Rebel News Podcast - A case study in propaganda： How the left-wing media demonized Trump through photographs

00:00:00.000 Hello, my Rebels. Today, boy, I tell you a story about pictures. I go through various photographs

00:00:07.620 of Donald Trump that have been doctored or that certain color filters have been added to by the

00:00:14.320 mainstream media. You can listen to the story, but boy, I wish you could see it in video,

00:00:19.040 because I take you through about three or four photographs and videos, and I talk about the

00:00:23.080 color of Trump's face. You know, that sounds funny, but his enemies say he's orange. I actually don't

00:00:30.420 think he's orange. I think just a few photographers put on an orange filter. I'm going to try and prove

00:00:35.340 that. Anyways, if you want to see the video version of this podcast, go to premium.rebelnews.com.

00:00:43.100 Sign up for the video version. It's eight bucks a month.

00:00:46.820 Uh, anyways, enjoy the podcast. I, uh, I hope it makes you curious enough that you check out the vid.

00:00:55.300 Here it goes.

00:01:00.520 You're listening to our podcast.

00:01:10.960 Tonight, a small case study in propaganda, how the left-wing media demonizes Trump

00:01:16.720 through photographs. It's October 3rd, and this is the Ezra LeVant Show.

00:01:23.180 Why should others go to jail when you're a biggest carbon consumer I know?

00:01:26.860 There's 8,500 customers here, and you won't give them an answer.

00:01:30.920 The only thing I have to say to the government, the wire publisher, is because it's my bloody right to do so.

00:01:42.140 Do you remember this outrageous story by Trudeau's CBC State broadcaster?

00:01:46.420 It was right after Donald Trump was inaugurated, and the CBC literally hired actors to go around

00:01:52.980 Canadian cities pretending to be racists and trying to entrap unsuspecting Canadian citizens

00:01:59.140 into saying or doing racist things in reply. It was so contrived. It was the definition

00:02:04.820 of fake news. It was a Jussie Smollett-style hoax. It goes to show you how unhateful Canada is.

00:02:12.820 The Trudeau's state broadcaster had to literally pay actors to be racist because they couldn't find

00:02:18.520 any naturally occurring racists. Just awful, unethical in every way.

00:02:23.840 By the way, they also stole our trademarked hats, make Canada great again, and tried to imply that

00:02:29.120 making Canada great again was somehow racist. We had our lawyers write to their lawyers,

00:02:33.760 and they actually apologized and agreed never to do it again, and they destroyed all their

00:02:37.640 counterfeit hats. What a bunch of thieves they are. Anyways, one of the things that always stood 0.98

00:02:42.960 out to me, and remember this was done by a consumer production show on the CBC called Marketplace,

00:02:48.580 a show that's supposed to expose fraud, not conduct fraud. One of the things that stuck

00:02:53.920 out to me was the deceptive coloring of Trump's face. Look at this. Look at how they make his face

00:03:00.540 redder and redder and redder. Take a look. We want to know if the Trump effect has come to Canada.

00:03:07.280 We want to have the wall, a great border wall. They're bringing drugs. They're rapists. A total

00:03:15.080 and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States. We don't want them in our country. 1.00

00:03:22.360 We will make America great again. Look at that. In 20 seconds, the CBC made his face redder and

00:03:32.320 redder. Look at how it was 15 seconds ago. It was normal. Maybe they made it a little bit redder

00:03:38.640 there to begin with. And then look at how red his face was 15 seconds later. That's a form of

00:03:45.280 propaganda. That's deception. It's altering an image. It's literally fake news, just like hiring

00:03:51.460 fake actors to be fake racists. I mean, if you can't find any racists in Canada other than the

00:03:56.340 racists you've hired, maybe it's not the Trump effect. Maybe it's the CBC effect. You're causing

00:04:01.980 the racism. Maybe Captain Blackface is the racist. Anyways, I've been thinking a lot about that 0.81

00:04:08.900 outrageous instance of fake news because they do that trick all the time, particularly with

00:04:14.080 Donald Trump, because he is an unusual looking man. His hair, his face, his skin color, a little bit

00:04:19.740 unusual, especially when it's matched to his personal style. Now, perhaps the CBC would say,

00:04:24.420 well, that Marketplace video, it was just for dramatic effect. It was all autistic licensed. 0.98

00:04:29.380 They're not trying to fake you out or deceive you. It's just an artistic interpretation. Yeah, right.

