a natural human emotion.
Now, we don't like hate.
We prefer love, but it's natural.
And I mean, the CBC hates you.
The liberals hate you.
Justin Trudeau hates the unvaccinated.
The CBC said the truckers were organized by Vladimir Putin.
They hate the truckers.
Hate is a natural human emotion.
You can't really much ban a human emotion.
You can ban threats of violence or things like that.
And Twitter already does.
And of course, the Criminal Code applies everywhere, including on Twitter.
Why was Catherine Tate, apropos of nothing, promoting a government censorship agenda?
Isn't her job to be president and CEO of CBC Radio Canada?
It's right there in her signature line.
Since when does the president of the CBC tell other companies, private companies, what to do?
I mean, shouldn't the CBC get its own act together, run its own?
Why is the CBC pressuring other companies to take a certain censorship line?
Well, here's the next letter in this series.
It gets really weird.
This is a letter May 26th, 2021.
It's written to Stephanie King, vice president and deputy general counsel of Twitter in San Francisco.
And the subject line is tweet containing hate speech.
And what's weird is they've blacked out who this letter is from.
They showed the letter from Catherine Tate.
I don't know why they blanked this out.
I am blank to the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation.
You're what?
We write concerning a series of tweets that was published on May 18th, 2021, see Exhibit A.
And they won't show us those tweets.
I wonder why.
We consider the tweets to be dangerous hate speech in violation of Twitter's rules and policies.
We have filed numerous takedown requests since the tweets were published, to no avail.
We wish the removal of these tweets.
I'm sure you do.
I mean, you're government journalists.
A real journalist would probably be more sympathetic to free speech, but you're government journalists.
And then there's another blacked out name.
An individual with the Twitter handle, blank, published a series of tweets in which he claims CBC News has banned all content that is sympathetic to Palestinians.
Now, I happen to know that's not true.
The CBC is actually quite pro-Palestinian, but so what?
It's some guy's opinion.
He's allowed to have an opinion.
He's allowed to even be wrong.
That's part of democracy.
Let me continue reading.
He expresses his desire that CBC be prevented from going on air unless its management backs down.
Now, I don't think I would like this Twitter, as he sounds very, I might even say he is anti-Semitic by some of the other details in the letter, but so what?
And the fact that this guy doesn't want the CBC to have its say, well, this very letter to Twitter is the CBC trying to silence that guy.
You have two illiberal forces saying, you shut up.
No, you shut up.
What is CBC doing telling Twitter to ban its critics?
Its critics might be wrong.
They might even be rude.
But since when does the CBC write lengthy letters to the general counsel of Twitter telling them to silence their critics?
We are of the view that these tweets are clearly designed to arouse anti-Jewish animus through their use of highly charged anti-Semitic language, e.g. Jewish white supremacists, Zionist censors, supporters of Israeli apartheid, and the imperialist colony.
Look, I don't like those phrases either because I'm Jewish myself.
I'm pro-Israel.
You could call me a Zionist.
But those may be offensive words, or actually I think they're more just words I would disagree with.
Since when is the CBC in the business of just silencing people who are wrong or who have opinions they don't like?
And look at who this letter was copied to.
It was sent by some mystery person.
It was copied to Vijaya Gaddi, who is the head of legal policy and trust, copied to Michelle Austin, who is the head of public policy for Twitter in Canada, and Paul Burns, the fellow who received the first letter, and of course Cam Gordon, the head of communications for Twitter in Canada.
Oh, by the way, copied to Catherine Tate of the CBC also.
So that's two letters in short order telling Twitter to silence people they don't like.
And here we go, June 9th.
They're really on a campaign here.
Subject, hate speech on your platform.
Ms. King, on May 26th, we wrote to you about a series of tweets published on your platform on May 18th, which we consider to be dangerous hate speech.
Sorry, it's not dangerous to criticize Israel and call it apartheid.
It's wrong in my view.
I find it maybe offensive and maybe insulting, but it's not dangerous.
It's not dangerous in violation of Twitter's own rules and policies.
You must be aware by now of the degree to which your platform continues to weaponize the online harassment and abuse of journalists and media hosts, particularly women and those from racialized communities.
It attacks trusted news sources and thus undermines reasoned discourse, democracy, and the health of our societies.
