Rebel News Podcast - Rebel Roundup： Guests Martina Markota, Sheila Gunn Reid & Ezra Levant

00:00:00.000 Welcome to Rebel Roundup, ladies and gentlemen, and the rest of you, in which we look back at

00:00:04.540 some of the very best commentaries of the week by your favourite rebels. I'm your host, David Menzies.

00:00:10.560 Well, the year is young, but did we just collectively witness the worst example of

00:00:16.480 fake news in 2019? Namely, that story depicting a teenager with a Catholic school in Kentucky

00:00:24.180 being vilified for supposedly disrespecting a native elder. Ezra Levent is loaded for bear

00:00:30.900 regarding the fakery and the fallout. Once upon a time, former Edmonton Journal reporter Paula

00:00:36.920 Simmons was a free press champion. So what happened? Well, she received a Senate appointment from

00:00:43.080 Justin Trudeau, and now it seems that she's taken a vow of silence when it comes to the provincial

00:00:48.280 government in Alberta declaring war on press freedom. Sheila Gunn-Reed shall explain all.

00:00:54.700 And in the department of What Were They Thinking? Martina Marcota will join me to discuss Gillette's

00:01:00.740 new and not so improved ad campaign. You know, the one that suggests that too many men are embracing 0.79

00:01:06.100 so-called toxic masculinity, and this is supposed to make guys want to buy Gillette razors and

00:01:13.560 shaving cream. Yikes. And finally, we get your letters every minute of every day, and I'll share

00:01:19.300 some of the letters we received regarding my commentary about the now infamous Tiffany Moore, that

00:01:26.280 freaky femme who freaked out in a GameStop store for being misgendered. Those are your rebels. Now let's round 1.00

00:01:34.040 them up.

00:01:42.360 I believe that by remaining motionless and calm, I was helping to diffuse the situation.

00:01:48.040 I realized everyone had cameras, and that perhaps a group of adults was trying to provoke a group of

00:01:52.840 teenagers into a larger conflict. I said a silent prayer that the situation would not get out of hand.

00:01:58.360 It goes on and on, so many details. And you saw the corroborating video for all of it, didn't you?

00:02:07.160 What do you think happened here? Do you think that silent kid was racist? Do you think he was smirking

00:02:14.180 racistly? Do you think he was taunting the man with the drum, threatening him? Do you think these kids

00:02:21.560 did anything more than be a bit boisterous? Would you have been so calm in the face of racial slurs being

00:02:27.400 thrown at you by the black extremists, even against a fellow African-American? Would you have been so calm 0.98

00:02:33.240 if someone walked up to you within an inch of your face and banged a drum in your face for five minutes?

00:02:40.360 I would not have been so calm, smiling and praying. You know, this is a version of what they did to

00:02:46.500 Brett Kavanaugh. This is a, this is what they did to an anonymous kid from Kentucky. This is what they'll do to

00:02:51.580 you. And by they, I don't just mean the lying thugs at the Lincoln Memorial. I mean, the lying 0.99

00:03:00.000 thugs in the mainstream media, including the lying thugs in our own Canadian media, including and 0.97

00:03:07.620 especially at the CBC. 0.86

00:03:10.320 Well, thanks to outrageously disingenuous media coverage, the optics look brutal. A white teenager 0.56

00:03:17.460 sporting a red MAGA cap, staring down a native Vietnam veteran, a man who later claimed he felt

00:03:25.060 frightened for his very life after being swarmed. Just one hitch. None of it was true. For it was the

00:03:32.480 Kentucky Catholic school kids, not Nathan Phillips, who were targeted. It was the entourage accompanying 0.98

00:03:39.680 Mr. Phillips, who spewed vile racist slurs, not the teenagers. And yet, if you had tuned into CNN or

00:03:48.400 MSNBC or even Justin Trudeau's CBC, the story being reported made it seem that the victims were the

00:03:56.120 perpetrators and vice versa. Just when you thought the mainstream media couldn't go any lower in terms

00:04:03.860 of a biased narrative, we witnessed that. And joining me now with more on this shocking story

00:04:10.580 of media manipulation is our very own Rebel Commander, Ezra LeVant. Welcome to Rebel Rebel.

00:04:15.940 Well, thanks very much.

00:04:16.860 Great. Now, Ezra, here's the deal. Now that it's been revealed that this so-called hounding of Nathan Phillips

00:04:24.740 is a complete and utter hoax, why isn't every single media outlet that reported this false narrative

00:04:33.940 issuing a retraction and an apology? And I'm no lawyer, but I think what was done to these kids

00:04:41.680 was actually actionable. Well, I've seen at least two different prominent American lawyers

00:04:50.420 be retained by either Nick Sandman, the kid involved, or other families of kids. And

00:05:03.140 from what I understand is that they have sent out hundreds of warnings to different people

00:05:10.420 on the internet, even a congresswoman from Minnesota who called them Nazis, who said they were doing things

00:05:17.620 that they clearly weren't, and saying retract or be sued. And I've seen probably a dozen retractions

00:05:24.100 either out of fear of litigation or genuinely contrite that they got it wrong. It is possible to get it wrong.

00:05:33.380 But it's so powerful, the narrative, white kid, a surrogate for Trump because he's wearing a Trump hat,

00:05:42.340 aboriginal man peacefully banging a drum. And you're right, it was all fake. It was like a, it was like actors. 1.00

00:05:48.820 I mean, the aboriginal man turns out he was not a Vietnam veteran as he claimed he was.

