September 2012 Archives
Ezra Levant discusses Omar Khadr's return to Canada.
This report aired on Sun News September 30 2012.
Mona Eltahawy has made a name for herself in the past year as a critic of the so-called Arab Spring — the violent trend towards militant jihad in the Middle East. In fact, she was arrested in Cairo’s Tahrir Square and assaulted by Egyptian police in jail. She’s a U.S. citizen now, and is a regular commentator on CNN and MSNBC.
Like many Arab intellectuals, she’s a socialist. But she was a critic of Islamic fascism.
But this week she flipped sides — and turned into a bit of an Islamic fascist herself.
Fellow critics of Islamic fascists had bought ads in New York subway stations with a very simple and blunt message: “In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man.” And then the ad ends by saying simply, “Support Israel defeat jihad.”
It’s pretty clear who the ad is calling savages: Extremists who use uncivilized means like terrorism to promote their agenda. By using the word jihad, it clearly means Muslim terrorists like al-Qaida, the PLO and others.
The woman behind those ads, Pamela Geller, was forced to go to court to get the New York Metro Transit Authority to run those ads, because they refused on political reasons.
Geller won her suit and the ads finally went up — but not for long. Eltahawy went out into the subways, with a can of spray paint and began vandalizing the posters. This so-called pro-freedom, anti-fascist Muslim became an anti-freedom, pro-fascist Muslim.
A so-called journalist, a so-called American was bringing Muslim Brotherhood-style censorship to America. There’s no other way to describe defacing ads you disagree with. And she went further — spray-painting and pushing around someone who supported the ads and stood in front of them.
Eltahawy was charged with assault. But she hasn’t expressed regret or called it a lapse in judgment or professionalism or even sanity. She has embraced her darker, violent side.
In an Orwellian twist, she has rechristened her censorship free speech, calling her vandalism “protected speech” and her assault “non-violent disobedience.” Nope.
She boasts she’d do it again. Here is a privileged journalist with access to CNN and MSNBC to make her case to argue, to put her ideas forward. But she would rather stop other people from buying a little poster on a wall.
The poster didn’t call all Muslims savages. It didn’t even use the world Muslim. It didn’t even say who the savages were — other than jihadists against Israel. Eltahawy was outraged that Geller’s posters called terrorists “savages.” Why would that bother Eltahawy? Are al-Qaida not savages?
Mona Eltahawy of CNN and MSNBC is a censoring, assaulting apologist for savages. But instead of being fired, it’s a certainty she’ll get even more TV airtime as a reward.
This column was written for Sun News September 30 2012.
Ezra Levant on the attack on freedom with the arrest of the anti-Muhammad filmmaker, and Obama’s use of the film as a scapegoat for the reason for the attack on the US consulate in Libya.
This report aired on The Source September 28 2012.
Peter Jaworski of the Institute for Liberal Studies joins to explain why many Canadians are becoming cheese smugglers.
This report aired on The Source September 28 2012.
Tiffany Gabbay brings the hottest stories from The Blaze, including details from their newest documentary, "The Project."
This report aired on The Source September 28 2009.
George Igler of the Discourse Institute in the UK has a warning for America and Canada about how easily the principles of free speech can be lost
This report aired on The Source September 26 2012.
Ezra reveals the truth about a “charitable” organization that’s meddling in Canada’s oil industry with foreign dollars
This report aired on The Source September 26 2012.
Tim Graham of Media Research Center explains how the mainstream media is rigging the US election with its bias.
This report aired on The Source September 26 2012.
Ezra Levant has a prime example of the Media Party’s obsession with things that no one really cares about, but seem go to missing every time it matters.
This report aired on The Source September 25 2012.
Pamela Geller of the American Freedom Defense Initiative on her fight to get her anti-jihad ads up in the New York City subway system and why it's making waves across the world.
This report aired on The Source September 25 2012.
Andrew McCarthy, the man who prosecuted the Blind Sheik, says what's going on in the Middle East right now is evidence the Arab Spring was just an Islamic illusion of democracy.
This report aired on The Source September 25 2012.
Thor Halvorssen on his open letter to Urban Outfitters to stop selling t-shirts that idolize Che Guevara.