Your lack of attention on this problem is extremely troubling.
It also gives credence to those in this country who believe that legislation is necessary in order to ensure that Twitter enforces its own guidelines and abides by domestic laws and regulations.
Oh, gee, I wonder who they're talking about.
By the way, I thought that they were worried about white supremacists, and now they're saying this targets racialized minorities.
This is just all liberal woke gobbledygook.
But again, what is Twitter doing?
There are some people on Twitter who are anti-Israel and call it an apartheid country.
I happen to know it's not an apartheid country, and we can have an argument about this.
Since when is the CBC in the business of demanding that Twitter silence them and saying those are dangerous views?
That's almost exactly the same language Justin Trudeau used to talk about critics of his vaccine policy.
He said those are unacceptable views.
CBC really is a state broadcaster, aren't they?
Here's how the letter is ended.
We expect Twitter to act promptly when it becomes aware of incidents of abuse of journalists facilitated by Twitter.
In this regard, we would like to establish a more direct and effective protocol to ensure that this will be the case in the future.
Yeah, they've heard about how the FBI and the CIA had a direct contact with Twitter so they could directly censor things.
The CBC wanted to be able to directly censor things on Twitter.
That is super gross.
We will raise this and other procedures in a meeting scheduled soon with the leadership of Twitter Canada.
Signed, Claude Gallipo, Executive Vice President.
Huh?
Really?
Okay, well, now it looks like the meeting had happened because now we're on the June 23rd letter to no one less than the CEO, Jack Dorsey.
So this is the CBC coming back at it again and again and again.
They're on a real campaign.
It's almost like they were taking orders from Trudeau himself.
Let me read excerpts from this letter.
You can see the whole thing on our website, RebelNews.com.
Mr. Dorsey, as president and CEO of Canada's public broadcaster, I am writing to request a meeting with you to determine how we will ensure that Twitter effectively acts in removing offensive material from its platform.
Can you imagine if the shoe is on the other foot, if Jack Dorsey said, dear CBC, I would like an immediate meeting with you to talk about how we can remove offensive things on your platform.
Could you imagine how CBC would squawk about that?
Here's the CBC demanding that Twitter remove offensive things.
Offensive.
Offensive to the CBC or to Trudeau?
Who cares?
CBC Demands Twitter Censorship00:05:29
Since when does the CBC tell anyone what they can or can't say?
This next part's very interesting.
On June 10th, I met with Michelle Austin and Cam Gordon, your representatives here in Canada.
To be honest, I found our meeting unsatisfactory.
We were told that our case had been reviewed and found not to be in contravention of Twitter's policies.
When we asked how we could appeal this decision, we were told to feel free to pursue whatever action we consider appropriate.
And then look at this line.
Given our business relationship with your company, I found this response not only unhelpful, but quite frankly rude.
Let me translate what that means.
We spend thousands of dollars on advertising on Twitter.
You better make this right or we will boycott you.
And then this.
I recall your testimony to Congress in 2018 where you committed to protecting your platform from disinformation and to, quote, encourage more healthy debate, conversations, and critical thinking on the platform.
That commitment is at odds with Twitter's failure to act when a provider of trusted news, in this case, CBC Radio Canada, is unable to get action on offending or misleading content.
Oh, so it's not hateful anymore.
It's not certainly not illegal or dangerous.
It's just what they disagree with.
Misleaning, unhelpful.
The CBC is literally trying to censor things that they declare to be misinformation.
Again, that is Trudeau's tactic now, too.
Since when is the CBC in charge of censoring other media?
And not for anything hateful or harassing.
They're not trying that line here again.
They're just saying things that they deem to be misinformation.
So the CBC not only is a propaganda organ itself, they want Twitter to follow their instructions.
I would hope you would share our concern about the degree to which your platform weaponizes the harassment and abuse of journalists and hosts, particularly women and those from racialized communities.
No examples given, by the way.
As you know, this is a global issue when all our media colleagues, especially in public broadcasting, are facing.
Let me translate.
Stop people saying mean things about our left-wing bias.
But look at this next part.
This is the threat.
Here is the CBC state broadcaster bearing its fangs.
Look at this.