00:05:55.300 So that's stolen valor. He lied about being taunted by the kids. So he really is an actor. He's a professional activist.

00:06:01.780 This is very important. You mentioned this in your commentary. He seems, Ezra, to pop up in

00:06:09.380 the most volatile situations and making hay of it. Yeah, he was up there at the big anti-pipeline

00:06:16.020 protests in North Dakota. He's done bizarre stunts all around Washington. So he's, he's a professional

00:06:22.100 protester, a dramatic actor who, when, you know, in fact, I know a reporter in Washington who says

00:06:30.260 she sees him everywhere, just perpetual protester. But when the national media saw him for the first

00:06:35.780 time, they took him at face value. So he pulled the wool over people's eyes. In America, their

00:06:39.940 defamation laws are more tilted towards freedom than they are towards protection of reputation.

00:06:46.020 But there's an important caveat in that. If you're a public person, a celebrity, someone who lives and

00:06:54.180 chooses to be in the public eye, a politician, obviously, the threshold to win a defamation case

00:06:59.700 is very high. If you're suing a defamer, you don't just have to prove that they got it wrong.

00:07:06.420 You have to prove that it was malice, that they actually meant to harm you. That's an extremely

00:07:12.260 hard thing to prove. But that standard does not apply to a private person. So if you're a 16 year old

00:07:20.020 boy who's just waiting at the Lincoln Center for his bus back from the March for Life to Kentucky,

00:07:26.500 who does not say one word in public and just smiles the whole time and later says, well, I just

00:07:35.380 didn't want to seem aggressive. I didn't want to seem offensive. I didn't want to escalate in any way.

00:07:40.660 So I just thought smiling. I mean, that's what a 16 year old in an extremely strange, stressful position

00:07:47.060 thought in real time. That is not a public person. And for him to be filmed, named, shamed, maliciously

00:07:55.700 defamed is one of those rare cases in US defamation law where a private citizen will have great power

00:08:04.980 in the courts. I'm not an American lawyer, but I know defamation law as a publisher for many years.

00:08:10.340 And in America, you can say almost anything about a public person. I mean, it's wild. It's

00:08:18.020 the First Amendment for you. You can say anything about Donald Trump, anything about Barack Obama.

00:08:24.100 But a 16 year old schoolboy from Tennessee who did not say a word, you can't go after him in the same

00:08:29.620 way, even if it's scratching your anti-Trump itch. I think there will be, by this time next week,

00:08:36.340 a hundred lawsuits filed. And I say that because I've seen the two lawyers.

00:08:40.820 I hope so. And you know, let's talk about, you know, Mr. Sandman's sins here. He was smirking.

00:08:48.740 Gee, last I checked, I didn't think that was a crime. And more disturbingly, and I was listening

00:08:54.420 to a lot of Canadian radio roundtables, which are, of course, almost 100% co-opted by lefties.

00:09:01.380 And the narrative was this. You know what? You wear a red MAGA hat into the public square.

00:09:06.900 You're just asking for trouble. You're just cruising for a bruising. Almost like this is

00:09:12.180 waving a red flag in front of a bull. And whatever happens to you, you get what you deserve.

00:09:17.300 I'm not making this up, Ezra. That was the narrative. I think this is appalling,

00:09:21.380 especially since what a MAGA hat means to me, it's a statement of patriotism. Make America great again.

00:09:28.340 And it's Donald Trump's slogan. And there's nothing inherently hostile about the words.

00:09:32.980 It's like Obama shirts that said hope on them. You're flying your colors. And we saw a lot of

00:09:39.140 those during Obama's term. We see other political icons on shirts. Che Guevara shirts are popular on

00:09:45.780 campus. You even see Mao Zedong shirts, which are, I think, quite offensive, considering he killed more

00:09:51.780 than 50 million of his own countrymen. Yeah. Like he's the greatest mass murderer

00:09:56.420 of all history. And he murdered his own people. And to put that on a shirt. So we don't believe in 0.99

00:10:04.820 attacking, abusing, God forbid, punching, which many celebrities publicly said, punch this kid.

00:10:11.300 Reza Aslan, a CNN commentator, said he's got a punchable face. So if you're a celebrity with a

00:10:16.500 half a million followers on Twitter, and you say, this Nazi's got a punchable face. I don't know 0.90

00:10:21.860 exactly. I don't remember exactly what Reza Aslan said. All it takes is one in a thousand people to

00:10:27.220 say, yeah, this guy really is a Nazi. I should probably, like, if you are on Twitter saying,

00:10:31.540 punch him in the face, um, and God forbid someone punches him in the face, I think there is a 0.98

00:10:36.980 connection. If you defamed him, lied about what he did, and granted some sort of lie, and one of your 0.99

00:10:43.380 followers did it. I mean, you have to be careful about that. But if you're literally exhorting

00:10:48.740 violence against someone, and someone who heard your message did what could be reasonable, I mean,

00:10:54.580 if you're saying punch him, it's reasonable to think that that could lead to someone punching him.

