Ezra Levant details Justin Trudeau’s prorogation of Parliament in 2019 to avoid a non-confidence vote, mirroring Boris Johnson’s UK precedent, while facing a $800K defamation lawsuit from anti-Semitic former CHRC chair Birju Datani—one of three Jewish targets among hundreds. His book Corrupted by Fear critiques judges’ COVID-era rulings, like Manitoba’s false claims of unprecedented crises or Ontario hearings held in the Caribbean, warning climate lockdowns could replicate this overreach. Trump’s Federalist Society vetting contrasts with Harper’s mixed judicial appointments, including Russ Brown, who enabled freedoms-eroding decisions like Saskatchewan’s forced mRNA injection for a 12-year-old. Levant urges support for Rebel News and John Carpe’s Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms as Canada’s freedom movement gains momentum against state expansion. [Automatically generated summary]
I've been sued by Justin Trudeau's crony, Beerju Datani.
I'll tell you all about it.
Plus a feature interview with our friend John Carpe of the Justice Center.
But before I get to that, let me invite you to become a subscriber to what we call Rebel News Plus.
That's the video version of this podcast.
Just go to RebelNewsPlus.com, click subscribe.
It's $8 a month.
And not only do you get the video version of this podcast, you get the satisfaction of helping Rebel News stay strong.
Hey, one more thing.
With COVID behind us, who knows what the globalists are planning next?
Maybe it's the expansion of the conflict in Europe or the release of another virus or the undermining of free and fair elections.
Whatever it is, you need to be prepared.
It is essential that you take the time now to sit down with our friends at Rocklink Investment Partners.
Rocklink will work with you to develop a financial plan for your family to give you security and peace of mind in the midst of so much uncertainty.
Our friends at Rocklink are freedom-loving conservatives who want to help other conservatives be prepared for the future.
Call Rocklink and get your investments working for you.
Call them at 905-631-5462 or email them at info at rocklink.com.
That's RockLink with a C. Info at rocklink.com.
All right, here's today's show.
Tonight, I've been sued for $800,000 by Justin Trudeau's Human Rights Commission crony, plus a feature interview with our friend John Carpe of the Justice Center.
It's February 6th, and this is the Ezra Levant show.
Shame on you you censorious bug.
Hey earlier.
I said I was sued by one of Justin Trudeau's cronies His name is Beerju Datani.
Here's a five-minute video I made and we published earlier today explaining the situation.
A terrible thing just happened.
I'm sorry to bother you about it, but I really need your help.
I have just been sued by Justin Trudeau's anti-Semitic censorship appointee, Birju Datani.
You can read his lawsuit in full for yourself at the website saverebelnews.com.
He's suing me for $800,000.
That's why I'm here today to announce that I've launched defamation lawsuits against those who spearheaded a targeted attack against me this past summer.
Conservative Member of Parliament Melissa Lanceman, right-wing media personality Ezra Levance, and the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs, Cedra.
You might remember Datany.
Last year, he was appointed by Trudeau to be the chair of the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
That's the kangaroo court that was going to implement the worst parts of Bill C-63.
That's Trudeau's atrocious censorship bill.
Now, thankfully, C-63 was derailed a few weeks ago when Trudeau prorogued Parliament.
But last summer, Detaney was all set to be the chief censorship enforcer.
But then the truth about Datani started to come out.
It turns out Datany had written atrocious anti-Semitic comments and appeared on anti-Semitic panels.
He compared Jews to the Nazis.
He compared Hamas terrorists to the Jewish victims of the Holocaust.
He called for a boycott of the Jewish state.
That is classic anti-Semitism.
He didn't just write about it and talk about it.
Datany even took to the streets.
He attended a protest outside an Israeli embassy where radicals were mourning the death of a terrorist.
Datani sat on panels with extremists, including a member of Hizbut Tahrir.
That's a violent terrorist group that's banned in dozens of countries.
He participated in anti-Semitic hate fests on college campuses.
And he wrote that, and I'm quoting here, terror is not an irrational strategy.
It is, in fact, a rational and well-calculated strategy, unquote.
He wrote that.
Now, two lawyers hired by the Liberal government investigated him and declared that he didn't do anything anti-Semitic, but their report contains page after page of evidence of his anti-Semitism, including the examples I just listed.
