EZRA LEVANT ｜ Rumble, Rebel News fight for freedom with latest lawsuit
Episode Stats
Words per minute
169.15736
Harmful content
Misogyny
5
sentences flagged
Hate speech
9
sentences flagged
Summary
We've been working on this case for almost a year. It's when they illegally tried to deplatform us at our Rebel Live conference in Toronto last year. I'll have all the details, including the lawsuit itself, in this episode.
Transcript
00:00:00.000
Oh, hi, everybody. We're suing the government. I know we do that from time to time, but we've
00:00:05.180
been working on this case for almost a year. It's when they illegally tried to de-platform us
00:00:10.380
at our Rebel Live Rumble Live conference in Toronto last year. I'll have all the details,
00:00:15.700
including the lawsuit itself. I think this is an important one. I'll take you through the lawsuit
00:00:21.260
and you'll see why. But first, let me invite you to become a subscriber to what we call Rebel News
00:00:25.320
Plus. That's the video version of this podcast. Just go to rebelnewsplus.com, click subscribe.
00:00:30.800
It's eight bucks a month. You get the video version of this podcast, but just as importantly,
00:00:35.180
you get the satisfaction of keeping Rebel News strong and independent because we take no
00:00:55.320
Tonight, after nearly a year of planning, we're suing the Liberal government and Ya'ara
00:01:02.740
Sachs. It's April 7th, and this is the Ezra LeVance Show.
00:01:12.180
Remember last year when Rebel News held a two-day conference in Toronto? Hundreds of people came,
00:01:26.340
including many who drove for hours just to be there. We teamed up with Rumble, the free speech
00:01:31.520
competitor to YouTube, who brought some of their biggest content creators, including Viva Fry,
00:01:36.420
the Canadian live streamer, Glenn Greenwald, the free speech advocate, and Donald Trump Jr. It was
00:01:43.140
actually a great event, but it almost didn't happen because the Liberal government tried to
00:01:48.160
cancel it. They tried to de-platform it. You see, the conference venue was located at Downsview Park.
00:01:55.300
That's a former Canadian military base in the Toronto area. So the underlying real estate is still the
00:02:01.740
property of the federal government and the Liberals, including the local member of parliament,
00:02:06.240
Ya'ara Sachs, tried to use that fact to pressure the conference venue into ripping up their contract
0.80
00:02:13.760
with us. That's obviously illegal. That's a kind of extortion. We had a signed contract with the venue
00:02:21.520
operator, and we paid the rent in advance. But at the last minute, the government threatened that
00:02:26.880
venue operator and demanded that we spend tens of thousands of dollars on unnecessary security fees,
00:02:33.660
or they would shut us down. They assumed we couldn't pay that much, and they were right. They induced a breach
00:02:40.480
of contract, but they didn't count on Rumble paying the ransom and calling their bluff. So the last minute
00:02:47.660
the conference went ahead, and all Ya'ara Sachs could do was rage against it on Twitter. Well, that was last
00:02:55.280
spring. And we've spent months meticulously researching what the Liberals did behind the scenes, including
00:03:03.280
by filing access to information requests and interviewing key people. So here's my news. Earlier
00:03:11.280
today, we filed a whopping $287,000 lawsuit against the federal government, including against Ya'ara Sachs herself,
00:03:21.120
for illegally interfering with our civil rights. You can find the lawsuit in full at
00:03:27.680
StopDeplatforming.com. I really encourage you to read it. It's 21 pages long, but it's in plain English,
00:03:34.960
and it tells an outrageous story. In addition to Ya'ara Sachs, we found six different government
00:03:40.880
officials who tried illegally to interfere with our conference, like Robert Ng, who said, quote,
00:03:47.120
quote, we might attract an undesirable crowd. Who are you to say that? Or Andrea Thompson,
00:03:53.360
who said, quote, I suppose we can't stop these undesirable events. Really? And Roxanne Krause,
00:04:00.720
who said, quote, I love a new challenge talking about stopping us. Thompson wrote, quote, I'm wondering
00:04:07.920
if you think there's any language within the lease agreement that would permit us to stop this event
00:04:12.080
from happening. She knew our conference was legal. She knew what she was trying to do was illegal. She