00:10:59.700 Yeah. And, and I think that what I'm excited about this kid is this. Let me say two things about the

00:11:04.980 smirk. I watched the full tape. That Indian elder, which is just a fancy way of saying he's 1.00

00:11:13.300 an old man. Walked out, I mean, he doesn't have any status in this community. He lives in Ypsilanti,

00:11:18.420 Michigan. He's just a faker. He walked right up to the kid, actually touched him a few times,

00:11:23.220 and was banging a drum this close to his face. Oh, I know. And the kid didn't flinch, didn't blink,

00:11:28.660 didn't break. I wouldn't have had that composure. So if his smile looked like a smirk, try holding a

00:11:33.860 smile for five solid minutes. And you know, it's funny because I was looking at the book, 1984,

00:11:38.500 by Orwell. And they have a word in there called face crime. Face crime. A face crime is related to

00:11:48.740 thought crime. Thought crime is if you have wrong think. Face crime is if you're not looking happy

00:11:56.100 enough when you're supposed to be happy, or sad enough when you're supposed to be sad. If your face

00:12:00.260 betrays an emotion that is deemed incorrect. That is a word in Newspeak, in the book 1984,

00:12:06.740 called face crime. So this kid apparently is guilty of a face crime.

00:12:10.980 You know, it's astonishing because a face crime does exist in places like the People's Democratic

00:12:16.500 Republic of North Korea, where people were ratting out their neighbors for not looking sad enough when

00:12:22.180 Kim Jong-il's father passed away. How sad that it would come to America. But you know, 0.80

00:12:28.420 as I want to talk about the media in the aftermath, some have dialed it back, some have taken down

00:12:34.340 their postings. But others are doubling down. And I speak of two days ago in The Guardian,

00:12:41.780 which is the best fish wrap money can buy. Jason Wilson did a column and it was entitled,

00:12:50.020 How Conservative Media Transformed the Covington Catholic Students from Pariahs to Heroes.

00:12:57.780 He's bemoaning that the narrative that was allegedly correct to begin with, due to right-wing pressure,

00:13:06.100 is being flipped, you know, upside down. Yet we know when you watch those tapes, you make mention of

00:13:13.140 the black Israelites saying the most vile, profane, racist slurs imaginable. And that never got coverage 0.95

00:13:22.820 in the mainstream media for some reason. What gives? Well, that's the soft bigotry of low expectations.

00:13:27.380 Black activists are allowed to be racist because don't pick on them. I'm not sure if it was the

00:13:33.220 Washington Post, I think it was, that said the real victims here are the media. But you know what?

00:13:41.300 I think that this was such an unfair thing. And so many people saw it and watched it. And it reminded

00:13:49.300 people of the unfair slurs about Brett Kavanaugh, Trump's nominee who's now sitting on the Supreme

00:13:55.220 Court. And it's a reminder of two things. That the left is absolutely vicious and will personally

00:14:01.620 destroy anyone. From the strongest man, Supreme Court Justice of the United States, to a weakest

00:14:08.820 man, a 16-year-old boy. Good point. And that's their tactic now. And that the media

00:14:15.860 are not about actual fact finding, but they are part of this gotcha activist advocacy. And so much

00:14:23.460 of journalism is, would be really what's called political opposition research. So just trying to

00:14:28.420 land a punch on Trump. The reason that MAGA hat, Make America Great Again hat, was what set this off

00:14:35.380 because everyone thought, aha, this is my, finally my sniper shot that's going to get Donald Trump.

00:14:40.500 For two years, for three years, the media has not done journalism in the traditional sense of

00:14:48.980 reporting the facts and maybe commenting on the facts. The media has done, we must find a silver

00:14:55.860 bullet to stop Trump. It's Russia collusion. It's the election was hacked. It's Stormy Daniels.

00:15:02.100 It's the, I mean, it, every day it's some new and they, for, for three years, it's been fake news and

00:15:11.780 all their scoops have turned into nothing. So many retract, and the retractions in the areas are only

00:15:16.180 one way. They got it wrong against Trump's favor. And I, and it was Buck Sexton, um, a radio host who said

00:15:23.860 the other day in Barack Obama's eight years as president. Can anyone name a single time a big

00:15:32.100 media scoop was found to be an error and the scoop was embarrassing to Obama? The media embarrassed

00:15:40.820 Obama with their facts wrong. They never once did it to Obama in eight years and they do it, do it to

00:15:47.060 Trump every week. Every week. That can't be an error. That can't be random. If, if you're throwing darts

00:15:56.340 and if you're throwing a thousand darts and every one of your darts is to the right of the bullseye,

00:16:03.060 that's not, that's not random. That means you're, you're tilting right. If you're a journalist and

00:16:08.260 you're throwing darts at the dartboard and every single time you're off, you're off in one direction,

00:16:13.300 that's not random. Uh, these aren't random mistakes. And when you've never been off with

00:16:18.340 Barack Obama or Nancy Pelosi or in this country, Justin Trudeau, that is a sign that the media can

00:16:24.260 no longer be trusted. This boy, Nick Sandman and his, and his, uh, peers, I hope they get a lot of

00:16:30.500 money from these people. I understand that Trump has invited them to the White House. That'll hopefully

00:16:34.500 help redeem them. In some eyes, it'll convict them in other eyes. But I, I think that, um,

00:16:43.140 it was just more proof that you cannot believe a single word the media says.

00:16:48.260 Well, you know, as we have to wrap it here, your commentary was great. What so saddened me about

00:16:52.340 this, you know, Trump's a big boy. This is a 16 year old kid that did nothing wrong and was vilified

00:16:59.620 in, let's face it, it was a hoax. And if there's anyone in the mainstream media watching this,

00:17:04.500 and I know some of you do, if you wonder why you get labeled with the term fake news,

00:17:11.140 well, for 2019, this, my friends, is exhibit A. Keep it here. More of Rubble Roundup to come right after this.