This report aired on The Source September 25 2012.
Is anyone paying attention to Thomas Mulcair’s economic theories? A new poll has the NDP tied at 35% with the Conservatives, so maybe it’s time to treat them as a serious contender.
Here’s Mulcair’s central economic idea, as told to reporters outside the House of Commons last week:
“The NDP came down four-square in favour of cap-and-trade … the losses of hundreds of thousands of Canadian jobs is due to the high Canadian dollar … the Canadian dollar is partially artificially high because of failure to internalize environmental costs.
If we apply the basic principle of polluter pay, we will reduce the pressure on the Canadian dollar, save some of those jobs, start getting back the balanced economy that we’ve had since the Second World War.”
Every sentence of that is voodoo. Mulcair says the NDP is for cap-and-trade. That’s where oilsands companies would have a legal limit of how much carbon they could emit (that’s the cap part). And as that limit is ratcheted down, cleaner or more efficient companies would sell their extra carbon quota to companies that need it (that’s the trade part). Cap-and-trade rewards clean companies and makes polluters pay.
Except that in the NDP plan, there isn’t a trade part. The government gets the money. It’s a carbon tax. The NDP’s 2011 campaign plan acknowledges this, saying it will raise $20 billion for their new spending plans.
But that’s not the weirdest part.
Mulcair says “hundreds of thousands” of jobs in Ontario and Quebec were killed by the evil oilsands, and he says a carbon tax will fix that.
There’s only one possible way that could happen: If the oilsands were taxed so brutally that they literally reduced the amount of oil they produced and exported, then the world demand for Canadian dollars to buy our oil would fall, and so our dollar would fall.
That’s Mulcair’s plan to get Americans to buy Ontario-manufactured products again: Have everything Ontario makes sell at a discount through cheap Canadian currency. Inefficient Ontario factories will become competitive again if our foreign customers only have to pay 60-cent dollars.
Mulcair doesn’t propose to improve Ontario’s productivity — that is, union productivity at GM or Ford. He wants to devalue the dollar.
And he’s willing to kill the oilsands to make that happen. But look at the last part of Mulcair’s plan. He wants to use the money to “rebalance” our economy to get back to the industrial mix we had since the Second World War.
He says this often: We need to rebalance the number of people working in agriculture, manufacturing and services.
Once upon a time, 95% of Canadians were farmers. Today it’s 1.8%. It’s been declining every year since the Industrial Revolution. But Mulcair wants to rebalance that.
Apparently he thinks we need more people working in the fields. Maybe replace those job-killing tractors.
Same thing with factories. Factory employment peaked in the industrialized economies in the 1940s. Since then, ever more of us work in services — everything from computers to health care to media. Mulcair wants to fix that too. Fewer doctors and web designers. More assembly line workers.
Mulcair would tax the most productive sector — the oilsands — so he could subsidize industries that have naturally closed down on their own. It’s nuts. But so far, the Media Party hasn’t dared ask a question about it.
This column appeared in Sun News September 25 2012.
Raheel Raza responds to Muslims in Toronto calling for the hanging of the creator of the “anti-Islam” film spurring violence in the Middle East.
This report aired on The Source September 24 2012.
The Parliamentary press gallery fails to do it, so Ezra Levant picks apart some statements made by NDP leader Thomas Mulcair.
This report aired on The Source September 24 2012.
Dr. Jeffrey Addicott addresses the risk of releasing terrorists from Guantanamo Bay and the fallout of the potential transfer of the Blind Sheik to Egypt
This report aired on The Source September 24 2012.
American foreign policy is in a shambles, but Obama remains unperturbed.
Why?
The answer lies in his keynote foreign affairs speech, delivered in the spring of 2009 in Cairo, Egypt.
The White House set up a special website dedicated to the speech, with the grandiose title “A New Beginning.” They even translated it into
14 different languages.
It’s the template for Obama’s foreign policy, especially towards the Middle East. And, when read again today, it shows why Obama isn’t particularly upset with developments. Because he told us, in advance, he wouldn’t be.
Here are some excerpts.
“Tension has been fed by colonialism that denied rights and opportunities to many Muslims, and a Cold War in which Muslim-majority countries were too often treated as proxies without regard to their own aspirations.”