We have been sharing our mounting concerns with the Canadian government, which is proposing legislation to address online hate.
There is significant public support for such legislation.
That's not true, actually.
As head of a media organization which values freedom of speech and of the press, I would prefer that Twitter take meaningful action on its own to address this problem.
Nice free speech platform you got there.
Shame if something were to happen to it.
You know, we were talking to the government the other day, and whoo boy, let me just put it this way: it would be better if you fix this problem voluntarily now than if my friends in government fixed it, because we love free speech, so censor what I want you to censor.
I say again, all of this was a year before Elon Musk bought Twitter.
I say again that these access to information documents, which were exclusively given to us, they're still hiding five of the 14 pages.
They blacked them out.
The CBC was making threats to other companies to censor Canadians.
They were making business threats.
They were making political threats on behalf of Trudeau.
Will Trudeau admit that or will he disavow that?
Was Catherine Tate just talking tough or did she really say to Trudeau, I'll help you get Twitter.
And if they don't bend the knee to me, you come in with the heavy stuff.
Catherine Tate, the boss of CBC, is indistinguishable from Trudeau in terms of political policy.
Her letters could have and maybe even were written by Trudeau's office.
And everything I've showed you today is what they put in writing.
Imagine what they would say in phone calls or meetings.
Imagine the coordination behind the scenes with Trudeau.
She already admitted that they'd been consulting with the government on what to do about Twitter.
And imagine what they've already got away with with pro-censorship companies like YouTube and Facebook.
Catherine Tate of the CBC is not a journalist.
She is a Trudeau liberal operative masquerading as a journalist.
She's literally the personification of fake news.
Stay with us for more.
Is the stuff of life.
Well, I'm not talking about love.
Zero Gas War00:08:24
I'm talking about the things that let us go from day to day, food and fuel.
If you have cheap, clean fuel, like natural gas, for example, you can do anything.
And food, well, that's the stuff of life, literally.
And so it's interesting over the last two years in particular, in part since Joe Biden took office, but I think in general, to see the prices of food and of energy climb.
But it almost seems as if that is a deliberate plan.
And that's what's so baffling.
We've seen that in Canada before, as Justin Trudeau has tried to transition off the oil sands and even block liquid natural gas exports to Europe, despite the demands of Germany and Japan to ask us to sell our liquefied natural gas to them.
It seems as if Justin Trudeau actually wants the price of energy to be expensive, to have energy poverty.
And an explanation for this is ideological extremism, but also to force people to do what Steph Andion called the carbon shift.
If using fossil fuel energy is difficult and expensive, maybe people will grudgingly use green energy schemes that simply can't compete.
And now we're seeing the same thing with food.
Just like there's been a war on carbon for the last generation, now we see a bizarre war on nitrogen in the form of fertilizers, telling farmers they can no longer fertilize.
The Netherlands, which is the second largest food exporter in the world, shocking for a country of that small size, is the pointy edge of the spear for this.
They're going to drive up the cost of food, just like they've driven up the cost of fuel.
I think it's connected.
I'm not quite sure how.
I find it deeply disturbing.
And so I see all these things coming together today on one of my favorite websites.
I'm talking about climate depot.com.
We go to climatepot.com and we've been friends with their founder, Mark Morano, for more than a decade.
And we usually go to him to talk about things involving the theory of man-made global warming.
He's an expert on these matters.
He always attends the UN Global Warming Conference.
So it was interesting to me to see this huge headline on climate.com today.
Eating insects may offer environmental benefits.
Brits would be told to eat bugs under bonkers green plans by civil servants.
That's a story in the sun of the UK.
But the same day, I see a story in the Wall Street Journal.
Switzerland wants children to eat less chocolate, more insects.
Companies pitch bugs to young consumers at schools.
Spicy mealworms don't fly with Anna.
Black.
I was recently in Switzerland when I was there to cover Davos, and they love their chocolate.
They're the world's foremost chocolatiers, though the Belgians would quarrel with that.
Imagine replacing that with bugs.
Joining us now is the boss of climatepot.com to help us make sense of all of this.
Mark, great to see you.
There was a war on cheap, clean energy.
Now there's a war on nutritious natural food.
How are they connected?
They're all connected.
There's also a war on private car ownership and gas-powered cars.