0.99
00:04:18.480
didn't care. She was going to find a way to stop us. As you can see, we've got their emails plotting to
00:04:24.960
violate our civil rights. Imagine how brazen you have to be to put it in writing. I wonder how often
00:04:30.720
they've done this to other people on their enemies list, too. You really ought to read the lawsuit for
00:04:36.000
yourself at StopDeplatforming.com. That's what they tried to do to us, deplatform us. And if you can,
00:04:43.360
while you're at that website, chip in a few dollars to help us crowdfund our lawsuit. I'm excited to
00:04:47.920
say that Rumble is joining us in this lawsuit because they were illegally extorted, too. They've
00:04:53.680
agreed to cover half the lawsuit, but we have to cover the other half. If you can help, please go to
00:04:59.920
StopDeplatforming.com. And I promise I'll post the government's defense at that same website, too,
00:05:07.040
when they find it. I'd like to see how they try and justify what they did. I mean, one of the things
00:05:12.960
they told us last year was that the Toronto police were warning them that there was going to be protests
00:05:18.960
against us, so we needed to pay for that extra security. But in fact, we have written proof that
00:05:24.480
the police told them there was no evidence of a counter protest to our event at all. None. They
00:05:31.200
lied. Yeah, I know. Big shock, right? I'd really like you to read our lawsuit to see what the liberals
00:05:36.880
and the government tried to do to us and to imagine what they'll do if they win again. They'll go even
00:05:42.880
harder after their political opponents. Remember, they weren't just coming for me and Rumble and
00:05:47.280
Rebel News. They were targeting a private sector event venue operator, too, simply because he let
00:05:52.800
conservatives use his facility. They terrified him. They terrorized him. That's what they do to anyone
00:05:58.640
who gets in their way. Read the lawsuit at StopDeplatforming.com. Paragraph 57 of the lawsuit
00:06:05.680
is where we outline how they violated our charter rights, including freedom of expression. Paragraph 61
00:06:12.560
talks about misfeasance in public office. That's where you misuse the powers of the government for your
00:06:18.880
own improper purposes. There's a breach of fiduciary duty and negligence and conspiracy. You can actually
00:06:26.240
see the conspiracy at work. Inducing breach of contract, obviously, and intentional interference
00:06:32.720
with economic relations. Now, no normal person could afford to fight back. I mean, the event venue
00:06:39.280
operator is just glad to be out of the hostage situation that he was in because the liberals didn't
00:06:44.400
like us. You can be sure he'll never let us rent from him again. He didn't sign up to be bullied by
00:06:49.760
the government. But we're built a little bit differently. And so is Rumble. They joined the
00:06:54.400
lawsuit because they're about freedom of speech. And they're appalled that the Canadian government
00:06:59.040
acted a bit more like the North Korean government. They're covering half the bill. But we're on the hook
00:07:05.920
for the other half. Now, the smart thing would be to walk away and lick our wounds. I mean, after all,
00:07:11.760
the conference did proceed and it was a great success, thanks to Rumble paying the ransom. But
00:07:17.360
we can't let these malicious bullies get away with this. Not against us, not against Rubble,
00:07:22.000
not against the venue operator they blackmailed, and not against the countless other people the
00:07:26.720
government surely bullies and cancels and de-platforms all the time now. This is about
00:07:32.480
setting a precedent. This lawsuit is setting a precedent and sending a message that you cannot
00:07:37.440
use the neutral, non-partisan government to attack your personal political enemies. You're not allowed
00:07:43.600
to do that. If you agree with our decision to fight back, go to StopDeplatforming.com. Read the
00:07:49.680
lawsuit. And if you agree with it, help us to cover our half of the legal fees. I know the government is
00:07:55.680
going to hire the most expensive law firm in Canada to fight back. That's what they always do. But when you
00:08:01.520
see the outrageous things these bullies actually put in writing, you'll know we have a real chance to
00:08:07.040
win and to set a precedent for freedom for every Canadian. Go to StopDeplatforming.com. Thanks.