00:04:35.160 On CBC Marketplace, a show dedicated to fighting against false advertising and deceptive practices.

00:04:40.800 Like I say, it was a disgrace. But how about a straight news show? Literally just a random video

00:04:45.880 on CBC News. Well, look at this picture that the CBC used as a thumbnail on a video about a Trump

00:04:52.940 meeting. Look at that picture. Is that touched up too? Now, CBC itself didn't take that picture.

00:05:01.140 A photographer with Reuters named Kevin Lamarck took it, and it was widely published by every

00:05:06.260 anti-Trump newspaper in the world. Is that really what Trump looks like? Or did they touch it up a bit?

00:05:14.240 Like the kids do on their Instagram photos. Did they make him look a bit more orange?

00:05:22.600 That's what they say. They call him the orange man. They love it as their insult. Did this

00:05:27.440 professional photographer at Reuters alter his photos to make him more orange? I mean, that's

00:05:33.500 obviously why the CBC chose that photo. Save them the trouble of altering it themselves.

00:05:38.880 Here's the link to Kevin Lamarck's entire body of work. Scroll through it. He hates Trump.

00:05:47.160 Forget about just coloring the photos. He must take hundreds of photos, or more likely just

00:05:52.080 takes a high-definition video stream and then selects the instant, the one instant, the one frame 1.00

00:05:58.720 that makes Trump look like a total idiot. That one moment where he makes a certain shape with his mouth 1.00

00:06:04.800 that we all do when we pronounce a certain thing. But if you froze it there, you'd look insane. 0.52

00:06:10.560 Like this one. Or this one. This is actually another one. Kevin Lamarck isn't doing this by accident.

00:06:19.200 If he was this bad in all his photos, he'd be fired. Reuters has him do awful photos only on this one

00:06:26.180 subject, Donald Trump, because they want to make Trump look like a blithering fool who gets his tongue 1.00

00:06:30.840 caught in his orange mouth. It's the same reason why the glamorous supermodel, Melania Trump, 1.00

00:06:37.320 who has graced the cover of every fashion magazine in the world, hasn't been on a single magazine cover

00:06:42.920 since she's been first lady, whereas the less photogenic Michelle Obama was on a new glamour mag 1.00

00:06:49.480 every month. They hate Melania, or they hate her only because of her marriage to Trump. If they do show

00:06:55.480 Melania Trump, it's always looking sad or sullen. They actually have a media narrative. 0.99

00:07:00.040 She's so unhappy. She truly feels trapped by Trump. We must save her from him. She's a beautiful woman

00:07:05.880 who always smiles. But do you really think Reuters, the company that specifically signs Kevin Lamarck

00:07:11.640 to cover Donald Trump, do you think they'd ever show her smiling to let her look pretty?

00:07:17.560 It's literally fake news. But let me show you something I just noticed now.

00:07:21.560 Trump just had a press conference with the president of Finland. Obviously, all the questions from the

00:07:27.320 American media were about the fake news scandal du jour impeachment or something, Ukraine or something.

00:07:31.640 I mean, not one in ten of those White House reporters could find Finland on a map.

00:07:35.720 Here's how I first heard of this meeting with the Finnish president.

00:07:38.920 It was in a tweet from the New York Times. This tweet.

00:07:43.320 Donald Trump responds to reporters' question about Ukraine during a meeting in the Oval Office.