And the lawyers said he tried to hide that evidence from the Liberal government.
Imagine appointing someone like that to run the Canadian Human Rights Commission.
This is the guy who's suing me.
But here's where it gets really creepy.
Every major news outlet in Canada and many around the world reported on Datani's shocking anti-Semitic comments.
And thousands of people on Twitter did too.
Just Google his name to see for yourself.
But he's only suing three people that we know about.
Me, Conservative Party deputy leader Melissa Lanceman, and the Center for Israel and Jewish Affairs, or CEJA, as it's called.
Suing three Jews for objecting to anti-Semitism out of hundreds of critics?
That's a bit obvious, don't you think?
I need your help, please.
Dataney has enormous resources, and now he's been hired by Canada's most woke university, Toronto Metropolitan University.
Dataney, who's suing me to silence me, is actually hired by their Center for Free Expression, if you can believe it.
TMU is such a joke.
Now, remember, Detaney was Trudeau's first choice to be Canada's censor.
There's no doubt in my mind he would have weaponized the Canadian Human Rights Commission against rebel news and against the Conservative Party and against pro-Israel activists.
That's exactly what he's doing now with his lawsuit.
I'm not too worried about Melissa Lanceman.
She's tough.
And it's standard practice for Parliament to pay an MP's legal defense.
And CJA has a major budget, and they actually receive large grants from the government too.
But not us at Rebel News.
It's weird how I'm the only journalist he's suing, given that every news outlet in the country reported the same things.
He's hired a top lawyer.
He's got vast resources.
And he's coming to destroy us.
If you want us to live, now is the time to help us, please.
Go to saverebelnews.com.
Chip in what you can.
I really need your help to cover our legal bills.
Even before we get to trial, this lawsuit could cost us well over $75,000 in legal fees.
We can't let that stop us.
If you help us cover the cost of our lawyers, I promise I'll fight like hell against this censor.
Thanks.
Please visit saverebelnews.com.
You know, Detaney was going to be the chief enforcer of Trudeau's C-63, silencing dissident voices.
This lawsuit could have the same effect.
Is it any surprise that someone who said terrorism is, quote, a rational and well-calculated strategy, unquote, would sue to silence his critics?
Last point.
You know, Rebel News loves to fight for freedom for other people, and we often crowdfund lawyers for other people.
But this time, we're fighting for our own survival.
We're the ones who need help.
Please chip in to help us cover our legal fees.
Thanks.
Visit saverebelnews.com.
I want to show you one more thing from our new reporter in the UK.
Her name is Sammy Woodhouse, and I think she's doing a great job.
Take a look.
Hi, I'm Sammy Woodhouse reporting with Rebel News.
Well, today I hit the streets in Rotherham and Barnsley to find out exactly what members of the community thought about their Prime Minister, Kia Starmer, President Donald Trump, immigration, and do they trust the mainstream media?
Why Deport Criminals?00:02:46
Here is what they had to say.
So, Donald Trump has been deporting illegal immigrants.
What's your thoughts on that?
Oh, is it crazy, man?
Is it crazy?
Because they do.
Look, what's happened to Ukraine?
Biden.
Prime Minister, what's happened to Ukraine?
All people run away, everywhere.
The people he's departing, they're criminals.
They've come and committed crime.
All of us, no criminals.
No people criminal come to this country.
No.
Nobody.
So you feel that none of them commit crime?
No.
Yeah, that's good.
Do you think we should do the same in the UK?
Yeah, yeah, get them out, get them all out.
Yeah?
He's put them on a plane and sent them back to Cuba.
Why can't Kia do that?
So you think UK should do that?
People and a lot of kiddies getting a lot of sexual abuse from these.
If they're causing trouble here, yeah, absolutely, don't be here.
But other than that, everyone has a right to live.
No, shouldn't deport them.
Because they come here for a good life, for working.
What are they doing here?
If you do anything, police cut you take you back.
That wouldn't do any problem.
So what about the people that come here, they're not working, they're claiming they're done, they're committing crimes.
Do you think they should be deported?
They know maybe one of the passive five people doing it.
Well, he all keeps saying they're going to send them all back and things like that, but it's getting out of hand.