00:17:18.260 Paula Simons posed her article by saying, and I quote,

00:17:28.980 Today, though, we're also faced with community activists and lobby groups who want the government

00:17:35.540 to tell journalists how and what to write to conform to their social values, whether the issue

00:17:42.260 is how we report on suicide or school test results or domestic homicides. But any suggestion

00:17:49.540 that a government should encourage or direct reporters to report in a certain way,

00:17:55.300 starts us down a perilous path. Anyone unhappy with our coverage has the right to complain,

00:18:00.980 to lobby us to change, but demanding the government get involved, that summons the ghost

00:18:07.620 of Eberhardt's press act from the grave. But since writing that, Simons has taken a partisan appointment

00:18:15.380 with Trudeau's liberals to the Senate, approving liberal laws and endorsing liberal policies. Now,

00:18:21.620 despite her claims to be independent, she's still an independent liberal partisan appointee. Despite

00:18:28.980 Simons' past protestations about having the government not become involved in the free press,

00:18:35.140 she now sits as an independent Senate liberal appointed by the same prime minister who is

00:18:41.860 giving $600 million in a media bailout to outlets based on what liberal appointees to a panel decide

00:18:49.220 is quality journalism. Once upon a time, well, about 10 seconds before her Senate appointment,

00:18:56.100 actually, former Edmonton Journal reporter Paula Simons was a champion when it came to those stories 0.61

00:19:03.380 involving freedom of the press. But those days are apparently a distant memory because as Notley's

00:19:10.020 NDP government tries to maliciously put the rebel out of business, Miss Simons appears to have taken 0.57

00:19:16.900 a vow of silence. Isn't it funny what a cushy appointment, a six-figure salary and a gold-plated

00:19:24.500 pension will do when it comes to somebody suddenly deciding to park their principles?

00:19:30.660 And with more on this story is the host of the gun show, Sheila Gunn-Reed. Welcome to Rebel Roundup, my friend.

00:19:37.860 Hey, David. Thanks for having me on.

00:19:39.380 Always, always a pleasure, Sheila. So, Sheila, it sure didn't take long for Paula to, what's the saying, go native?

00:19:47.940 Yeah, she was sure assimilated quickly into the Liberal Party, or at least the Liberal Party ethos,

00:19:56.740 despite her claims that she's a independent, nonpartisan member of the Trudeau Senate appointments.

00:20:05.700 You know, and I mean, what makes this perversely ironic to me, Sheila, as you noted in your superb

00:20:11.540 commentary, is that she used to be with the Edmonton Journal, and the Edmonton Journal dines out

00:20:17.460 on its Pulitzer Prize that it justifiably won way back in 1938, I believe, when it went up

00:20:24.100 against the provincial government of the day in terms of that government curtailing press freedom,

00:20:31.460 demanding that the paper hand over sources, demanding that it print official government

00:20:36.340 rebuttals to stories and so on. So, the Edmonton Journal justifiably from that time period,

00:20:45.380 they dine out on this, like I said, but here we are in 2019, as various newspapers are going to go

00:20:52.180 on to the government teat at the tune of $595 million. Golly, it's amazing what that sum will do

00:21:00.420 to one's media ethics, isn't it, Sheila? Yeah, and I think there's a real irony here that Paula Simons

00:21:08.020 herself was the author that wrote the article that commemorated the 80th anniversary of the

00:21:15.460 Edmonton Journal winning that battle against the Aberhart government here in Alberta, yet she's notably

00:21:23.540 silent except for saying something like, oh, I find the rebels' lawyer very interesting. Yeah,

00:21:29.620 well, fine. Fred Kozak is interesting, but what do you think about the censorship from the government

00:21:34.580 that you have so vehemently and passionately written about in the past? I mean, the things that are

00:21:39.940 happening to us are some of the same penalties that journalists here in Alberta faced 80 years ago

00:21:47.300 under what was colloquially known as the Press Act. It was escalating fines, court injunctions to stop

00:21:54.980 publications. I mean, none of us are going to get locked up, but back then they were even locking

00:22:00.340 up journalists using an act of the legislature to do it, which I would draw a similarity to us in the

00:22:07.940 fact that they would do this sort of stuff without a trial, without a participation from the accused,

00:22:13.300 which is exactly what's happening to us. And the best Paula Simons, the author of that passionate article

00:22:18.420 can muster is, well, Fred Kozak is an interesting guy and let's see what shakes out of the trees.

00:22:23.380 Like, come on, lady. And Sheila, what does that mean, calling Mr. Kozak an interesting guy? I mean,

00:22:30.980 that's about as neutral a statement as you could possibly make. That's taking neither one side or the

00:22:37.780 other. No, that's exactly what's happening here. I mean, it's pretty easy for someone who is truly

00:22:44.420 principled and against censorship. Someone I thought the Republicans used to be to say,

00:22:50.660 yeah, that's censorship and that's not cool, especially when it's coming from the government

00:22:54.420 and a newly created bureaucrat whose sole role is to censor political enemies. You'd think that

00:23:00.180 that would be a pretty safe bet for anybody to say, but more specifically a former journalist,

00:23:07.140 but she's just not willing to say that. But when you look at her track record with regard to

00:23:11.940 press freedom and government meddling in the press since she's been assimilated by the Borg,