00:08:14.800
One of the largest issues for me, and I think for a large number of Canadians last year, was Bill C-63,
00:08:34.960
otherwise known as the Online Harms Act. And it had been a project of the Liberal government for
00:08:39.840
actually many years. It was Stephen Gilboa when he was heritage minister the first time
00:08:45.680
who proposed it. And then it went through various ministers and it never really got off the ground,
00:08:50.400
but it was moving through parliament. And the NDP and the Bloc Habakkuk said they were going to support
00:08:56.240
it. This would have created three new censorship bureaucracies. It would have empowered the Canadian
00:09:01.440
Human Rights Commission to go after hurt words the same way that they did to me some 20 odd years ago.
00:09:06.720
So we were lucky when Justin Trudeau dissolved parliament, proroguing it, that immediately
00:09:14.800
canceled all pending legislation. So C-63 right now is dead. It does not exist anymore. But
00:09:23.200
I'm increasingly worried that if Mark Carney wins the election, he will reintroduce that. And I base that
00:09:30.800
on his statements that he supports wokeism. Remember this? There's a fever gripping America. And while
00:09:38.400
it rages, Canadians will remain resolute and true to our values. While America engages in a war on woke,
00:09:47.920
Canadians will continue to value inclusiveness. And his treatment of reporters. And I'm not just whining
00:09:55.120
about the fact that, for example, they kicked David Menzies out of a parking lot. Did you see that?
00:10:00.640
Sir, did they tell you why we are persona non grata?
00:10:05.040
They just told me you cannot be here. And no reason given. Security.
00:10:11.040
Okay. Thank you, sir. I appreciate that. So, yes, I did.
00:10:14.000
Okay, but sir. All right. We're done with this.
00:10:15.840
Okay. So, where do you want me to go? Just on the other side of the fence.
00:10:19.600
You just cannot be here. Before we continue. What about that way?
00:10:22.080
Sir, before we continue. I need him to interview Karima for a second.
00:10:25.840
You cannot interview anybody on this property, sir. Okay.
00:10:28.880
Lee, I'm afraid I can't because... Oh, Karima is...
0.92
00:10:32.160
You have a registration and you're on this property.
00:10:35.280
And I really don't want to do that. I'm not that kind of guy.
00:10:39.600
Oh, no, sir. I'm not trying to cause trouble for you. But is it not a fair question to ask,
00:10:48.400
If there's people on a list of undesirables that are not supposed to be in there,
00:10:53.440
That's it. Well, it's never going to go in the building, sir.
00:10:55.440
They can't be on here. This is owned by the building.
00:10:59.360
All right. Everybody in this line has to be permitted to be here by the building.
00:11:03.120
All right, then. If you don't have a registration...
00:11:04.800
Well, we're going to leave. You show me your license.
00:11:08.480
The Gestapo is on standby. Don't want to get into trouble with them.
00:11:14.640
just the facts reporters like Karima Sad. She was kicked out too.
1.00
00:11:19.520
What did they say to you about why you didn't get into Oxford?
00:11:22.400
So, before I had a chance to speak with anyone or show anyone any documentation,
00:11:31.200
Well, I was really trying to assert my right to speak to someone,
00:11:35.680
to understand why I'm on a list, because I am on a list.
00:11:39.120
We were told... I was told by the security that I was an undesirable...
00:11:47.040
You know what? They spared me that particular indignity.
00:11:53.120
I am worried, and I know that there are more acute and urgent things to worry about.