Now, look at all the country, what's going on, you know what I mean?
It's just getting worse and worse.
But then they keep saying all this and that, like, they're going to send them all back, but they never do.
And it's just going to be repeat all the time, isn't it?
You know what I mean?
Then what's coming illegally, I mean, they should be turned back.
Then when they come here, you know, emigrate it sort of thing.
Yeah.
They ought to send them all back to Soviet Truth, because since all these have been in Roverman, that like it's not me, but no trouble.
To be honest, you have to think about why the people are coming here.
See, why am I here?
If my country was not destroyed, I wouldn't be here.
No.
I don't think we should deport anybody, because everybody's got to have rights of food and clothes and shelter.
I mean, we're all brothers and sisters, really, aren't we?
You know what I mean?
So, what gives us right is saying, no, you can't come in, because in another two or three years, it could be trebling the population.
And we haven't got the houses, we haven't got the money to spend, have you?
Have they?
No.
So you feel that none of them commit crime?
No.
Well, it's been proven in a court of law that some do.
Look, here, car wash, people immigrant working.
Yeah, you come here, open a bar bar shop, open a takeaway.
What's a killer?
Parliamentary Prorogation Controversy00:09:40
Not a show with Donald Trump.
He's a businessman.
America's a business.
So he's probably right, man, for a job.
Same again.
He's going to look good in people's faces.
Just so he gets the votes.
He wants to run again, doesn't he?
So, what is it?
What's your thoughts on Keir Starmer, the Prime Minister?
Oh, right.
Meh.
Can't abide him.
I just can't.
He's made a rain mess on it.
What do you think he's doing wrong?
Everything.
No, I don't have any idea today.
I'm from another country.
Thank you.
What do you think to Keir Starmer, Prime Minister?
I don't know.
Sorry.
I'd rather not tell you, to be honest.
Thank you.
I don't vote in politics.
It's a waste of time.
They're all saying, vote to Labour all my life, but never vote Labour again.
Oh, no.
What he's done.
And he's that because of Kier Starman.
Even rather MP, what they've done.
Stabbed it in by old age pensioners.
Oh, no.
No into politics.
Well, stop.
They're just liars, paid liars.
Simple.
The mainstream media, do you trust them enough to tell you about important matters such as immigration and the grooming and rapes of children?
Yeah.
Like the big newspapers, yeah.
I won't really trust the media as far as I can throw them.
I mean, I think everything's kind of bent to the truth anyway.
Everything's subjective, but there's always normally another angle when it comes to the media.
So I tend to not watch it.
The mainstream media, do you trust them enough to our politics in Canada are insane right now.
One of the reasons is because Parliament itself has been dissolved and in the middle of a crisis.
We've got a lot of crises going on, actually.
One of them is an economic crisis, Donald Trump threatening tariffs against Canada.
But instead of resuming the business of Parliament, the Liberals are having a leadership race at this moment.
And Trudeau, I think it's pretty clear, dissolved Parliament so he could evade the possibility of a non-confidence vote.
Is there any way to stop this?
Maybe there is.
As you remember, a couple of weeks ago, we talked to John Carpet, the boss of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedoms.
That's a public interest law firm.
And they are taking the government to court, challenging the authority of the Prime Minister to dissolve Parliament.
I thought it was a crazy long-shot trial, but then John told me, John Carpe, the boss of said organization, that there's a precedent in the United Kingdom.
And they actually won over there.
Joining us now to talk about this and more is John Carpet.
John, nice to see you in person.
Good to see you.
When you first announced that you were going to sue the government to stop them from dissolving Parliament, I thought, there's no way.
Parliament is supreme in so many ways, and the Governor General was the instrument by which this happened.
I thought, there's no way.
But then you told me that this actually happened in the UK not too long ago, and the dissolution of Parliament was ruled unconstitutional.
Tell me, first of all, how did you know that?
And second of all, what does it mean for Canada?
Well, kudos go to our lawyer, James Manson, who's based in Toronto.
And he looked at the situation.
He was aware of the United Kingdom Supreme Court ruling from 2019, where Boris Johnson had a minority government, didn't like the way that the Brexit, the United Kingdom's exit from the European Union was taking too long, prorogue Parliament for five weeks, which that was longer than the normal one to three weeks.