That’s what the speech was: An apology to the world’s dictatorships, like Egypt and Iran. But America has never been a colonial power — it was a British colony. In fact, America’s last half-dozen wars were to defend Muslims in Kuwait, Kosovo, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.
“I’ve come here to Cairo to seek a new beginning between the United States and Muslims around the world.”
Obama did not speak country to country, or person to person. His speech was an outreach to Islam as a whole — to a religion. That’s odd. But fine: What did Obama have to say about religious freedom and Islam?
“The United States government has gone to court to protect the right of women and girls to wear the hijab and to punish those who would deny it.”
But what about the right of women not to cover their faces in public? And why does he criticize America, where women are equal — why not a word for women suffering under Arabia’s gender apartheid?
“Regardless of race, religion, or station in life, all of us share common aspirations — to live in peace and security; to get an education and to work with dignity; to love our families, our communities, and our God.”
Those are a good list of values. But where is the quintessentially American value: Freedom?
“Nine-eleven was an enormous trauma to our country. The fear and anger that it provoked was understandable, but in some cases, it led us to act contrary to our traditions and our ideals.”
That’s all Obama had to say about 9/11 — not that it was an act of war or terrorism. In the hour-long speech, Obama carefully managed not to say the word terrorism once. Instead, he blames the victim. Instead of saying that 9/11 was an immoral act against America, he said 9/11 caused Americans to be immoral.
He had a special message for Iran, too: “In the middle of the Cold War, the United States played a role in the overthrow of a democratically elected Iranian government.”
Leave alone whether that revisionist view is true historically. Iran doesn’t care. What Iran cares about is that Obama was clearly saying it will not interfere again — in the future. It was a final reassurance that Obama would not stop Iran from its nuclear ambitions today.
And here’s the most important part: “No system of government can or should be imposed by one nation by any other. That does not lessen my commitment, however, to governments that reflect the will of the people.
Each nation gives life to this principle in its own way, grounded in the traditions of its own people. America does not presume to know what is best for everyone, just as we would not presume to pick the outcome of a peaceful election.”
No mention of freedom. Not even democracy. Just that each country can run itself in its own way. If that’s the Shariah law, if that’s the Muslim Brotherhood terrorist group, Obama won’t object. And he hasn’t, has he?
Obama wanted the Muslim world to hear this speech. They did. He wanted a new beginning. They’ve given him one. They’re delighted. So is he.
This column was written for Sun News September 23 2012.
Is the US releasing a terrorist to Egypt? Ezra Levant talks to Pamela Gellar about the US' irresponsible foreign policy
This report aired on The Source September 21 2012.
Why did John Lennon's son get into a verbal sparring match with Ezra's guest, Phelim McAleer?
This report aired on The Source September 21 2012.
Mulcair thinks the oilsands are draining our economy? Really? Maybe that's why he compared them to the Sydney, Cape Breton tar ponds. Shameful.
This report aired on The Source September 21 2012.
Ezra and Brooke Goldstein of The Lawfare Project agree: the Libyan attacks are not about some film. They were planned Al-Qaeda terrorism.
This report aired on The Source September 20 2012.
Ezra Levant speaks to Nadeem Esmail of the Fraser Institute, who reveals that Canadians pay $11k/year for 'free' health care.
This report aired on The Source September 20 2012.
Though the White House suggested the Libyan attacks were in no way related to 9/11, Ezra - and new evidence - beg to differ.
This report aired on The Source September 20 2012.
Ezra takes on the Media Party, who has recently joined forces with the NDP to attack Stephen Harper for opposing a carbon tax.
This report aired on The Source September 19 2012.
Ezra talks to Hillel Neuer of UN Watch about what the international body has been up to while anti-Western violence explodes across the globe.
This report aired on The Source September 19 2012.
Is Mark Steyn a prophet? Well, no, but his book After America seems all too familiar compared to recent events in the Middle East.
This report aired on The Source September 18 2012.
As Thomas Mulcair retreats from his "Dutch Disease" comments, Ezra wonders who you trust more on the economy: Mark Carney or Mulcair-conomics?