00:11:57.760
Bread and butter issues, pocketbook issues, the tariffs, the cost of living, of course.
00:12:02.560
But I'm also deeply worried about the state of freedom of speech in Canada,
00:12:07.280
I just saw a news story out of the United Kingdom,
00:12:09.520
by the Times of London, perhaps the most reputable broadsheet in that city,
00:12:13.520
that on average, the United Kingdom arrests 30 people every day for saying something on social media.
00:12:26.080
I don't even think that Vladimir Putin's Russia keeps up that pace, and they're twice as large.
00:12:32.560
Joining us now to talk about this very issue is the author of a new article in the National Post called
00:12:44.160
She's the litigation director at the Canadian Constitution Foundation,
00:12:48.080
and the author of a new book called Free Speech in Canada.
00:12:50.160
What a pleasure to have Christine back on the show.
1.00
00:12:58.560
That's different from the JCCF we sometimes talk to.
00:13:01.920
Tell me about the CCF, the Canadian Constitution Foundation,
00:13:05.440
and what you guys are doing to fight for free speech.
00:13:10.000
The Canadian Constitution Foundation is a nonpartisan legal charity.
00:13:15.680
We have done a lot of public interest litigation on the issue of free speech,
00:13:20.960
and on broadly issues of constitutional law and fundamental freedoms in Canada.
00:13:25.840
Some of your viewers might know us because we're one of the organizations
00:13:29.040
that brought the legal challenge to Justin Trudeau's invocation of the Emergencies Act against the 2022 Freedom Convoy.
00:13:38.240
When he used that piece of legislation, it shut down protests that were nonviolent and largely peaceful,
00:13:52.160
We also have been challenging what are referred to as bubble zone laws across Canada.
00:13:58.640
These are laws that prohibit protests in specific areas.
00:14:02.560
So I just got back from Calgary recently where we were challenging a bubble zone law in that city
00:14:09.520
that prohibits not just protests near libraries and recreation centers and community centers.
00:14:16.400
Generally, it prohibits them on the basis of the content of the protests.
00:14:20.240
So this is a law that says you can protest the climate extinction or you can have a labor strike
00:14:27.200
in front of a library, but you cannot protest something like drag story hour.
00:14:32.400
The law would actually also probably prohibit protests about foreign conflicts,
00:14:37.520
about supervised injection sites and all kinds of things that are on this government prohibited list
00:14:43.680
of topics to protest. And once the government's deciding what you can and cannot protest,
00:14:50.480
That's a great point. It's a content-based restriction.
00:14:54.640
Can I ask, because we helped crowdfund for a pastor named Derek Reimer,
00:14:59.840
who was kicked out of a drag queen story hour. He was protesting.
00:15:03.920
It sounds like it's the same law that you're challenging. Is that right?
00:15:08.240
It is. I believe it's the same law, but it's a separate lawsuit.
00:15:12.000
So there is a case that's still proceeding at the Court of Appeal now called Heather and Calgary.
00:15:18.960
That involves a man named Larry Heather, who was also charged under this same law.
00:15:23.920
Ours was a judicial review, so it actually would be a broader precedent if it was decided as a judicial
00:15:32.160
review. But only part of the judicial review proceeded, and we will likely be intervening
00:15:38.160
in Mr. Heather's appeal. So lots of moving parts, lots of technical litigation stuff I don't want to bore
00:15:44.000
your viewers with. But at its core, these are laws that prohibit the ability of regular citizens
00:15:50.480
to protest the action of their government, which is fundamental to democracy.
00:15:56.640
Right. Wow. You know, thank you. I mean, I think I understand the detail you referred to.
00:16:02.240
There's a lot of different ways you can fight a different law, but challenging its constitutionality
00:16:07.200
is perhaps the most important. Let me get back to your article in the National Post.