This is all very simple, Ezra.
If you know who the players are, and you, of course, do know, but I mean, if you look at this from the World Economic Forum, the United Nations, the World Health Organization, players like Bill Gates, George Source, it's a very simple vision.
Their stated public goal, and I can go through dozens of examples on everything where they actually say higher food prices are good to get people to eat.
Higher energy prices are good for the green agenda.
But their goal is to intentionally collapse our energy system to create a transition to what they're seeking: solar, wind, green energy, and limited resources.
Their intention is to collapse our transportation system, banning of gas-powered cars.
And that goes actually pretty deep because you have the World Bank being telling the automakers they're not going to be funding for gas-powered cars.
You have corporate banks not going to give out car loans.
You have now cities and towns in Colorado, California, voting for no new gas stations, which will, even if you own a gas-powered car, you're going to start facing gas shortages.
And then, of course, they're trying to collapse our current agriculture and food system.
And they're doing that in so many different ways, but all under the umbrella pretty much of the net zero agenda.
And the net zero agenda, as you alluded to, Ezra, deals with the Netherlands as the first test case where the idea is you can't have nitrogen because nitrogen creates nitrous oxide, it's a greenhouse gas.
We've got to go after these farmers.
We're going to put in heavy, big restrictions.
And guess what?
They're only going to affect the small, family-run, traditional farms up to 11,000 in the Netherlands, not the big agribusiness, corporate Chinese, Bill Gates, mega giant firms that run them.
They can absorb all these new net zero costs.
It's the small farms.
And if you relate that back to COVID, who could afford the lockdown mandates that went on for years?
Big corporations and retail chains, not the small mom and pops.
It's the same thing.
They are collapsing food, energy, and transportation to boot our free speech as well and throw in our financial system as well, devaluing our currency.
So they're doing all of this intentionally, and it's to create a new world order/slash great reset.
You know, what you're saying sounds shocking.
Each part of it is shocking.
Together, it's almost too much to believe, but I know for a fact each element you've described is there.
I mean, here's a famous video that I always tweet on Twitter.
It's Bill Gates coming up with a mathematical formula for the, and he says we absolutely have to reduce the number of humans in the world.
This is a TED talk he gave.
Look at this.
Absolutely terrifying.
Imagine putting this guy in charge of the world's vaccines, for example.
Take a look at this.
It's an average about five tons for everyone on the planet.
And somehow we have to make changes that will bring that down to zero.
It's been constantly going up.
It's only various economic changes that have even flattened it at all.
So we have to go from rapidly rising to falling and falling all the way to zero.
This equation has four factors: a little bit of multiplication.
So you've got a thing on the left, CO2, that you want to get to zero, and that's going to be based on the number of people, the services each person choosing on average, the energy on average for each service, and the CO2 being put out per unit of energy.
So let's look at each one of these and see how we can get this down to zero.
Probably one of these numbers is going to have to get pretty near to zero.
Now that's back from high school algebra.
But let's take a look.
First, we've got population.
Now the world today has 6.8 billion people.
That's headed up to about 9 billion.
Now if we do a really great job on new vaccines, health care, reproductive health services, we could lower that by perhaps 10 or 15 percent.
But there we see an increase of about 1.3.
So you said a lot of astonishing things there, but I just happen to know that everything you say, I mean, the craziest thing, and I literally dry heave whenever I think about it, here's Bill Gates, who's buying up all the farmland in America.
I think he's now the largest farmland owner in America.
Here he is promoting the drinking of what he calls poop water.
Take a look.
Over 2.5 billion people have no access to safe sanitation.
We asked brilliant engineers to help us solve this problem.
And one of those engineers actually has proposed a solution where the waste is valuable.
The omniprocessor turns sewer sludge, which is kind of nasty, into clean drinking water, electricity, and ash that is pathogen-free.
This is where the sludge enters the machine.
It goes up this conveyor belt, is fed into these large tubes we call the dryer.
Pushing Protein Alternatives00:13:08
That's where we boil the sludge.
And in the boiling process, we separate the water vapor from the solids.
The solids are now dry, and we can feed them into the fire.
Once we have this very hot fire, we can make high-pressure, high-temperature steam.
And we take that steam and we send it to a steam engine.