This report aired on The Source September 18 2012.
Ezra Levant talks to Conservative MP Russ Hiebert about real workers rights - that start with union transparency.
This report aired on The Source September 18 2012.
Ezra Levant asks why there is growing anti-American sentiment and violence across the globe but Obama doesn't seem to mind.
This report aired on The Source September 17 2012.
After her illness, when Americans tell Shona Holmes "You're lucky you have public health care," she now responds "You're lucky you don't."
This report aired on The Source September 17 2012.
Ezra interviews Sam Nunberg about the outrageous judicial overthrow of free speech involving none other than Zombie Mohammed.
This report aired on The Source September 17 2012.
Ezra Levant weighs in on the terrorist attacks in Egypt and Libya.
This report aired on Sun News Network.
Ezra Levant thinks the Libyan murders and anti-US violence across the Middle East are a new chapter in the War on Terror.
This report aired on Sun TV September 13 2012
Last week Vic Toews, the public safety minister, finally received videotapes of Omar Khadr, the confessed murderer and terrorist, being interviewed while in prison.
At the request of Khadr’s lawyers, the U.S. military commission in 2010 had those videotapes sealed.
Toews wants to review them before deciding whether to accept Khadr’s application to be transferred from Guantanamo Bay to prison in Canada.
Khadr wants to come to Canada because, under our ultra-liberal parole laws, he could be back on the streets in a matter of weeks.
Should we take him? Forget about justice and Khadr’s murder victim, U.S. Army medic Christopher Speer. How about public safety for us Canadians?
Well, public safety minister is Toews’ job title. And here’s what our International Transfer of Offenders Act has to say about prisoner transfers to Canada.
Section 10(1)(a) reads: “In determining whether to consent to the transfer of a Canadian offender, the Minister may consider ... whether the offender’s return to Canada will constitute a threat to the security of Canada.”
Of course Khadr is a threat to Canadian security. He is an al-Qaida terrorist, we are at war with al-Qaida and Khadr has not renounced al-Qaida.
Here’s section 10(1)(d): “...whether the offender left or remained outside Canada with the intention of abandoning Canada as their place of permanent residence.”
Khadr abandoned Canada to go murder Americans in Afghanistan. His family only used Canada for free health care whenever they got shot up.
Section 10(1)(f) considers “whether the offender has social or family ties in Canada.”
Khadr does have family in Canada, his pro-terrorist mother Maha and his pro-terrorist sister Zaynab. They want Omar to rebuild the Canadian branch of al-Qaida like their dad, Ahmed Khadr did, until he was killed by Pakistani police.
Section 10(2) says “the Minister may consider ... whether, in the Minister’s opinion, the offender will, after the transfer, commit a terrorism offence or criminal organization offence.”
In the years Khadr’s been at Guantanamo Bay, he has become more jihadist — and made hundreds of new terrorism contacts around the world.
There is no way, given what we already know about Khadr, that he can pass the test of this law.
If the International Transfer of Offenders Act can’t keep Khadr out of Canada, it can keep no one out of Canada and we may as well scrap the law.
There is no reason to let him back — other than to further his war aims. It will be an enormous propaganda victory for al-Qaida to have a terrorist walking free on the streets of Toronto, unrepentant, cheered on by every anti-war, pro-jihad nutbar.
It will be a real benefit to al-Qaida, too — fundraising, recruiting, inspiring. Just like his dad did before him.
Abacus Data did a survey of 1,800 Canadians last month, asking their views on Khadr.
Only 24% of Canadians want him transferred back to prison here, 60% oppose it.
But ask Canadians how they feel about paroling Khadr — what really could happen, a few weeks after he’s back — and the results are staggering.
Only 15% of Canadians support him paroled. Compared to 71% who are opposed — 53% “strongly opposed.”
Now Toews has the videotapes of this murderer. He’s going to watch them. But shouldn’t we have the right to see them too? Not just the few clips that Khadr’s lawyers will surely leak to the CBC, edited to make him look harmless.
Let’s see all of it.
I doubt Khadr made any bombshell statements about his plans to kill us all. He’s smarter than that. He’s a master manipulator.