00:16:11.280
First, I look at Europe, and I think that free speech is in retreat in just about every country
00:16:18.640
there. I really can't think of one where it's getting stronger. I think the UK is appalling.
00:16:25.680
I have some skin in the game there. I'm friends with Tommy Robinson, who is a journalist activist,
00:16:33.440
who's serving 18 months in prison. He'll be let out in nine, but nine months is solitary
00:16:39.760
for violating a don't publish order on one of his videos. I find that astonishing. I see in Ireland
0.70
00:16:46.080
and Scotland, they're either bringing in or have brought in their version of the Online Harms Act.
00:16:52.560
France, you know, I think they actually were banning Rumble, the whole platform.
00:16:59.200
Anyway, I won't go on, but I really see free speeches in retreat across Europe. I think it
00:17:05.680
was retreating in America too. Maybe it's coming back a bit. What's your analysis of the state of
00:17:11.120
freedom in the world? So I actually don't agree that free speech is in a good situation in the
00:17:19.280
United States either. I think it's actually backsliding everywhere. The reason I say it's not great in
00:17:24.720
America is the recent decisions by the Trump administration to issue these executive orders,
00:17:30.560
targeting some law firms. I also don't agree with some of the action on some of the deportations
00:17:38.960
of college students on the basis of the content of their speech alone. Now, there are some details that
00:17:44.960
we don't have. But Ezra, I think your viewers might be familiar with one particular case of a student
00:17:52.160
from Colombia who has a green card. It seems like there's a lot going on in his particular case.
00:17:58.800
His name's Mahmoud. And, you know, if he's being deported as a green card holder on the content of his
00:18:05.120
speech alone, that would be a violation of America's very strong protections for freedom of expression.
00:18:12.320
Now, I'm not defending the content of his speech. I think the content of Mahmoud Khalil's speech is
00:18:18.240
actually abhorrent and disgusting. But that's how you know someone is a real defender of freedom of
00:18:24.880
expression, if they're willing to defend the right of someone to express speech that they disagree with.
00:18:30.080
So I think that free speech is backsliding across the world. And we're sort of at this inflection point
00:18:37.680
globally, where I think Canada has a decision to make. Are we going to be a country that is a beacon,
00:18:46.000
an example to the world of protections of freedom of speech, freedom of expression? Or are we going to be yet another
00:18:53.440
cautionary tale to the world? I would like to become an example of how allowing for robust debate about all kinds of different
00:19:03.120
issues, including issues that we might disagree on, allows for the flourishing of society, that we
00:19:09.680
allow for freedom of expression. I'd like to have a government that keeps that really precious, vital
00:19:17.360
right that has been core to Western democracies for so long, that protects that instead of backslides like
00:19:26.400
the rest of the world has. And I think that that's something that Canadians should think about when they vote for
00:19:31.520
their next government. I hear what you're saying about Mahmoud Khalil. I have a, I guess the one
00:19:37.600
asterisk I'd put there, and I just, I hear what you're saying, but I think if you're a foreign,
1.00
00:19:42.800
a foreigner who's in Canada or the United States as a guest, a privilege, not a right. So you're not,
0.86
00:19:50.160
you're not a citizen. You weren't born here. You haven't naturalized here. You came here under a specific
0.98
00:19:55.040
invitation. You're allowed to come and study at our university. You're allowed to be a temporary foreign
1.00
00:19:59.440
worker. And instead you go to these Hamas hate marches. And in the case of Khalil, I think
00:20:04.640
there's some information that perhaps he. Yeah. So what I'd say, what I'd say about Khalil's case
00:20:10.080
is that he, there's things that are still unknown. What we, what it's, I mean, if he is, um, if he
00:20:17.760
lied on his application to obtain that green card, totally different story. I think it also depends on
00:20:24.720