And it only took a month from the time that a citizen filed until they got a ruling from the Supreme Court of the United Kingdom.
And in a nutshell, they said, look, you can't use prorogation as a tool to promote the government's agenda.
The government must be accountable to Parliament.
So there's nothing wrong with prorogation when the Parliament session comes to a natural end.
But it was an abuse for partisan purposes.
And that's what we have here now.
But here, it's 11 weeks.
11 weeks.
If this was a one, two, three week prorogation, you know, fine.
But this is 11 weeks where Parliament's committees are shut down.
They cannot call a cabinet minister, compel a cabinet minister to come and answer to a committee.
And there's just no accountability.
You know, a moment ago, I said you can't challenge parliamentary supremacy, but actually, I got it upside down.
Parliament is supreme over the government.
But they're not allowed to come in and dismiss the government.
It's almost, I don't want to use the word coup because that's thrown around too much.
But when an unpopular prime minister is afraid of being thrown out and he dismisses parliament, he's the one violating parliamentary supremacy.
That's amazing.
So I understand that the federal court, is that where this is being heard, has granted you the right to a very speedy trial.
Normally these things take months or even years.
Years.
So you are getting into court when.
We are doing oral argument on Thursday, February 13th, Friday, February 14th.
And we could have a ruling as soon as Monday the 17th, Tuesday the 18th, because the court already has the written brief.
Right.
And the court really gave the federal government a bit of a reprimand.
The federal government came into court and said, we'll get back to you next week and we'll let you know our position as to whether or not we think that this is urgent.
And the judge wasn't buying it.
Which judge, remember which judge it was?
Crampton, the Chief Justice.
Oh, so the fact that they're bringing in the Chief Justice is very interesting.
And it makes sense because this is a very political ruling and you want the biggest boss of the federal court to make that ruling.
Perhaps a younger judge might be nervous to do something as dramatic as make a constitutional ruling like this.
So on the other hand, the Chief Justice is probably a political animal himself to get to the top of that greasy poll.
But if someone's going to rebuke the government, it had better be the Chief Justice as opposed to a more minor or junior justice.
I don't know.
Maybe I'm applying too much political lens to this, but it's an inherently political battle.
Yeah, I think it's a constitutional issue and there's no Canadian case law on it yet.
If somebody had thought about it back in the day, theoretically, somebody could have challenged Stephen Harper's prorogation of Parliament and, you know, who knows, a different fact scenario, but that would have been interesting.
But nobody did.
Nobody thought about it.
And in this situation here, it's not a COVID masks, vaccine, travel restriction, none of that.
Because as I've outlined in my book, we've had a serious problem with judges in Canada that they're writing the media narrative into their court rulings not supported by evidence.
But that was on the because there's so much fear.
This is like a totally different.
We don't have 24-hour a day media fear-mongering about what would happen if Parliament comes back into session before March 24th.
So it's just a fresh start.
Wow.
You know, it's so much audacity to, I forget exactly how many months Trudeau dissolved Parliament for, but it was enormous, all the way up to March 24th.
11 weeks.
And they got to come back by March 31st.
Otherwise, they need parliamentary authorization for the continued spending of money after March 31st.
11 weeks.
That's crazy.
I mean, that really is an authoritarian regime.
It's an abuse.
You know, prorogation for valid reasons, like the parliamentary session has come to a natural conclusion.
Okay, fine.
This is for the partisan interests of one political party.
You can't do that.
You know, it was a trick that he did it.
I mean, Trudeau was going to be fired.
Instead, he dissolved the people who were going to fire him.
He said, I'm going to resign in the future, but he didn't resign.
He's still going on junkets.
I just saw a headline that he's off to Paris for another luxury junk.
He's trying to wring out everything he can.
But it would be quite something if you managed to overturn this.
Because when did you say your hearing was again?
February 13th and 14th.
That's right, and you think the result could be known as soon as the 16th or something, or something like that.
The Liberal leadership race concludes on March 9th, which is one of the reasons it's scheduled that way.
They wanted to get to install, to select the new prime minister through the Liberal Party apparatus as opposed to through Parliament.
That's extra insane.