00:07:48.280 Wow. He literally looks insane there. He looks like he's screaming. And the color of his face, 0.93

00:07:55.720 orange, red, pink. And his teeth are so white and his hair is so light, it serves to make the

00:08:01.080 orangeness of his face impossibly sharp. It's almost like you're looking at a negative photograph,

00:08:05.720 you know? Super white, super dark, white teeth, white hair, orange, red face. And oh, he's showering,

00:08:11.320 isn't he? And it reminded me of the other photographs, the Kevin Lamarck specials.

00:08:15.800 And I thought, I wonder if I can check what Trump really looked like before they put him through the

00:08:21.320 filter. Let me check because I think this is more fake news. This time it's not from some

00:08:26.360 losers at Justin Trudeau's CBC state broadcaster in Canada. And it's not from that weirdo Kevin 0.98

00:08:31.560 Lamarck, I don't think. The tweet, at least, is from the New York Times. Is that really what Trump

00:08:37.560 looked like? Really? At the Finland meeting? Really? Well, let's see. I'll show you some video first,

00:08:43.720 which is what I watched. Because I wanted to see if Trump really was screaming. So here's,

00:08:48.840 I don't know, 30 seconds from CNN. Not exactly Trump fans over there. What does Trump look like?

00:08:55.000 What did he sound like at this meeting?

00:09:00.280 Well, the whistleblower was very inaccurate. The whistleblower started this whole thing by writing

00:09:04.920 a report on the conversation I had with the president of Ukraine. And the conversation was

00:09:11.560 perfect. It couldn't have been nicer. I saw Rick Scott. I saw many of the senators talking about

00:09:15.880 it. Many of the congressmen talking about it. Not a thing wrong. Unless you heard the Adam Schiff

00:09:22.680 version where he made up my conversation. He actually made it up. It should be criminal. It

00:09:26.920 should be treasonous. He made it up. Every word of it made up and read to Congress as though I said it.

00:09:34.280 And I'll tell you what. He should be forced to resign from Congress. Adam Schiff. He's a low life. He should be

00:09:40.520 forced to resign. Oh, so he wasn't screaming at all. He was mad, I think. But he was

00:09:46.360 in complete control. He was emphatic, maybe. But he was just being himself. And every

00:09:50.520 once in a while, he sort of grimaced just for a second in between phrases. He does that as a

00:09:54.920 mannerism. I think that's one of the split-second moments the photographer grabs to make it look like

00:09:59.880 he was screaming. It wasn't. It's sort of like how he punctuates his phrases. And the color. His hair

00:10:06.040 isn't white anymore, is it? It's blonde. His face is slightly orange in hue. I'll grant you that. 0.92

00:10:13.160 But it's not the bright orange and pink chromatic colors of that New York Times picture.

00:10:19.000 I think they whitened his teeth and his hair and reddened his face for the shocking contrast.

00:10:23.560 Look at that New York Times tweet again. Sorry, that's fake. That's doctored. That's

00:10:28.280 that's what the kids do on the Instagram filters to make themselves look funny.

00:10:31.240 Okay, well, maybe CNN got it wrong. Let's check with a pretty objective presidential chronicle,

00:10:39.800 Mark Noller of CBS. He says,

00:10:44.680 saying he has the duty to report corruption, President says Biden's son is corrupt, and Biden

00:10:48.840 is corrupt, and I'd rather run against Biden than almost any of those candidates. I think Biden has

00:10:53.000 never been a smart guy, and he's less smart now than he ever was since Trump. So Noller,

00:10:57.640 as you can see, is reporting what Trump said, and it's accurate. He doesn't imply Trump was screaming,

00:11:02.360 because Trump wasn't. And look at that photo. Blonde hair. I think that's a normal colored face.

00:11:09.560 At least nothing you'd say is insane. Like the New York Times photo makes you do. Like that old CBC

00:11:18.120 Kevin Lamarck photo makes you do. Here's the Washington Post video feed just for comparison.