exactly what his activities were. It does seem like he was distributing Hamas propaganda. I think
00:20:31.200
the question is what is the actual rationale for the, the, the deportation and based on reporting
00:20:39.440
from the free press, what the free press, Barry Weiss's outlet has said is that it seems to be on
00:20:46.560
the content of the speech alone. If that's the only reason that's not acceptable for a green card holder,
00:20:53.200
for someone with different immigration status, perhaps a different result for a green card
00:20:57.760
holder. If it's just the content, not good enough, but there might be more to the case that we don't
00:21:03.040
know yet. And as I said, disagree with his speech. Right. I, you know, I don't know the intricacies
00:21:08.720
of U S immigration law. I guess all I'm saying is foreigners in my view have no rights, um, in our
0.99
00:21:14.800
country. It's all privileges, but I, I'm not an expert in U S immigration, but you know, I, I understand the
00:21:19.680
point you're making and I think you're right. You have to take those hard cases. I mean, I know from
00:21:23.760
personal experience, I think of myself, I think of Mark Stein, I think of other people in Canada
00:21:28.320
who've been put through the human rights commission and they're not going after the
00:21:31.520
friendliest people. They're going after the prickly ones, the cactuses, the ones who say offensive
00:21:36.000
things by definition, that's, who's going to be the cases. So you have to be able to put up with some
00:21:42.000
rough and tumble. If you're in the free speech defending business, I absolutely accept what you're
00:21:47.200
saying. Hey, tell me a little bit about your book called free speech in Canada. And I'd like to,
00:21:52.320
we'll show it on the screen here. And you tell me it's available on Amazon. Give me a little bit of
00:21:56.960
info. What is that book about? Um, was it a diagnosis? It was a prescription. Tell me about
00:22:04.720
free speech in Canada. Yeah. So this is the book free speech in Canada. It came out in November.
00:22:09.520
It's about the origins of the right to freedom of expression, the ancient roots dating back to
00:22:15.680
Socrates and the Magna Carta, the invention of the printing press, but then going through
00:22:20.960
all of the modern issues with freedom of speech, including things like hate speech, including
00:22:26.560
legislation like C 63, uh, the return of the civil remedy for hate speech. We talk about how
00:22:33.680
municipalities can actually be one of the greatest offenders of our right to freedom of expression.
00:22:39.840
A lot of us don't think about our municipal politicians a lot, but it's actually these
00:22:44.480
local busy bodies who interfere with our right to free speech quite a bit. Uh, we talk about free
00:22:49.840
speech in the digital age, and we talk about an interesting intersection between property rights
00:22:55.840
and freedom of expression. And, uh, it's, it's just a fascinating look at the right and its origins and how
00:23:03.440
it applies in Canada. It's a short read, sort of an introduction to the right for Canadians. And
00:23:09.680
I really want to emphasize just how important this right is, how important it is for us to defend the
00:23:15.520
rights of expression, even if the people who are expressing ideas that they, even if we don't agree
00:23:23.120
with them, because if you don't have the right to say something people disagree with, you don't have the
00:23:29.600
right at all. I mean, no one is going to try to shut down unobjectionable speech. It's only
00:23:35.920
speech that is, uh, you know, controversial or objectionable that people will, uh, will try to
00:23:42.320
silence and censor. You know, I remember, uh, when the hate speech law went to the Supreme Court of
00:23:48.720
Canada the first time, I think it was in 1990, if I'm not mistaken. Um, and it was upheld, uh, again,
00:23:56.160
some old crank who was handing out leaflets and, you know, this was in the pre-internet age. And I
00:24:01.520
think it was a 5-4 ruling. And, um, you know, the Supreme Court justice, Beverly McLaughlin at the time,
00:24:08.320
if I'm, I don't know if she was chief back then, she said, oh, this won't go further. Um, only in the
00:24:14.400
most extreme cases, we have a lot of protections. Yeah, right. Here we are 35 years later.