And the steam engine drives a generator that makes electricity that we use for the processor and also excess electricity that can be delivered back to the community.
The water vapor that's created in the boiling process is run through a cleaning system until we have the cleanest, purest water you can possibly imagine.
I am very impressed with this solution we're seeing here.
And it generates electricity, it generates clean water.
It will grow to every corner of the earth that needs it because it makes money every day.
It's water.
I cannot mention that without literally gagging.
I apologize.
But there is something so repulsive about that.
Talk about bugs.
Why do they want us to eat bugs?
Well, bugs, this has been going on now for decades.
The UN Agriculture Report, back when I worked in the United States Senate Environment Committee, they issued a report 2007 in the United Nations saying that cow emissions, i.e. methane, were more damaging to the earth than the entire transportation sector, planes, trains, automobiles combined.
So they've had cows and meat eating in their target for decades.
We've had UK climate advisors say that we want to make meat rare and expensive.
We've had the former UN climate chief Christina Figuere say we wanted to basically turn meat eaters the way we used to do smokers in their own small, uncomfortable section in restaurants.
That's how it started.
Then they've come out with even more reports basically calling for an end to meat eating in the industrialized West.
What Bill Gates, as you mentioned, stated goal is to get Europe, United States, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and all Western nations off of eating livestock grown animal meat.
His stated goal is to have us eat synthetic, fake meat grown from stem cells from a cow or a lamb or sheep and put into a steel vat in a laboratory and then add all sorts of additives, antibiotics thrown in, and then it comes out to a puree paste.
And I'm not making this part up, that you then print it up on a 3D printer, several kilograms an hour, and you can have your steak dinner in quotes.
I mean, that's still, it is actually a form of meat.
It's derived from the animal.
So it's not a veggie brewer.
But that's what they want.
That's his stated goal.
And he'll have huge sway in agricultural policy to make that happen.
Yeah, I've seen images of that 3D printer printing lab-grown meat.
I just, and I'm sorry I'm looking nauseous.
I just don't have the stomach to even talk about this, let alone to eat it.
You know, I can't help but juxtapose this with an image from China.
Maybe you saw this.
It's the most astonishing thing I've seen.
Two urban skyscrapers, like in the city, skyscrapers, well, not quite scraped, multi-story buildings, pig farms in the city, in towers, like story after story after story.
I could only imagine the smell of that neighborhood.
Just, you know, that would never be stopped.
That's a diabolical kind of farming to begin with, I think.
That truly is a cruelty to animal moment.
China is going ahead with all the coal energy it wants.
China is building skyscrapers for pig farms.
I don't think they're pushing bugs on people.
It's only the luxurious, decadent West and people like Soros and Gates that are pushing bugs.
I don't think George Soros has ever had a bug in his life.
I think he eats the finest steaks and food he likes.
I think this is only just for the little people.
They're taking on air travel.
They're really hyping up the economic cost of air travel.
They want it to be an elite thing again, only for true jet setters.
The ordinary folks can't see the world.
The idea of a young person being able to take a cheap flight to Spain or Italy and see the world, I think they want to end that.
I think they truly see a stratified society with the elite and then the grubby peasants below.
I think it's a dystopian future they're actually working towards.
It really is Bond villain type stuff.
It is.
I mean, throughout history, throughout civilizations, the ruling class elites have always tried to invent reasons why the rest of us couldn't be free, why we had to be managed, why we had to give up our liberties.
Today's answer is climate change.
Yesterday's answer was COVID, a virus.
The previous answer to that was terrorism.
And you can go on and on throughout history.
And this is where they get into these emergency declarations where they bypass democracy.
But what's happening in particular with the food industry right now, they are just out yesterday.
I don't know if you saw this, Ezra, but 258 million people worldwide face food insecurity now, according to the United Nations.
And they're blaming it on drumroll, please, climate change.
And what they're saying is that climate shock because of the bad weather, which isn't increasing on any time scale, hurricanes, floods, tornadoes, droughts, wildfires, not increasing, according to even the UN itself.
But what they're claiming is because of these food shortages, this is why we need to invest in the synthetic meat.
And this is why we need to turn to insect eating.
Also, because insect eating is earth-friendly.