00:11:22.920 Here, let's watch 30 seconds of this. I won the case. I didn't see one story that I won that case.

00:11:29.080 Not one story. From the fake news. I didn't see Steve write it. I didn't see you write it.

00:11:34.920 I didn't see anybody write it. So let me just tell you, just to finish. Nancy Pelosi and Shifty Shift, 0.96

00:11:43.560 who should resign, in disgrace, by the way, and Jerry Nadler and all of them,

00:11:49.560 it's a disgrace what's going on. And we should be focused on making America great again and keeping

00:11:55.080 America great. You can see those split-second facial tics that Trump does. Like this is for

00:12:00.920 a second the ones that the newspapers grab to make it look like he's shouting like a gorilla. He's not

00:12:05.000 shouting. There are his physical punctuation marks between his comments. But again, my main point is the

00:12:10.200 color here. Trump's normal, normal hair, normal face, normal teeth in this Washington Post video.

00:12:17.960 Washington Post hates Trump, and that's fine. It's a legitimate point of view, fair point of view.

00:12:23.080 But my friends, this photo that the New York Times published, I think it's actually a Reuters photo.

00:12:29.240 It's a lie. I mean, it's hard to imagine that a photo can lie. You know, we like that saying,

00:12:35.160 do you believe your lying eyes? Your eyes, you know, you see the truth. But your eyes can lie to you

00:12:40.760 if the picture is a lie, and it lies to you actually more effectively than any else

00:12:45.560 could lie. I mean, if someone was telling you a lie, telling you words, watching a video that was a

00:12:51.240 lie, it would not be as effective as a lie in a photograph because the lie is instant. You don't

00:12:56.760 even think about it. You don't have to pay attention and be convinced of it. A lying photograph is an instant

00:13:03.160 deception. You saw it. Trump is orange. You saw it with your own eyes. Trump is red and wild. Maybe

00:13:09.080 he's even insane. He was shouting. You saw the proof of it. Look, the words of the media party are fake 0.90

00:13:15.640 news. They're deceptive. In the case of the Canadian CBC, they outright literally did a hoax. But these photos,

00:13:22.520 they're just as bad. They're far more powerful. You just can't trust a word the mainstream media says.

00:13:31.560 And you know what? You can't even trust the photographs either. Stay with us for more.

00:13:37.800 We've created a multicultural chaos. Because the problems they see is there's blooming all over 1.00

00:13:55.880 Europe. You have no-go zones. You have rape epidemics. You have all kinds of problems. The

00:14:01.480 most that I've been told about was a young woman that was taken to a flat and she stopped counting at 36.

00:14:12.920 What? 30s? Six adults. Yeah, in one night. But what happened to left-wing feminist movements? 1.00

00:14:22.280 They seem, many of them, to be strangely silent on this issue. They do not understand that they are

00:14:28.040 taking their own graves. It's normal for these people when they think like that because it's our

00:14:37.960 religion. It's our real jihad. This is just, I don't know. I don't even know what to say. I'm speechless. 0.97

00:14:50.520 This is surreal.

00:14:54.360 I have to warn you that it doesn't matter how you produce and how you cut this documentary.

00:15:00.040 You have to know that you will be labeled a Nazi or a racist just because you made this movie.

00:15:06.280 So I have to warn you, watch out.

00:15:12.280 Well, that is a clip, various clips from the movie Killing Europe. I've, I haven't watched the whole

00:15:18.360 thing. I've skimmed it. It's a little bit of a low production value, as they say. Like I'd say,

00:15:23.800 if you went to see it in a big fancy movie theater, you'd say, oh, that felt a little homemade.

00:15:28.280 Could have used a little more editing. That's my recollection of when I watched it. But the subject

00:15:33.480 matter and even some of the personalities in it should be very familiar to Rebel viewers. Some of them

00:15:38.280 I interviewed when I myself visited Europe, including Sweden and other places. As you can see,

00:15:43.880 the main subject of it is the mass wave of Muslim immigration to Europe, both on the continent and

00:15:51.800 in the UK and how that has transformed to society. There's no doubt about it. The movie criticizes it.