00:24:19.040
And I think that the concept of hate speech and hate speech isn't free speech and that's toxic
00:24:28.480
speech. And that's like, I just think this whole industry has muddied the waters. And I think if
00:24:35.000
that case, um, I, I think the courts have moved towards censorship. I think academia has moved hard
00:24:43.200
towards censorship. Can you give me a little twinkle of hope? Is there a court ruling you can
00:24:49.440
point to? Is there a judge you can point to? Is there a development you can point to in Canada
00:24:54.880
that that's a source of some optimism? Because I'm, I mean, I, I grant you the, um, finding that
00:25:02.560
the Emergencies Act invocation was illegal. That was very important. That, that is sort of a free
00:25:07.200
speechy thing a little bit, but is there actually a pure speech ruling where freedom of speech pushed
00:25:14.640
back censorship that we can hang on to for hope? So I think the cases that you're referring to,
00:25:21.120
uh, the, the older ones are, you're either referring to Zundel or to Keekstra. Zundel was a notorious
00:25:27.600
Holocaust denier, uh, and, uh, Keekstra was a notorious anti-Semite. In that decision, uh,
00:25:34.880
Justice McLaughlin was actually in the, in the dissent, uh, and she at the time was quite the big
00:25:40.320
proponent for, uh, freedom of expression. And Canada has upheld these hate speech prohibitions,
00:25:47.040
criminal prohibitions on hate speech. And this is different from the United States. Now I was
00:25:52.800
critical of the United States for backsliding, but the United States actually has, uh, no criminal
00:25:58.160
prohibitions on hate speech. And I think that that is a better situation, uh, because
00:26:04.640
we should counter hateful rhetoric and hateful speech with better speech to explain why these
00:26:11.680
concepts are wrong. Um, there's an excellent book about this by Nadine Strawson. She's the
00:26:17.600
former executive director of the ACLU in the United States, uh, an organization that itself has done
00:26:24.160
some backsliding, but when Nadine was in charge, really staunch experts and defenders of free speech
00:26:30.800
in that country. Now in Canada, I don't know that I have a good case for you that should, uh, is,
00:26:37.680
is a beacon of hope. The emergencies act was a good outcome, uh, because that case is a free speech case.
00:26:43.840
It's about the right to protest. Uh, so that was a positive outcome. The problem is our constitution
00:26:51.520
guarantees the right to freedom of expression, but subject to reasonable limits. This is section one of
00:26:57.360
the charter. And it seems like increasingly judges are willing to impose those limits and take at face
00:27:04.960
value, whatever rationale the government wants to put forward for limiting speech, uh, without
00:27:11.600
really considering the larger consequences of eroding this core foundational right.
00:27:19.760
You know, I remember, I just remembered the name of that case from 1990 was, uh, John Ross Taylor.
00:27:24.640
And he was, oh, I'm sorry. Yep. A different case. No, it was my mistake. I didn't remember the name
00:27:29.120
till now. And, you know, I just think of, and it was Chief Justice Dixon. It was a four, three ruling.
00:27:36.560
And, you know, they say, oh, we're just taking a baby step into censorship. This will never be abused.
00:27:43.200
This will never be common. And, uh, I'm just really worried about that, but I'm really glad you guys at
00:27:48.160
the CCF are fighting back. Tell me your website, uh, for our viewers who want to learn more. What's the best way to
00:27:53.360
learn to go to your website and poke around? So our website is theccf.ca. Uh, we're a charity,
00:28:01.120
so we issue tax receipts for any donations. And we also have a YouTube channel. If you search the
00:28:06.400
CCF or the Canadian constitution foundation on YouTube, I provide regular video updates about
00:28:12.000
all of our ongoing cases and about other interesting developments in constitutional law in Canada. So
00:28:17.440
check us out. We have a lot to offer and, uh, a lot of takes on freedom of expression,
00:28:22.400
expression, as well as other constitutional issues like division of power, freedom of religion,
00:28:27.360
things like that. Well, I'm really glad you're out there fighting and, uh, we need far more. I just
00:28:31.920
talked to Lisa Bildy the other day who created the Free Speech Union of Canada. I'm really glad she set
00:28:37.440
that up. Um, it's great to know that the JCC, sorry, the CCF is doing good work, the democracy
00:28:43.920
fund, the JCCF. We're starting to get a little bit of a community, which is good because I think
00:28:48.560
some of the traditional defenders of freedom of speech have been lacking. I, I feel like the, uh,
00:28:53.440
Canadian Civil Liberties Union, uh, association rather has basically taken a, uh, a 10 year holiday.