And the reason that what's significant about the Switzerland story today about they're actually targeting school kids to eat bugs.
They did the same thing in Australia, the same thing in other parts of Europe, because they're getting kids to go home and pester their parents.
They're using kids as part of a psychological operation to normalize insect eating.
This is their goal.
World Economic Forum is behind this.
United Nations behind this.
Hollywood celebrities are behind it.
The corporate media is behind it.
CNN has been hyping, I think, cockroach milk and other things.
I mean, they are in this to win, to make this happen.
And one of the things you need to do, you need to collapse plentiful food.
And they are very far from COVID and to all the climate policies.
They are on their way fully to make that happen.
The same way they're creating car shortages, they're creating food shortages.
They're also creating energy shortages.
This is what they do, and they do it masterfully because they own the levers of power.
Yeah.
You know, I was in a pet store the other day, and pet food is now full of insect protein.
I think they're trying to normalize it.
They're trying to artificially build a market for it and to say, hey, it's been in your pet food for years.
Hey, you've been eating it all this time.
You just didn't know it.
You know, I was talking to James Lindsay a month ago and I asked him about certain instinctive reactions to things.
I mean, I see it in my pet, speaking of pet stores.
How does my dog know certain things?
Because it wasn't taught that by other dogs.
There's obviously instincts, just like humans have instincts.
And I think there's an instinctive revulsion to eating bugs that must come from tens of thousands of years, hundreds, tens of thousands, since time immemorial.
It would be a Darwinian trait that if you ate bugs and got sick, you would die off if you didn't eat bugs.
And so just like, I think there is something visceral.
The reason I gag when I see that footage of Bill Gates drinking poop water, why do I gag?
Because there's something I think that goes back millennia.
Yes.
That's Mother Nature or God or Darwin or whatever you ascribe to.
Humans are hardwired to react.
To react that way, that's your body or nature saying, don't drink sewage.
You will get sick.
Don't eat bugs.
You will get sick.
We have a revulsion to certain things.
It's not even learned.
It is in our essence.
And these people are trying to.
Let me stretch this analogy a little further.
I was thinking about this the other day.
Brutalist architecture.
The ugliest architecture engineered to be ugly.
And I was thinking about that.
Brutalist architecture, usually, in my observation, is in government institutions, universities, hospitals, government offices.
I've never seen, other than in North Korea, a brutalist hotel that you actually want to attract people to.
Hey, guys, come spend a lovely vacation in this architecturally oppressive, horrible prison-like setting.
And to me, that's proof that people hate brutalism because if it actually appealed to people, every five-star hotel would be this atrocious prison-like thing.
That's proof that when capitalism and people voting with their dollars is an issue, people like beauty.
And I say it's the case here, too.
If people naturally, instinctively were attracted to bugs, were attracted to this kind of living, they would be there already.
And that's why I say again, these people at the top of the pyramid, they know this is anti-human and unhuman.
They know it.
They know people don't like being cold in the winter.
They know people don't like being immobile.
They know people don't like eating bugs.
And yet they do it to us and they're selling it to us as a plus.
I find this the most terrifying of all.
I find it very dystopian and yet they just don't stop.
Last word to you, Mark.
Well, yeah.
And the only way they really can do it, they have to create the food shortage, which then makes you soften you up to more likely to consider eating bugs.
They're already starting, as they did with climate education.
They're targeting the youth, and that's who they're going after.
Interestingly enough, there have been animal rights activists pushing back on the bug eating, saying that bugs can feel pain.
There's a whole movement now to basically say, what about bug rights?
Remember, if you follow all their logic consistently, how can we eat bugs but not an animal?
How are bugs different?
You're supposed to all be equal with the animal world.
They don't want humans to be elevated.
So this is where we are.
And one other thing on bugs, if you go back through history, it's the poorer subsistence cultures that eat bugs.
But once they get wealthier, the practice is largely abandoned, except for a very small percentage.
And that's what people don't realize.
Yeah, a lot of people eat bugs because they had to, not because they would choose to.
And that's what they're trying to recreate.
These policies are going to create shortages.
That's a great point.
You know, I think even of Jewish cuisine, you know, traditionally Jewish cuisine, it's actually poor people food.
You know, you're in Europe and you have to eat like gefilte fish.