00:23:19.300 I hope you like that sci-fi reference, David. But, you know, like she, she said, oh, I'm against

00:23:26.260 the media bailout because she tweeted about being against it. But did she really pick up the phone

00:23:31.060 and call the PMO? Because she could probably do that and say, I'm against the media bailout of $600

00:23:37.940 million. She, you know, she hasn't really said anything about that publicly except for the odd

00:23:44.020 tweet here and there. And that's just, um, that's just a cop out. Well, you know, to paraphrase another

00:23:48.900 sci-fi saying we're going to prove that resistance is not futile, Sheila, when it comes to this. And by the

00:23:54.740 way, can you very quickly recap, uh, the news that broke late last week, Sheila, in terms of

00:24:00.980 the Alberta Notley government essentially declaring war on us in such a way that evokes a combination of

00:24:09.300 1984 with the star chamber? Yeah. I mean, we've sort of had an inkling that this was in the works

00:24:17.860 since November of 2017. That's when we first got our, we first got a warning letter from the Alberta

00:24:24.980 government from the elections. Uh, I think at that time it was elections, Alberta. And they sent us a

00:24:31.220 letter saying, we have a complaint against you that you're in contravention of elections law.

00:24:35.300 Our lawyer, Fred Kozak, apparently an interesting fella, sent them a letter back. We never heard from

00:24:39.540 them again. And then just, uh, recently since, uh, Kian's big, beautiful fire, David Egan billboard went

00:24:49.220 up, um, on a very busy highway in Alberta, we received a complaint, or at least we heard that the, uh,

00:24:57.780 elections commissioner, this newly created bureaucrat, uh, mercenary, um, had received a complaint. Um,

00:25:05.220 we never got a chance to respond to the complaint. We've never even seen the complaint to say what we

00:25:11.060 aren't complying with, but not only that, we don't need to comply with elections laws because we're

00:25:16.260 journalists, not third party advertisers. We're not advertising for any political party. So these

00:25:20.500 laws don't even apply to us. Um, they find us, um, $5,500 basically for illegal criticism of the

00:25:30.180 government as journalists. And because of that, and because we've never even had a chance to see the

00:25:34.980 complaint, we're challenging it. We're not paying this. Um, and we won't comply with elections laws

00:25:41.460 because we are not third party advertisers. We don't have to stop our criticism of the government.

00:25:48.340 Um, and we don't have to report to the government, how much we spend on things. These just aren't

00:25:51.860 things that apply to us. It is just strong arming, heavy handed censorship leveled at us from the

00:25:58.420 government. And, uh, that's how we ran a foul of not least government. And, uh, that's, uh, something

00:26:04.420 that we're just not going to, uh, lay down and die over because the fines can escalate.

00:26:09.300 They can even get injunctions against us to stop us from publishing.

00:26:12.260 And two things, we could put our head down and submit a check for $5,500,

00:26:16.820 but us fighting it, it's going to add a multiple of at least 20 to that figure, I should think,

00:26:23.700 uh, by using Mr. Kozak. And secondly, Sheila, this is, the parallels are uncanny

00:26:30.980 about what's happening to us and what happened to the Edmonton Journal in the 1930s. And yet,

00:26:36.420 once again, the one person out there who should be blowing a whistle and calling a foul

00:26:43.380 is, as you say in your commentary, hiding under a blanket somewhere in Ottawa.

00:26:47.140 Yeah. I mean, but like you pointed out in the same way that the $600 million media bailout is

00:26:55.700 buying favorable coverage for Justin Trudeau from the mainstream media, uh, patronage appointment

00:27:01.700 to the Senate is buying a lot of silence from a woman who I used to think was a very principled 1.00

00:27:07.220 freedom fighter. Although we disagreed on a lot of things. Um, I always thought that she was a woman

00:27:13.140 of principle, but now that she's been snatched up and stuffed into the Senate, um, her principles

00:27:19.140 have gone away. And you know, Sheila, one last question, cause we have to wrap soon, but, um,

00:27:25.220 here's the deal. It's not just her. It's that even other media outlets, even media outlets that hate

00:27:31.860 the rebel should be coming to bat for us based on the principle alone. You know, I've had this

00:27:37.220 conversation with Ezra before when he was the publisher of the Western standard and he had,

00:27:41.940 he was the only courageous person in Canada to publish the Muhammad, the Danish Muhammad cartoon.

00:27:47.540 Um, you had journalists and various media outlets, um, come to bat for his Western standard,

00:27:53.860 even though they appalled it as much, almost as much as they appalled the rebel. I, today,

00:27:59.140 if we were to do that, if there was a Western standard that would do that, I, I know Ezra feels that

00:28:03.940 there would be zero support. Isn't it shocking that in the space of less than 15 years,

00:28:10.260 things have gotten so partisan, so personal that journalistic ethics and principles,

00:28:17.380 they just go out the door now, don't they, Sheila? I think it happened a lot faster than that. I

00:28:22.420 happened, I think it happened in a lot smaller timeframe. If you look at how journalists reacted

00:28:27.380 when Rachel Notley both kicked me out of the legislature and banned all of us from being

00:28:34.820 recognized as journalists by the government, the backlash at Rachel Notley was nearly immediate.

00:28:40.740 It was international and growing. My haters and enemies were even saying that, you know,

00:28:47.620 like this was a bad thing. It's bad for press freedom. It was totalitarian. It was authoritarian.