00:29:00.000
They haven't been at the leading edge. I'm glad you guys are amongst us filling the gap. We've been
00:29:03.840
talking with Christine Van Gein, the litigation director of the CCF. Her book is called Free
00:29:08.160
Speech in Canada, and I'll be sure to pick that up on Amazon. Thanks for taking the time, Christine.
00:29:13.120
Thank you. All right. There you have it. Stay with us. More ahead.
00:29:28.160
Hey, welcome back. Your letters to me about Alberta separatism. Frank 5D says,
00:29:33.360
notice how the older people want to leave the most. They know that Alberta and Ottawa's relationship
00:29:38.640
will never get better. You know, it's interesting. Uh, I've seen polls showing the opposite actually,
00:29:43.520
that young people are the most open to leaving. I, I suppose it depends. Um, but what I would say in
00:29:49.680
general is that the mainstream media is not doing a good job covering this story because most media
00:29:54.400
are based in Toronto or Ottawa or Montreal. They don't understand the West. They don't really like the
0.71
00:29:59.920
West. They don't listen to the West. I think of CTV's at issue, sorry, CBC's at issue panel.
00:30:05.760
That's got Rosemary Barton based in Ottawa, Andrew Coyne from Toronto, Althea Raj from, uh, Ottawa and
00:30:12.800
Chantal Ibert from Montreal. So no voices outside that little triangle, the entire political spectrum
00:30:18.720
from A to B, you know, they just, it's the stalest, most boring conventional wisdom of the so-called
00:30:25.280
Laurentian elite. I'm not saying that people in Toronto should become Western separatists,
00:30:30.160
but they should have some source of news that at least treats Albertans with enough respect
00:30:35.600
to hear them out. Ed Bernier says, I want a divorce. Even if we get a conservative government,
00:30:41.760
we can expect the same abuse in eight years. We can be our own captain, chart our own destiny
00:30:46.640
and be so wealthy and successful. I think you're right. I think that's what Alberta would be like
00:30:52.080
if it were independent. And I think Saskatchewan would probably join pretty quickly. And if you had
00:30:57.280
seven million people in a new country, that's a respectable country, especially with the amount
0.97
00:31:02.000
of oil and uranium and other things like that in there. Um, I just think that getting there
00:31:10.720
would be an astonishingly difficult thing to do because every single establishment enterprise
00:31:16.560
from the media to the banks, to the lawyers, to the courts would be against it. But it's possible.
00:31:22.800
I mean, Quebec came within half a percent of winning. Gil Schiller says, I live in BC retired,
00:31:30.400
and I absolutely see the need for not only Alberta, but all the Western provinces need to go our own way.
00:31:35.520
This Quebec and Ontario ruling Canada has to end. China truly is ruling Canada with the help of the
1.00
00:31:40.640
Liberal Party. You know, again, it's very different in the West. And, um, I don't know. I, the earlier
00:31:48.800
letter about Pierre Pauly of granting a reprieve, there's some truth to that. I mean, Stephen Harper
00:31:53.600
was, I think, a pretty good prime minister, and he was quite good for the West. But as soon as he was gone,
00:31:58.080
in came the problems. Well, that's our show for today. Until next time, on behalf of all of us here
00:32:03.600
at Rebel World Highquarters, to you at home, good night. Keep fighting for freedom.