00:15:57.880 Look at the title Killing Europe. But should people be able to watch that movie at all? Should Canadians 0.98

00:16:05.320 be able to pay to see it? Well, that was a matter that was before an Ontario court recently.

00:16:11.720 As a group of Canadians wanted to show that film in a public library in Ottawa, they rented the space.

00:16:21.800 They were selling tickets to people who wanted to see it until the censors deployed and de-platformed

00:16:28.600 the event, banning it. Well, the good news is there's still one or two Canadians who believe in freedom

00:16:34.120 of speech. And our old friend John Carpe of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedom took the case

00:16:39.800 for freedom of speech and he joins us now in studio. John, good to see you again. Good to see you.

00:16:44.360 Did I properly summarize what happened in Ottawa? It was an Ottawa public library, private room rental

00:16:51.640 by a group of people. They were going to show it to a group of ticket buyers and then some Antifa

00:16:58.520 style censors basically shouted the library into submission. I don't know if the censors were as bad

00:17:04.280 as Antifa. I mean, they're non-violent as far as we know, but people said, some individuals agitated

00:17:09.960 on Facebook and social media and whatnot and said, this is anti-Muslim hate speech. And so, no platform

00:17:18.280 for hate. And they put pressure on the library. The library had signed a contract. They had agreed to

00:17:24.280 do it. And of course, as always, you know, there's no formal complaints of hate speech, criminal hate

00:17:30.280 speech. There's no complaints filed with the police and there's no prosecution for hate speech. And

00:17:35.480 it's not criminal hate speech. But people say, oh, it's hate, it's hate. And then the Ottawa library

00:17:42.120 caved into political pressure, canceled the contract. And then the two ladies, Madeline Weld and Valerie

00:17:51.560 Price Thomas, took the library to court. And we lost the first round with the court saying,

00:17:59.320 kind of sidestepping the whole issue, but saying, well, we don't really have authority to review

00:18:04.200 the decision made by the public library. So they didn't say whether the public library's decision

00:18:10.040 was right or wrong. They just said, we don't really have jurisdiction over that.

00:18:12.840 Well, I mean, listen, I don't practice law anymore, but, you know, contract's a contract.

00:18:17.880 Why would the court claim it doesn't have jurisdiction to enforce a contract?

00:18:22.120 Well, because the claim was brought as a declaration that it was for judicial review. So the claim was brought

00:18:27.640 forward, not as a breach of contract. It was brought forward as a judicial review,

00:18:32.840 because the Ottawa library is a government body. And then the court said, we don't have jurisdiction.

00:18:38.040 And the court actually said, you could sue in contract. But I think that misses the whole point.

00:18:42.280 Right. Because the big point, in my view, is that you've got a public authority, a governmental body,

00:18:49.960 and they've decided, and they don't have to do this. They could fill up all their rooms with books,

00:18:55.320 but they've decided we're going to have some rooms that are publicly as a service to the public.

00:18:59.480 We're going to have some rooms that you can rent out. And then they've injected their own personal

00:19:05.160 politics into this and said, well, you're not allowed to rent the room because you've got,

00:19:08.200 you don't have the correct political views. So you're barred from renting the room. That's a problem.

00:19:14.040 Yeah. You know, I remember in law school many, many years ago, one of the cases that we studied,

00:19:19.800 and I remember it because it was just so interesting. It was called Ron Corelli versus

00:19:23.640 Duplessis. Yes, Duplessis. And it was the Jehovah's Witness restaurant owner. And the

00:19:29.160 Premier of Quebec was very upset with him. Because he was always posting bail. All these

00:19:33.000 Jehovah's Witnesses were doing things. Street preaching. And then they're getting arrested.