00:28:52.980 That was two years ago. Two years ago, there were still enough journalists standing on the side of

00:28:59.780 freedom to speak up. I can't really see anybody coming to our defense. I see a few op-eds, but those are

00:29:11.940 from other groups that were themselves fined, like the Canadian Taxpayers Federation. I don't see any

00:29:17.620 journalists really running to our defense right now. And I think that might be a harbinger of what we're

00:29:24.660 going to see on their editorial pages as we head into the election. If we can run afoul for an

00:29:30.980 editorial opinion, I think they're going to tamper their coverage so that they don't.

00:29:37.620 Couldn't agree more, Sheila. And you know, folks, if you want to support us, because we are not on any

00:29:42.980 kind of government payroll, please visit StandWithTheRebel.com. Make any kind of donation you can.

00:29:49.940 Fighting for freedom does not come cheap. Sheila Gunn-Reed, thank you so much for weighing in on

00:29:55.380 this and another superb commentary by you. Thank you, my friend. Great, David. Thank you so much,

00:30:00.420 and have a really great weekend. You got it. And folks, keep it here. More of Rebel Roundup to come

00:30:04.900 right after this. And this is why the Gillette ad is an interesting example. They act as if there is

00:30:17.700 some wild, wild west of interaction between men and women. Instead of implying that all men are bad,

00:30:24.820 they could simply encourage respect with others through our already developed system of social

00:30:29.140 cohesion that they are so eager to destroy. I think etiquette is important for all people.

00:30:34.260 They are not rules. They are not forceful. But when one does know how to treat others around

00:30:39.060 them with respect, it goes a long way. And it is not forgotten. It can make someone's day.

00:30:45.060 The difference is that politeness is merely formal. Political correctness requires that you

00:30:49.940 internalize the lie. Politeness is telling an ugly woman that she is attractive. Political 1.00

00:30:54.580 correctness is encouraging her to try for a modeling job and then picketing the modeling agency if they 1.00

00:30:59.620 don't hire her. It is all well and good to be polite in social situations. But when discussing

00:31:05.060 actual policies, politeness must not get in the way of clear thinking. And this is an important

00:31:11.220 distinction to make. Etiquette offers the ability to be honest. And political correctness forces you

00:31:18.180 to lie. Well, they say there's no such thing as bad publicity. But is that really the case?

00:31:25.220 I'll bet you a dollar that Procter and Gamble is suffering from buyer's remorse right now thanks

00:31:30.100 to the sort of publicity they're receiving for the new Gillette ad campaign. Gone and forgotten is the

00:31:36.580 Gillette tagline of olden days. You know, be the best a man can get. Because now, whether it was

00:31:43.220 intentional or not, the new Gillette ad campaign seems to imply that too many men inherently embody

00:31:50.580 so-called toxic masculinity. And wow, what a fantastic way for a company to endear itself

00:31:58.820 to its target market. And with more on the Gillette marketing misstep, I am joined now by Martina

00:32:05.300 Mercota in London. Welcome to Rebel Roundup, Martina. Thanks for having me. Always a pleasure,

00:32:10.740 my friend. Now, Martina, as you state in your commentary, this Gillette ad campaign is more

00:32:16.500 than merely an attack on men. It is also an attack on the very concept of etiquette.

00:32:22.580 What exactly brought you to this conclusion? Well, I'm a big fan of etiquette, the Emily Post guy

00:32:30.180 to etiquette. And I've done some videos before on the topic. And when the Gillette ad thing came out,

00:32:36.420 I was like, yeah, you know, I get everyone's point. It is the way it was. It's an attack on men,

00:32:42.820 sure. And I didn't think I had anything more to add. But the more I thought about it, I said,

00:32:46.900 wait a minute, you know what, they're missing something. And this is what I noticed what they

00:32:51.780 do a lot when they reboot old movies or TV shows and things like that. They're getting rid of the old

00:33:00.020 to implant a new form of ideology that they want to implant within those shows and things. You know,

00:33:07.540 with definitions, they remake definitions, racism is now a whole new thing involving institutionalism

00:33:13.380 and whatever. So I was like, this is another thing because I when I used to have lefty friends,

00:33:20.260 they really hated etiquette. And they thought it was old fashioned. I mean, this is something that

00:33:24.420 feminism has been fighting against is etiquette. They say we we don't need a man to open our doors. 1.00

00:33:31.780 We can open doors ourselves. You know, they they really have been pushing to get rid of etiquette.

00:33:36.660 But now they're having this weird way of trying to implant a new form of social cohesion. But we

00:33:44.260 already have one that works. Why are they redoing it? So that's my kind of concept. I was like, wait a

00:33:49.140 minute. This makes sense with etiquette. They're trying to read. What is it called read? Not

00:33:54.020 rebrand. You know, reprogram. They're trying to reprogram that how men should be acting. But we

00:34:00.980 already have a system of respect for women. Well, you know, and I'm with you there,

00:34:05.300 Martina. I'm old school. I guess I'm old fashioned, as the case may be. I'm big on etiquette. I like to

00:34:10.660 hold the door open for a lady. And I've never had the lecture. It's always appreciated. So I just wonder

00:34:16.820 who this lunatic fringe is of feminists that don't want that courtesy done. But going back to the ad 1.00

00:34:22.580 campaign, I think what ruffles my feathers, especially since I'm a guy who shaves, is first 0.97

00:34:30.500 of all, some corporation with the ostensible policy goal of having an uptick this financial quarter,

00:34:38.980 using the idea of masculinity as being a bad thing. And I say masculinity because I'm not falling into the

00:34:46.580 trap of toxic masculinity. I think, Martina, toxic masculinity is a code word to attack masculinity 1.00

00:34:55.220 classic, if you will. And I'm sick and tired of this because the women in my life have always 1.00

00:35:01.140 appreciated masculine men. What's your take on this as a woman? Yeah, absolutely. And I mean,

00:35:07.300 well, what you said was was accurate. Like, who are these people that don't want this?