There would be quite something if Parliament was brought back before the Liberals finished their shenanigans.
And that's their mess.
Why should Canadians have to wait around for their mess to be sorted out?
Well, that's one of the points that, you know, a political party, neither the Liberal Party nor any other party is a constitutional player.
These parties, they exist, they're real, but constitutionally, it's irrelevant.
It's like, well, this is bad for your party.
Well, too bad.
Political Shenanigans00:07:41
Hey there, Rebel News listeners.
Do you have a business or cause that you want to promote to the tens of thousands of regular Rebel News viewers?
Now's your chance.
Whether it's ads on podcasts like this one, videos, our website, or even our digital billboard truck, Rebel News has your advertising needs covered.
It's easy to get started.
Just head over to rebelnews.com/slash advertise.
That's rebelnews.com slash advertise.
Fill out our form and find out how Rebel News can help spread your message today.
Don't wait.
Advertise with Rebel News.
Reach freedom-loving patriots and support our independent journalism.
Are there any interveners who've asked to join as a friend of the court, as they say, to give a briefing or a point of view?
Or is it just you guys alone?
I think that perhaps I have to get back to you on it.
Perhaps the Canadian Civil Liberties Association may have.
No, the Democracy Watch.
Democracy Watch, to my knowledge, is intervening.
And I think that's probably on your side, I would imagine.
On our side.
You know, they're not bad.
They're a little lefty, but actually, I think they do good work.
I think so too.
Wow.
Well, I'm really excited about that.
And that is coming up so soon.
Huh, that's great.
Well, tell me some of the other stuff you do in your book is out.
Corrupted by Fear, How the Charter Was Betrayed and What Canadians Can Do About It.
I wrote the book arose in part because when I was going to public meetings in Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, Regina, Saskatoon, whatever, at public meetings, people often, every public meeting I went to, there's at least one person that said, what is going on with these judges?
Are they getting thick wads of $100 bills?
Are they getting threatening phone calls from the prime minister telling him that they have to rule for lockdowns or get into trouble?
Are they getting threatening emails from the World Economic Forum?
And my answer was no, no, no, I don't believe that.
But the question is valid.
Why are judges?
So when, you know, the Justice Center, we sued governments across Canada over lockdowns of vaccine passports and lost pretty much every case.
Some of them we had minor, partial victories, but on the whole, the governments would admit in court, yes, lockdowns violate the freedoms of conscience, religion, expression, association, peaceful assembly, mobility, travel, bodily autonomy.
Yes, all these rights and freedoms are violated by lockdowns and travel restrictions.
The governments admitted that in court.
But then they said, ah, but it's justified under Section 1.
And so what's going on?
So we have, for example, in the Gateway case in Manitoba, the judge wrote into his judgment, COVID is unprecedented, and it's the worst global pandemic in a century.
Both of which are false.
COVID is not unprecedented.
We had the Spanish flu of 1918, which was much, much worse.
Even in the 20th century, the Asian flu of 1957 was more deadly.
The Hong Kong flu of 1968 was more deadly than COVID.
So he writes these false assertions into his judgment for which there's no evidence put before the court.
So corrupted by fear, my thesis is judges are not getting thick wads of $100 bills.
They're not getting threatening phone calls from the prime minister.
They're not getting nasty emails from the WEF.
But they bought into this media fear-mongering.
You know, every hour of every day, it's all, oh, COVID, it's unprecedented.
And people who are full of fear, they don't think clearly.
And that's my thesis.
You know, it's interesting you say that.
One of the cases that the Democracy Fund helped fund was that of Arthur Pavlovsky, the Christian pastor from Calgary.
And he would give sermons and do Facebook posts and do TV interviews where he would be a skeptic or a dissident on the conventional government narrative about COVID.
And so a judge named Adam Germain, who has since retired.
This is a chapter in my book.
Oh, is it really?
I'm excited to read that.
Keep on talking about it.
So Adam Germain made an astonishing ruling saying that whenever Arthur Pavlovsky, the pastor, would say anything that contradicted the official government narrative, he had to immediately then take out this little card that Judge Germain had written.
What I've said is contrary to, like, he's got the majority of scientists.
He's got to self-denounce, self-denounce any form, self-denounce after a sermon, self-denounce after a media interview, basically compelled speech.