Or these are things you probably don't even know about, Mark.
But as a Jewish person, I know about Gefilte.
It's the worst fish ground up so you don't even recognize it.
And then you put spicy horseradish so you can stomach it.
That is not a delicacy.
That's what peasants ate because they were poor and they had to make do with like gross leftovers.
You know, I'm not going to, I can talk about that because I'm Jewish myself, but there's a certain kind of Chinese food that is basically the worst cuts of meat, the worst, it's what you eat when you are poor, but you need calories.
I mean, we all know that in North Korea, that horrific prison country, they boiled leather.
They ate grass, anything to live.
So if that's your argument, well, people have been eating these crappy foods out of desperation to survive, and they want people to stay in that nasty, brutish state of poverty.
I find this stuff really eerie, and the fact that this was proposed in the United Kingdom as part of an official platform, they are not going to relent, are they?
They are not going to relent.
They're not.
This is about literally an agenda that wants to control every aspect of human endeavor.
Our freedom of movement, our food, our energy, our free speech, and our means of exchange and currency.
They are out.
When I say they, I mean, I'm talking about United Nations, World Health.
I'm talking about the World Economic Forum.
They are out to literally mastermind our entire society from above, using these self-created crisis, shortages of energy, food, transportation, and they're going to force us into desperate times.
And that's, they're really, and COVID was just the ticket to do that.
And that's how far we've come.
And now, of course, the UN is blaming climate change for coming food shortages, particularly in the developing world.
Yeah.
Yeah, it's just crazy.
Mark, great to see you again.
Thanks for ringing the alarm bell.
We love the website, climatepot.com.
It's not just climate, though.
Climate is the excuse for so many terrible things, energy, food, and everything.
Take care, my friend.
Keep up the fight.
Thank you, Ezra.
I appreciate it.
All right.
There you have it.
MarkMorano of climatepot.com.
Stay with us more ahead.
Hey, welcome back.
Your letters to me.
Must Be Applied00:02:32
Someone with the nickname O Me said if Bill C-11 and the rest should become law, then it must be applied against Trudeau and those who publicly broadcasted him, shamelessly insulting Canadians who decided not to take the mRNA injection by calling them misogynist, racist, and questioning if they should be even tolerated.
This call of not tolerating a group of people is a hate crime and must be treated as such.
Well, don't you know that hate crimes are in the eyes of the beholder, and they will only be applied against the enemies of the regime.
And that's why I say to people who say, well, we should arrest Trudeau for treason or whatever.
And I say, no, don't you understand?
If you criminalize something in the hopes you're going to get Trudeau, don't you know that they will use that law against you first?
Censorship is a, it's a, free speech is a tough thing because you have to give it to your opponents if you want it for yourself.
Everyone is for free speech for themselves.
Can you give free speech to your opponent to say things that you hate to hear?
You have to, because otherwise you'll set the precedent of values against you.
Calvin A says, hey, Ezra, in the dying moments of your show, you referenced Western provinces separating.
I agree with you.
I'm not sure if you know, but BC already voted to secede from the Dominion.
On August 30, 1878, a motion passed third reading, and BC's legislature did do exactly that.
The petition was sent on to Queen Victoria, but she refused to receive it, so it died.
Its genesis came as a result of the delay on building the railroad.
And after the petition was ignored, Canada eventually finished the railway.
That said, the petition was never rescinded by the BC legislature.
I sent all the info and proof onto Drea and Sheila about a year ago, and I appreciate that Drea responded to me.
Our independent streak is not bound only to Alberta and Saskatchewan.
Well, that's a very interesting story that I had not heard today.
And of course, there is a great independent spirit in BC and a lot of colorful characters.
One of the funnest names in politics I've ever heard was, I believe he was a premier of BC, called Amor de Cosmos, which you don't have to know Latin, to means lover of the cosmos, lover of the universe.
Just there's always been a dissonant streak, a contrarian streak, an independent streak.
And yeah, the railway was built to hold this country together, and its delay, I'm sure, was a problem.
I don't know what the sentiment is today.
It's hard to say.
There's so much wokeness in Vancouver.
I think that clouds out all the rest.
Well, that's our show for today.
By the way, what do you think those CBC documents say?