00:35:11.620 And it is a very, very few minority. And that's what we've seen. We've seen

00:35:15.300 the few loud minority make it make a big stink about stuff when it doesn't really represent

00:35:21.620 the majority. And women definitely do appreciate a masculine man. I mean, who wouldn't? Who wouldn't

00:35:30.740 want that? And it should be noted to Martina, as much as masculinity, it's kind of fashionable 0.86

00:35:40.020 to frown upon it when it comes to the heavy lifting. And I know in the army and the police

00:35:46.660 force, in the fire service, there are women in those roles. But for the most part, these are still 0.96

00:35:52.180 guy things. So if we're in a conflict, if there is a police situation, if there is a fire, it is guys

00:35:59.460 putting their lives on the line. And I don't think the critics on the left at that point have any problem

00:36:05.860 when it comes to being saved by this so-called man embracing toxic masculinity.

00:36:11.700 Yeah. And I think that that's what the ad did wrong. And what they could have,

00:36:17.380 they could have approached the ad in that way where, you know, and in my video,

00:36:20.820 I bring up Desmond Doss and all sorts of virtuous men that really put their life on the line. They're

00:36:27.860 virtuous for women and children and society in general. And I think that would have been really

00:36:33.140 powerful for Gillette to go in that direction, to show virtuous men being as manly as possible for

00:36:40.580 women, for children. And that would have resonated with everyone, I think. That really would have done 0.80

00:36:45.860 better advertising than targeting them as innately bad. Because I don't think that's true. I think men

00:36:51.700 innately want to protect.

00:36:52.980 I agree. And, you know, Martine, in the Department of Full Disclosure,

00:36:57.460 I use the Gillette Fusion, or I should say used, past tense, because I'm not going to support this

00:37:04.340 company anymore. But, and the reason I use it is that despite the cost and they're not cheap,

00:37:11.780 those are, in my estimation, the best razors on the market. So I'm in this dilemma now of do I avoid

00:37:19.700 the advertising campaign, which I think is appalling, and choose their razors based on merit? Or do I now

00:37:26.580 go to, say, Schick, and maybe their blades are just as good now? It's been a long time since I've used

00:37:30.980 that to make a point. And I guess in the bigger picture is this, Martine, when the financials start

00:37:37.700 to roll in for Gillette, do you think, because that's what it's all about, it's the bottom line,

00:37:42.980 do you think this ad campaign is going to affect sales in a positive or a negative way?

00:37:49.540 Yeah, I mean, it always is about the money. And I think that's what the attempt is with

00:37:54.340 trying to pander to stuff. They think that's what the mainstream wants, and they're going to pander

00:37:59.300 to it. And that's where the money should go. But once they see, you know what they say, they say,

00:38:04.260 get woke, go broke. I mean, they've been seeing time and time again that these kinds of things

00:38:09.540 don't work. So I don't, I think it'll work against what they intended. And they'll probably back off a

00:38:18.900 little bit. I think that's the general direction with a lot of these advertising. They think it's a good

00:38:22.980 idea. They think this is what society wants to see. But once they go broke, they're just like,

00:38:27.540 oh, shoot, it's all about the money in the end. Well, and you know, on that note, maybe the fact

00:38:32.420 is, Martine, I know a huge selling brand for Gillette is the Venus product for ladies, but I'm not sure how 0.54

00:38:40.100 many feminists shave their legs. So maybe that's a nice starter. But overall, as an exit question, 1.00

00:38:47.860 Martina, all the feedback I've seen by those I respect in the media that weigh in on such issues,

00:38:55.780 my friends, my colleagues, my family members who are male, it's been absolutely negative. 1.00

00:39:01.140 Do you see Gillette doing some kind of a, you know, retreat to save face somehow?

00:39:07.380 Or are they just going pedal to the metal that this is what they're all about, preaching to their male

00:39:13.140 customers that, you know, you're kind of piggish and we don't like that? 1.00

00:39:18.980 Yeah, I mean, it's an interesting question. I don't know. I think that they might just keep going

00:39:26.340 with it because God knows who they have up in their boards and whoever's pulling these strings. So they

00:39:31.940 might just go, oh, okay, there was some backlash for that. Maybe that's good PR. You know what they

00:39:36.660 say about PR. I don't know. But maybe they're just like, oh, okay. And then they'll just kind of do

00:39:41.460 their normal commercials again. But if they backtrack even more and then say the other side,

00:39:47.540 go, oops, sorry, we were wrong. You know, that small minority, they're super loud and angry. So

00:39:52.900 it'll tick them off all over again. So it'll be this weird back and forth that they really take hard

00:39:58.500 lines. Hey, and maybe for me and thousands of men like me that are saying goodbye to Gillette,

00:40:03.860 maybe when we go and buy the alternative like Schick, maybe Gillette's done us a favor. Maybe they've

00:40:09.780 so upped their game that even my beloved Fusion is now second best. So I'll have to send a thank 1.00

00:40:15.620 you note for Gillette for that. In any event, Martina, thank you so much for weighing in on this

00:40:21.220 topic. Thanks for having me. You got it. And that was Martina Mercota in London. Keep it

00:40:26.660 here, folks. More of Rebel Roundup to come right after this.