And it was so stupid.
The judge thought, oh, I'll just write what this guy has to say with no basis.
But I thought about why would Adam Germaine do that?
I mean, he's a liberal and he's a political judge, but I think it's because, and I read his ruling, he talked about, well, everyone knows someone who's died from COVID.
And I thought, I don't.
And maybe if you're in your 70s, maybe you, you know, that is the age.
As we know, most people who died from COVID were very old, were sick with other things.
So maybe in this judge's little world, maybe all the people in their 70s and 80s that were his peer group, maybe they all did know someone who died.
And maybe because you're a 70-something year-old judge, you're not going out to where young people go.
You're not going to the gyms or the bars or the restaurants or on the streets.
You sort of are cocooning at home.
So you just live with your fear and the TV set pumping you with propaganda.
Whereas young people are saying, hey, can I leave my house, please?
No, don't go out there.
So the most nervous guys in the world, judges, the most obedient to authority, judges, that's their whole currency is obey.
I think that in the minds of all these 70-something judges was exactly what you say, fear and outrage that anyone would defy authority.
Even if the authority was truly stupid, like mask rules or you can sit down in a restaurant but not stand up, or maybe it was the opposite, I can't remember.
I thought about it a lot.
I think Adam Germain was living in a little weird cone or node of society.
And a lot of the decision makers were.
And the judges kept on getting their paycheck once every two weeks.
Yeah, the lockdown didn't hurt them.
It destroyed livelihoods.
It drove people into poverty.
It destroyed life savings.
A lot of small businessmen, their business is their retirement.
They don't have the generous public sector pension.
So they're hoping that when they're retiring at 60 or 70, whatever age, they will sell the business and get a half million or a million, and that's their retirement.
And then along come these chief medical officers who have zero understanding of business and economics, you know, and the likes of Jason Kenney, never had a private sector job.
And they just destroy businesses and it creates poverty, despair, all these lockdown harms.
And I think the judges, they were the privileged public sector class.
You just get your paycheck.
A lot of them work from home.
I remember there's a case of an Ontario judge who did his hearings by Zoom from the Caribbean.
Climate Lockdowns00:08:25
He went to the Caribbean and was having hearings and he had this fake backdrop behind him.
I mean, they loved, for them, it was a staycation.
I think there's a huge swath of society for whom the lockdowns were the best time of their life.
They never had to work less.
They could, like that judge, move to the Caribbean or work from the cottage.
I mean, it's amazing to me to see Donald Trump order every American civil service back to the office or you're fired.
We don't have the courage to do that in Canada.
I don't think most Canadians know that a huge swath of government workers haven't gone back to the office since 2020.
To this day, not surprising.
There's two worlds out there.
Hey, let me ask you this.
I mean, the lockdown and the pandemic and all the abuse of regulations and prosecutions, those are really winding down.
Tamara Leach's ruling will come out in March in Ottawa.
The Coutz protesters, they've, you know, those cases have pretty much run their course.
I don't know if there's going to be any appeals, but, you know, it's been three years really since the trucker convoy, and it's been five years since the pandemic.
So a lot of that litigation is done.
There's still some, but I'd say it's maybe 1% of what it was.
So what's the new front line for corrupted by fear?
What's the new thing that the courts are going to use as the justification to abridge our liberties?
I've got an idea, but I'd like to hear yours.
So generally, I try to avoid making predictions.
I'll depart from our usual practice.
So I predict the next aggressive assault or assaults, plural, on our rights and freedoms is not going to be because of a new virus.
It might be, I might be wrong.
It's going to be climate lockdowns.
It's going to be, you have to give up your rights and freedoms to prevent the world from burning into a crisp.
And so this is just, and the book is a warning to Canadians.
If you were pro-locked, if you thought lockdowns were good and vaccine passports were necessary and effective, let's say that's your viewpoint, you should still be very concerned about these court rulings where the courts have lowered the bar for government.
Justice Renee Pomerance said, instead of the Section 1, the government has to demonstrably justify with cogent and persuasive evidence that its lockdowns are doing more good than harm.
Instead of that test, which is up here, she said, the question is, was it open to Ontario to do what it did?