00:19:36.760 And then this guy, Ron Corelli, kept posting their bail. And so Duplessis was so mad, he said,

00:19:43.240 who is this Ron Corelli? Oh, he's got a liquor license? Take away his liquor license.

00:19:48.920 And it was for that political reason. And that case, and you correct me if I'm wrong,

00:19:53.240 set the rule that if you're in government, you can't use the instruments of government

00:19:57.240 for your personal vendettas. One of the many good principles out of that case, absolutely.

00:20:03.400 It's the rule of law. So why should, if the Premier of Quebec, a mighty position,

00:20:08.760 has to be neutral in how he exercises the power of the state, why should the Ottawa Public Library

00:20:15.160 be able to get away with it? Well, they shouldn't. And I, you know, we're talking about appealing the

00:20:20.600 case. We'll be announcing a decision at some point in the near future about whether we're going to

00:20:26.680 appeal it or not. There are pros and cons and there are costs and there's risks of furthering a bad

00:20:31.320 precedent. You know, it's complicated. So we're in discussion with the clients on it right now.

00:20:36.120 Did any lawyers intervene on behalf of the, of the library? No. No. So this is not,

00:20:44.440 this is not becoming a huge national case where everyone's lining up on either side.

00:20:48.200 This was just really a case of de-platforming and censorship.

00:20:51.160 In my view, that's absolutely, it's absolutely that. De-platforming and censorship saying,

00:20:58.280 you know, I don't like, I don't like your opinion. I don't like what you're saying.

00:21:01.880 So no platform for hate. I get to censor you and I get away with it because I'm, you know, this,

00:21:08.600 this holy angel or this, this, you know, wonderful person fighting against hatred and bigotry. So

00:21:13.720 I can get away with silencing you just by calling you hateful. This is the dynamic that's at play.

00:21:18.760 And it's very, very toxic. It's, it's very bad that you can simply censor something

00:21:24.200 by calling it hateful and ending the discussion.

00:21:27.880 Hate is a human emotion. Um, it's natural. We want to control our hate. We don't want to

00:21:33.080 become violent. We don't want to direct our hated injustice.

00:21:36.040 Yeah. And we want to transform our hate to into something positive. We want to use it as fuel to

00:21:40.680 be constructive and to fix the underlying grievance. I mean, hate often comes from a feeling of injustice.

00:21:47.400 Absolutely. And if you can take that and fix the underlying grievance, you've not only fixed

00:21:54.040 a problem, but you've turned off the tap for hate. So you can't just say we're going to all love each

00:21:59.880 other. And that's the law because if you haven't fixed the underlying problem, you've just, it's

00:22:04.440 like painting, it's like putting paint over a deeply rusted metal. You might've hidden the rust.

00:22:10.440 For a little while.

00:22:11.240 But, but you didn't fix the problem. I, you know what? I, this movie is a tough movie. I mean,

00:22:17.560 I didn't, I haven't watched the whole thing through, but I watched a large chunk of it.

00:22:21.960 My, my main reaction was, boy, this could have used a bit more spit and polish before it being

00:22:26.280 out there. But these people who wanted to see it, they wanted to see it. And, and I, and I have to

00:22:31.000 tell you, the censors who blocked it, they didn't change anyone's mind. If anything, I think they would

00:22:37.400 convince people that this film is powerful. It's so powerful that people want to block it.

00:22:41.960 Like there's something mysterious about something that's banned. I mean, every, every school boy who's

00:22:50.760 told he can't read some book because it's too grown up. Well, that's the only book they want

00:22:55.720 to read. You know, it adds a mystique to hate, to ban it, I think. Well, I, I saw the whole movie.