But let’s watch. Let’s watch the smug sense of entitlement. The lack of remorse. The denial of moral responsibility. How he reveres his terrorist father.
Write to Toews at vic.toews@parl.gc.ca. Tell him you want to see the tapes — all of them.
Remind him that his job is to stand up for public safety and apply the law — not to cave in to the Media Party and their celebrity terrorist.
This column appeared in the Sun News chain September 9 2012.
Ezra Levant talks about Iran's horrific human rights record and why cutting diplomatic ties with the regime was the right move for Canada.
This report aired on The Source September 7 2012.
Ezra Levant talks to Marc Murano of Climate Depot about why so many Canadians are man-made climate change skeptics, and why that's OK!
This report aired on The Source September 7 2012.
Ezra Levant interviews the pilot who flew the PSAC plane reading "Stephen Harper hates us". Was it really forced to land, as the consensus media is saying?
This report aired on The Source September 6 2012.
Ezra talks to Canadian journalist Joe Wang about why the Chinese regime is censoring him.
This report aired on The Source September 6 2012.
What does Ezra Levant think of the PSAC plane that was taken down after criticizing Stephen Harper on a banner?
This report aired on The Source September 5 2012.
Why is one Canadian featured in an American political ad speaking out about her scary experience with our public health care system?
This report aired on The Source September 5 2012
The most pitiful moment of the Republican National Convention wasn’t anything that Mitt Romney or anyone in his party did.
It was a snippy little comment posted on Twitter, the micro-blogging site, after midnight on Thursday night, by a juvenile Democrat activist who was staying up late and mocking the Republicans.
Clint Eastwood, one of the few conservatives in Hollywood, had just made a quick, loosely scripted appearance at the Republican convention, and talked about his own disillusionment with Barack Obama. He was standing by a chair, and made a quick reference to it — how Obama himself should have been in that empty chair.
It wasn’t particularly funny or powerful or memorable. But across America, staying up late in the White House, a junior campaigner just couldn’t help himself from replying.
And that Democrat was Barack Obama himself.
President Obama tweeted a picture of himself sitting in the president’s official chair at an official cabinet meeting, with the reply to Eastwood: “This seat’s taken.” Not particularly funny either. Not exactly a Twitter “war.” But it was a “nyah, nyah, I’m sitting in the president’s chair, and you’re not.”
Hold on a second. This is what the president of the United States — the leader of the free world, the commander-in-chief of the world’s greatest military, the man responsible for lowering America’s staggering unemployment rate, reducing its record debt, handling the Arab Spring, the civil war in Syria, the Iranian nuclear threat, China’s ascendance — this is what the president was doing?
Lurking on the Internet after midnight and sparring with an 82-year-old actor?
Now, maybe the Obama tweet was written by a staffer in his name. Which is just as troubling — that, after nearly four years of working with Obama, they know him well enough to know that he is small and petty and partisan and that this is the image he wants to project.
But it was actually quite likely that it was the president himself. Earlier in the Republican convention, Obama made a publicity stunt of sitting down at a laptop and engaging in an hour-long chit-chat on the Internet website Reddit.
It’s not that he’s nerdy. It’s that he’s a time-waster, a childish man, given to stunts and not substance. It was really him at the keyboard for the Reddit stunt.
It’s not unlikely that it was really him, staying up past midnight, obsessing about his greatest enemy — Mitt Romney. Not Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, or a possible Eurozone economic meltdown. But Clint Eastwood. And tweeting.
But Obama has always been unserious. No great accomplishments in life – but two lovingly written autobiographies. No business experience; no military experience; no leadership experience at all, really. Just being wafted ever upward in a series of preparations.
He won the job — that big chair — in 2008. And it was as if he didn’t know what to do with it. He didn’t master events or cause them — they happened to him. He took over at the beginning of a recession — and deepened it. He took over a debt-burdened government, and further indebted it.
The Arab Spring exploded on his watch — he has stood impotently to the side as the Muslim Brotherhood seized it. His solution is what it has always been: Another speech, always on teleprompter; another campaign fundraiser; maybe another golf game. It’s the difference between campaigning and governing; between talking and actually taking steps, actually deciding.
This column is at Sun News, September 4 2012.
Blogrolls