A total lowering of the bar.
So my challenge to people who are pro-lockdown is, do you want courts that are going to rubber stamp anytime the government comes along and says, it's an emergency, our solution's the only way to deal with it, and we're violating rights and freedoms, but you better agree with us, otherwise people are going to die.
Anyway, I predict climate lockdowns.
What do you think?
Well, it's interesting because in the United Kingdom, they're really moving forward on this 15-minute cities thing.
That's part of the...
They call it ULEZ, Ultra Low Emission Zones.
Oh, no.
And they have countless spy cameras that are tracking who's moving when, and they'll issue you a fine if you travel when you're not supposed to.
By the way, there's sort of an anarchist response to that.
People who call themselves blade runners run around and with a metal saw and knock these down by the hundred.
It's like a game of cat and mouse.
But the climate lockdown is sort of proceeding even in the UK.
I want to tell you something.
We haven't released it yet, but I went back to see how the recovery in Maui after the wildfires was going.
We were there when the wildfires swept through a town of Lahaina, killed more than 100.
It was shocking, devastated the town.
So the LA, we haven't released this yet.
We're going to do so very soon.
The LA fires destroyed an enormous part of some beautiful neighborhoods in LA.
And I thought, well, gee, how is the recovery going in Maui?
That's probably going to be a premonition of how it goes to LA.
So we went to Maui just for a day.
Almost nothing has been rebuilt.
Oh.
Except the government, and I'm sort of scooping myself here, but consider this like a teaser for what we're going to roll out.
They've set up a kind of FEMA camp that reminded me more than anything of the Australian COVID detention camp.
I don't know if you ever saw video footage.
It was this huge prison-like camp with hundreds of tiny homes where COVID people were going to be stacked.
And they never really took off, but they were built and some people used them.
That's what I saw in Maui.
They haven't rebuilt the town, but they put all those people in sort of COVID-style.
It's like a low security, minimum security prison.
And I was just stunned that this was happening and no one was like, why do I tell this story?
First of all, it reminded me of nothing so much as that COVID internment camp.
But people have been commissioned to accept it.
You're living in a camp.
You're not allowed to return to your land.
It's done in the name of safety.
Oh, it's all for a good cause.
You're saving lives.
But they've agreed to it.
Now, Hawaii is a little different than most American places, but I thought this was land of the free.
There are hundreds of people stored in this kind of...
You're saying the Hawaiian people are living in this camp.
Yeah.
The government set up this?
Yeah, the government has not rebuilt their homes.
They put them in this camp.
Let's hope it's temporary.
But this British thing, when I said climate lockdowns, I'm talking more broadly about using this idea, which I don't think has actual scientific support.
This idea that we control the weather.
You and I control the weather based on heating our homes in winter, how frequently we drive the car around.
If we drive our cars less, then we control the climate.
But based on that pretext, if we accept that, and if we accept that global warming is a bad thing, which my view it's not.
But if you accept the whole narrative, right, mankind controls the weather, warming is bad, and so on, it leads to that next step where the government can take away all your rights and freedoms.
Like, you know, you don't need a car.
You're just going to use public transit.
You don't need to fly to places.
You've got Zoom and telephones, and you have the violation of rights and freedoms in the name of saving the earth from the climate holocaust.
Well, the World Economic Forum had that famous essay and video, you'll own nothing and you'll be happy.
And it was this dystopian future where everything was like an Uber, just a temporary rental.
So the means of production, the assets, you were just passing through life.
You never accumulated anything.
If you needed a place to stay for a bit, you would rent.
If you needed a place to work for a while, you would rent.
It was taking the gig lifestyle to its insane conclusion.
And the irony is the masters of the universe would never live that way themselves.
They're all about asset accumulation and wealth.
This is for the poorest.
I was at the World Economic Forum also.
There was a guy giving away bug protein, like insect protein candy bars, and people were taking them.
And I can assure you, the oligarchs who run that place are not eating bugs.
But like you say, for climate reasons, the little people have to.
And my Maui example was a little bit off point, but I'm saying a lot of people are conditioned now to accept things that they would not have done.
The pandemic broke our spirit in a lot of ways.
Just like now when we go on a plane, we're used to taking off our shoes and being poked and prodded and being groped by the TSA.