00:23:02.760 It is as biased as any other documentary. I don't think I've ever seen an unbiased documentary. When

00:23:08.200 people put together a documentary, typically they do have an opinion, a perspective, something that,

00:23:17.080 and some documentaries are better than others because they're more

00:23:20.440 honest. There's that movie, The Red Pill, for example. And the author said, you know, she went into

00:23:26.680 it, author, producer, creator, person went into it to, I guess, discover just how bad the men's rights 0.99

00:23:34.760 movement is. And over the course of time, you know, through interviewing a whole bunch of people,

00:23:40.120 she had a shift in, in, in her opinion. And at the end of the movie, she says, I no longer

00:23:45.400 call myself a feminist. Okay. So maybe that, so, but the point is this, every documentary is got some kind

00:23:53.400 of perspective or viewpoint or, or bias. And, you know, every media story has bias, even if they're

00:24:01.240 trying to be objective. This is a very negative take on the negative impact of the Muslim migrants 1.00

00:24:08.760 coming into Europe in 2015. But it is open to anybody else to argue that it's wrong, that it's biased.

00:24:17.240 Other people can produce documentaries that show the positive impact of immigration into Europe and

00:24:23.960 how positive impacts could include, you know, this, maybe it's enriched the culture or it's done this,

00:24:29.160 that, the other thing. But just to shut it down with the name calling, I think is, that's bad for

00:24:35.560 the free society. Yeah. I got a question for you, because in recent weeks, we've seen a lot more

00:24:40.280 censorship, more and more brazen all the time, I think. And there are groups that maybe 30,

00:24:47.320 40 years ago would have roused themselves. I mean, I think back to the best moments of the ACLU,

00:24:57.080 where they would send a black or a Jewish lawyer to defend Ku Klux Klan members.

00:25:04.760 Or anti-Semitic speech. Yeah. And the reason they sent the Jews and the blacks 1.00

00:25:10.520 is to make the point, obviously, we don't agree with the Klan, we're Jewish and black,

00:25:16.760 but we understand that you have to fight for freedom for everyone. And there was something

00:25:20.520 really noble about that, I thought. And in Canada, there was a moment where we had that,

00:25:25.400 when Alan Borevoy ran the Canadian Civil Liberties Union. I think he was part of that old-school,

00:25:31.080 60s mentality, civil liberties. I have not seen in five, maybe 10 years, an organization in Canada,

00:25:40.280 Penn International, Canadian Association of Journalists, Canadian Journalists for Free Expression,

00:25:49.480 Amnesty International. I have not seen any of these so-called civil liberties groups,

00:25:55.880 including ones with a focus on journalism. I just simply haven't seen one of them stand up for free

00:26:02.200 speech at all, even for leftist free speech. Can you think of one case? Like, banning movies,

00:26:10.600 and everyone's, yeah, that's so cool. It's okay. There is a good exception. In British Columbia,

00:26:16.760 the BC Civil Liberties Association has consistently defended the free speech rights of pro-lifers.

00:26:22.600 Okay, good for them. Even though the British Columbia Civil Liberties Association is avowedly

00:26:27.560 pro-choice, disagrees with the pro-life speech entirely, but says they have a right. And they

00:26:32.680 represented the Youth Protecting Youth, which was a pro-life club at the University of Victoria.

00:26:38.600 Okay, well, I'm very glad to be corrected on that. So they're good. But sadly, you know,

00:26:44.200 you look at the Trinity Western litigation. In 2001, when the BC Teachers College

00:26:49.800 took the same approach that the Law Societies did and said, you know, because you, 0.98

00:26:54.440 the BC Teachers College said to Trinity Western University, because you believe that gay sex is 0.96

00:27:00.520 sinful, you are not eligible or qualified to run a teacher's program to train up teachers. 0.99

00:27:08.680 That was in a nutshell, right? And then 15 years later, the Law Society say the same thing.

00:27:12.840 Because you think that gay sex is sinful, and for that reason alone, for no other reason, 0.96

00:27:17.000 you're not allowed to start a law school, even though we admit that the law school that you 0.98

00:27:21.880 propose is academically sound and meets all the professional criteria. But there, they shifted.