00:40:37.140 Here he is in his own words. What's really sad is it's bringing so many bigots out of woodwork.

00:40:42.660 But Moore, a local emcee and rapper, isn't letting the memes get to her. She's using her newfound viral 1.00

00:40:48.340 fame to raise awareness about the transgender community. And she even wrote a song to get her

00:40:52.820 message out there. We're humans just like you. We're people just like you. We have kids. We have

00:40:58.660 parents. We have brothers, sisters, aunts, uncles, cousins. We're just trying to live.

00:41:05.540 As for how Moore handled the situation inside the store with that expletive-filled outburst?

00:41:10.020 Yeah, I could have reacted a whole lot better. But you know what? I look back at it. If I could,

00:41:15.300 I wouldn't change a single thing. I would do it 100,000 times again. I would kick over that display

00:41:20.020 100,000 times again because my actions were justified. I mean, it was blatant and malicious hate.

00:41:25.620 So, what lessons did we learn from the latest transsexual media darling, the oh-so-angelic 1.00

00:41:32.580 Tiffany Moore? Well, for starters, ZZ is completely unapologetic when it comes to

00:41:39.460 committing vandalism. And for someone clamoring for empathy and understanding,

00:41:44.900 he or she shows a complete lack of empathy and understanding for the young employee

00:41:50.500 at the GameStop store who was clearly not looking for a confrontation. And this guy gal has no regrets

00:41:58.260 about the incident. Tiffany says he'd still yell profanity and carry out acts of vandalism and

00:42:04.100 try to engage in a physical confrontation with someone about half his size 100,000 times over again.

00:42:11.860 Because at the end of the day, Herman Munster in a miniskirt isn't the problem.

00:42:16.260 Rather, society is. In any event, here's what some of you had to say about this latest episode of

00:42:23.700 Transanity. Stella Ash writes,

00:42:27.220 It's a bloke and he's the size of a rugger player. Unfortunately, he has the mind of an immature 0.99

00:42:34.260 idiot. Well, you're correct, Stella. Hey, if a man is going to go through life pretending he's a chick, 1.00

00:42:39.700 maybe he should, I don't know, consider acting ladylike. And call me a sexist if you must,

00:42:46.260 but being a lady doesn't mean kicking over display cases and grunting and swearing and asking a clerk 1.00

00:42:53.860 if they want to take it outside. Alexandria Hardy writes,

00:42:58.980 Oh, wow. You really nailed it, Alexandria. Funny how the usual suspects on the left

00:43:07.860 are not all over this brute for this particular brand of truly toxic masculinity. Or is toxic

00:43:16.660 masculinity okay in the eyes of the progressives if a she-male is misgendered? Gee, has anyone written

00:43:24.900 a rule book on all this new age etiquette stuff yet? I sure need it.

00:43:29.780 YTS Debunker writes, 0.98

00:43:31.460 It's clear in the interview that he is mentally unstable. He needs a psychiatrist, not a dress. 0.74

00:43:39.700 Yep, that's how we did it in the good old days. Psychiatric care would benefit the person suffering

00:43:46.020 from mental illness while keeping society at large safe. But insanity is becoming increasingly

00:43:53.140 normalized now. I guess it's all part of that diversity is our strength shtick.

00:43:59.460 Mr. Adam Bick writes,

00:44:01.540 Was that Buffalo Bill from Silence of the Lambs?

00:44:05.460 No, Mr. Adam Bick, I don't recall Buffalo Bill being quite that creepy.

00:44:11.380 CMA WPG writes,

00:44:15.060 Somewhere a football team is missing their linebacker. Hey, no kidding. And based on last week's AFC

00:44:21.300 conference final, I think that team might be the Kansas City Chiefs.

00:44:26.420 And Chibi1986 writes,

00:44:28.980 Speaking as a GameStop employee, 0.89

00:44:32.100 I wouldn't have an ounce of sympathy for this lunatic. 0.91

00:44:36.100 If that were my employee he was shouting at, 0.91

00:44:38.580 I'd be telling him to get out and never come back or the police would be called.

00:44:43.540 After calling said police,

00:44:45.780 Well, well said, Chibi. And so much for the worst phrase ever coined in the history of retail.

00:44:52.580 Namely, the customer is always right.

00:44:56.900 Well, that wraps up another edition of Rebel Roundup. Thanks so much for joining us.

00:45:01.300 See you next week. And hey folks, never forget, without risk, there can be no glory. Good night.

00:45:08.580 Bye.

00:45:11.140 And here,

00:45:11.700 Bye.

00:45:13.140 Bye.

00:45:13.540 Bye.

00:45:16.100 Bye.

00:45:21.540 Bye.

00:45:21.780 Bye.

00:45:26.180 Bye.

00:45:27.140 Bye.

00:45:29.160 Bye.

00:45:29.660 Bye.

00:45:30.840 Bye.

00:45:31.280 Bye.

00:45:34.640 Bye.

Rebel News Podcast - January 26, 2019

Rebel Roundup： Guests Martina Markota, Sheila Gunn Reid & Ezra Levant

Episode Stats

Summary

Transcript