That would have been shocking before that, but 9-11 broke that psychological barrier.
COVID broke another psychological barrier.
Now we accept the government saying, you can't go there.
You can't get on a plane.
You have to wear a mask.
We have the right to look in your home while you're six feet separated.
Like, I think that these real crises, 9-11 was a crisis.
Pandemic's Psychological Impact00:03:37
COVID was sort of a trumped up crisis.
They were used to demolish age-old sensibilities of our freedom.
And I think the government learned they can get away with a lot and want to do a lot more.
The good news is we've got a stronger freedom movement in Canada now than what we did in 2019.
Yeah, that's true.
I know I have met so many people who said that pre-lockdowns, they barely voted if that.
And beyond that, they tuned out all the newest political developments, not involved at all.
And now you've got this freedom movement of people who pre-2020, again, totally not engaged, are now active federally, provincially, municipally, school board levels.
So we've got an awake freedom move.
I talk about that in the book as well.
There is a freedom movement in Canada.
And as it grows, there is pushback.
There will be more of it.
And I think, you know, we need to change the culture and have a culture where people cherish and respect their rights and freedoms.
And that's something that's within our power to do that.
We can effect cultural change.
Yeah.
You know, one of the things that I look back at Donald Trump's first presidency, I think his most important legacy from that term was his judicial appointments to the Supreme Court, of course, but also every court below.
And Trump doesn't know that domain.
He had the Federalist Society, which is a freedom-oriented sort of legal fraternity, I would call it.
They helped develop lists and vet them.
And so they really work closely with Trump to find the people.
Trump doesn't have that network.
He's not a lawyer himself.
I think Stephen Harper's greatest missed opportunity in his term was he didn't take the courts seriously.
He allowed the justice ministers to appoint their buddies, really.
I think if Pierre Pollier becomes prime minister later this year, and there's a real chance he will, I think one of those culture-changing, long-term strategic moves has to be to find and help incubate legal and judicial and law professor and law student talent so that if Polly was prime minister for four or eight years, he can do hundreds of appointments that'll slowly turn the ship around.
I think that's the number one error Harper made.
Well, I agree with you.
Harper appointed, for example, in Saskatchewan.
There's a judge, Michael McGaw, ordered a 12-year-old girl to be injected with the mRNA vaccine, contrary to the girl's wishes, contrary to the mother's wishes.
But worse, he takes it to the next level.
He says he takes judicial notice of the fact that the vaccine is safe and effective for adults and children.
And his reason for taking judicial notice is that because Health Canada and the Saskatchewan Health Authority have said that the vaccine is safe and effective.
And no reasonable person would dispute what a government body has said about the vaccine.
This is a Harper appointment.
So, I mean, people get upset about, you know, Trudeau appointments.
And it's, okay, well, fine, you know, get upset about that.
Harper appointed some very good judges, you know, Russ Brown to the Supreme Court of Canada.
He's no longer on that court.
And he appointed a few good judges.
But a lot of the Harper appointments are, they're as bad as the Trudeau appointments.
They're left-wing ideologues.
They don't respect and cherish and appreciate freedom.
Yeah.
Inspired Days Ahead00:01:12
Well, it's very interesting days.
I'm inspired by what's going on in America.
And I hope we have a small echo of that up here.
We sure need it.
John, it's great to see you again.
What's the best way to follow your work, jccf.ca?
jccf.ca.
And the book Corrupted by Fear, bestseller on Amazon, so Amazon.ca.
That's great.
Well, listen, you're a role model.
You're an inspiration.
You fight for freedom every day at some personal cost too.
A lot of bad guys try and come for you because you're making a difference.
Keep it up.
And we've got you back here at Rebel News.
Thank you.
Right on.
Cheers.
There you have it.
John Carpe, one of the good guys.
It's nice to spend some time with him in person at our world headquarters.
Until next time, on behalf of all of us here at Rebel News, to you at home, good night and keep fighting for freedom.
Thanks for tuning in to this podcast.
If you appreciate the news that Rebel brings you, consider being a part of what makes it possible.
You can do so by subscribing to our exclusive content at RebelNewsPlus.com.
That means get exclusive shows, documentary, behind the scenes, and more.