00:27:28.200 And 15 years ago, the Canadian Civil Liberties Association came down on the pro-freedom side

00:27:34.040 of, with Trinity Western saying, they have a right to have their teaching program. Because,

00:27:40.920 you know, if they have, they happen to think that sex outside of marriage is sinful, well,

00:27:47.000 they have that freedom. 15 years later, Civil Liberties Association came down on the side of

00:27:52.680 the Law Societies against Trinity Western University. Very disappointing.

00:27:56.280 Well, disappointing is the understatement. They-

00:27:59.640 They might still be good on free speech. You know, credit where credit's due.

00:28:03.320 Well, show me where that's the case. I accept your statement that the BC Civil Liberties Group is good.

00:28:09.560 I haven't seen a thing out of the Canadian version. Not one thing. And maybe I've missed it,

00:28:15.480 but I think I've got my finger on the pulse of free speech, at least in Toronto and nationally.

00:28:20.520 And I haven't seen that peep from them ever. If you go to their website, I mean,

00:28:25.000 let me just use the Canadian journalist for free expression. Pretty clear in their name,

00:28:29.000 what they stand for. Never are they against censorship rules that I've seen. In fact,

00:28:34.440 their last big petition was to ban Donald Trump himself from speaking in Canada when

00:28:40.440 trying to get him banned from speaking at the G7 conference. First of all-

00:28:44.360 That's insane.

00:28:45.400 What's that got to do with your function? But I guess if the only thing is banning speech,

00:28:52.280 your name is false advertising now. I find it deeply depressing, which is why I like talking

00:28:57.080 to you because at least it's nice to see one guy fighting back. Well, listen, thanks for keeping us

00:29:01.000 posted on this case. I'm pretty sure you can find this movie online because that's where I would

00:29:06.120 have seen it. I watched it. You can spend three,

00:29:08.440 four or five dollars and see it online. I think that's what I did. Yeah, it's called Killing Europe.

00:29:13.560 And I think everyone is fairly familiar with the story now because four years later,

00:29:18.600 we've learned so much more about that mass migration wave. I'm glad you're fighting for

00:29:22.840 free speech in Canada's capital city. Thank you. All right, there you have it, John Carpe. He's the boss

00:29:28.600 of the Justice Center for Constitutional Freedom. You can check it all out at jccf.ca. And like us,

00:29:36.840 he doesn't take a dime from government, so he depends on you, my fellow viewer and friend of John.

00:29:43.560 All right, stay with us. More Ahead on the Rebel.

00:29:54.280 Well, that's our show for today. What do you think of my thesis I made earlier?

00:29:57.720 That a photograph is actually the most powerful propaganda tool,

00:30:01.560 even more than words, even more than a video, because you have to pay attention to something

00:30:05.960 that's unfolding in words or video or reading. Photograph, you just see it in the corner of your

00:30:09.480 eye. You don't even know that you've ingested it. Trump was orange and pink and shouting. I saw it with my

00:30:16.600 own eyes. If someone said, hey, guys, Trump was orange and pink and shouting, you'd have to pay

00:30:22.360 attention. You have to think about it. You maybe or maybe wouldn't be convinced, but you see it.

00:30:26.840 It's done. It's in your mind already. I think photographs are the most powerful propaganda.

00:30:33.560 And in politics, they're used all the time. When was the last time you saw a bad

00:30:38.920 media party photo of Justin Trudeau? When was the time you saw a good media party photo of, I don't

00:30:45.560 know, Stephen Harper, the late Rob Ford? You never do. I think we have to be alert to this,

00:30:53.160 and I think the CBC is one of the worst of it. They're into hoaxes all the time.

00:30:59.080 All right. Well, that's our show for today. Until tomorrow,

00:31:01.480 on behalf of all of us here at Rebel World Headquarters, to you at home, good night,

00:31:05.400 and keep fighting for freedom.

Rebel News Podcast - October 04, 2019

A case study in propaganda： How the left-wing media demonized Trump through photographs

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript