Podcast Summary

Rebel News Podcast – The Ezra Levant Show

Episode Title: Liberals push Nazi symbol ban to distract from the real problem
Date: November 26, 2025
Host: Ezra Levant
Guest: Sam Westrop (Director, Islamist Watch, Middle East Forum)

Episode Overview

Ezra Levant critiques the Canadian Liberal government's new "Combating Hate" Bill C-9, arguing that its focus on banning Nazi and terrorist symbols is a political distraction from what he sees as the root cause of antisemitism and hate crimes in Canada: mass immigration from countries with entrenched antisemitic attitudes, and a lack of law enforcement against pro-Hamas agitators. The episode features a discussion of the specifics of Bill C-9, issues of selective enforcement, and a broader conversation with Sam Westrop on the Islamification of Western societies and recent US state-level crackdowns on Islamist organizations.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

1. Introduction: The Futility and Motives Behind Bill C-9

• Ezra Levant opens by skeptical of whether hate, as an emotion, can be legislated against. He pivots to promote Rebel News+ before critiquing the government’s focus on symbolism rather than substantive action ([00:00]).
  • “Hate's a human feeling. An emotion. Can you change someone's feelings just by passing a law?” ([00:11])
• He accuses the Liberals of using Bill C-9 to distract from their failure to address pro-Hamas protests and harassment of Jews.
• Core Argument: The government is obsessed with censorship and attempting to regulate feelings, which Levant sees as inherently authoritarian.

2. Breakdown of Bill C-9

• Ezra goes through the bill line by line:

  • Willful promotion of hatred:
    • Bans symbols associated with listed terrorist groups, most of which are Islamist organizations ([05:00]).
    • Bans Nazi symbols like the swastika and SS bolts, but not all Nazi-related imagery ("Believe me, the Nazis had plenty of symbols" [09:40]).
    • Outlaws flying terrorist flags, but Levant doubts enforcement given current police inaction toward pro-Hamas demonstrators.

• Symbolic loopholes and enforcement skepticism:

  • Hate group supporters adapt with alternate symbols (e.g. watermelons, red triangles), making legislation ineffective ([07:00]).
  • Law includes defenses for “legitimate” educational, journalistic, or artistic uses. Levant predicts pro-Hamas activists will use this defense ([10:55]).
  • A new stand-alone hate crime is introduced, with possible life sentences if an underlying crime is “motivated by hatred”—which Levant calls a dangerous prioritization of thought crime over material acts ([14:30]).

Notable Quote:

• “You don't get life in prison even for murder in Canada, I don't think, but you'll get life in prison for having very strong feelings of detestation. That shows you the priorities of this government, doesn't it?” ([15:27])

3. Law Enforcement and Previous Inaction

• Levant argues existing laws already prohibit harassment and intimidation at places of worship but are simply not enforced ([17:28]).
  • Example given of police ignoring repeated attacks on a North York synagogue ([16:30]).
• He interviews a government official who, when pressed, admits a lack of prosecutions, prompting Levant’s harsh critique of political inaction ([18:38]).

Memorable Exchange:

• Levant (to Ontario Solicitor General): "You have condoned it. You've created a new normal where people can engage in low level, permanent anti Semitic crimes. Assault, threats, mischief, because you guys don't prosecute. But there you are on Twitter, though, so congrats for that." ([19:58])

4. Symbol Bans: Who Gets Targeted?

• Levant predicts symbol bans will be selectively used against political opponents of the government, such as Canadian truckers, rather than Islamist hate groups ([21:00]).
  • He contends the only real “new” measure is the stand-alone hate crime, again predicting it will disproportionately target dissenters, not violent extremists.

5. Broader Context: Islamification and Radicalism in the West

• Levant shares observations from European cities about the growing influence of radical Islam, connecting it to demographic changes via immigration ([23:24]).
• He observes similar, if less advanced, trends in North American cities.

6. Interview with Sam Westrop (Director, Islamist Watch, Middle East Forum)

• Topic: Recent moves by state governments in the US (e.g., Texas) to designate groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and CAIR as banned entities ([26:31]).
  • Westrop explains these moves are mostly symbolic, given the legal complexity and lack of follow-through.
  • Argues the focus on the Muslim Brotherhood is too narrow; many other Islamist groups operate openly.

Key Exchange:

• Levant: “If it’s the showiest thing and it’s a big fuss, but it’s not the actual problem on the ground, then you could even say he’s playing us... That’s my worry about Donald Trump’s statement.” ([31:02])

• Westrop: “The Brotherhood is the tip of the iceberg. There's a lot to do here, and I hope Governor Abbott follows through.” ([29:28])

• Westrop adds that organizations evade designations simply by changing names, citing the case of Anjem Choudary in the UK ([37:43]).

• Both agree that, without genuine law enforcement follow-up, these bans are largely performative and ineffective.

Notable Quote:

• Westrop: “Once I see law enforcement setting up task forces, I see prosecutions, indictments made... then I'll know that the political class is truly paying attention. For the moment, this is a good first step, but we're not there yet.” ([38:47])

7. Symbolic Action vs. Real Change

• Levant and Westrop concur that, while symbolic actions can raise awareness, they can also give false comfort and distract from effective policies.
• They discuss the legal challenges in actually using terror designations to seize assets or successfully fight extremism in court ([39:56]).
  • So far, US law has seldom been effectively used to crack down on domestic funders of terrorist-linked organizations.
• Westrop’s concluding thought: Political will is the true missing ingredient.

8. Letters and Audience Feedback

• Levant reads and responds to viewer letters calling for deportation of foreign agitators, law enforcement reform, and skepticism about government pipeline announcements ([43:05]).

Notable Quotes & Memorable Moments

• On legislating emotion:
  • "You can no more tell someone not to feel an emotion that they are feeling than you can command someone to feel an emotion that they aren't feeling. That's just not how people work." (Ezra Levant, [02:20])
• On selective law enforcement:
  • "The flag is not the problem. It's the people who would hold the flag." (Ezra Levant, [11:15])
• On government priorities:
  • "The Liberal government puts a higher premium on censoring Canadian citizens than on pretty much any other policy." (Ezra Levant, [01:45])
• On playing to the crowd without substance:
  • "If it’s the showiest thing and it’s a big fuss, but it’s not the actual problem on the ground, then you could even say he's playing us. He’s throwing us a bone in the most showy way, which is my worry about Donald Trump’s statement." (Ezra Levant, [31:02])
• On the futility of terror designations:
  • "Even if you take those groups in the U.S. Islam is seen most closely aligned with the Brotherhood. Now you have to prove they are part of the Brotherhood... So proving amid the chaos that these groups in the United States... are still connected... is a whole other barrier to cross." (Sam Westrop, [41:00])

Important Timestamps

• 00:00-05:00 – Introduction, Bill C-9 context, Levant critiques attempts to legislate feelings
• 05:00-13:00 – Analysis of which groups and symbols are targeted by the bill; issues with symbolism over substance
• 13:00-16:00 – Expansion of hate crimes in law, possible penalties including life imprisonment
• 16:00-21:00 – Law enforcement inaction and interview with a government official revealing bureaucratic buck-passing
• 23:00-26:30 – Levant’s observations from Europe regarding Islamification
• 26:31-43:04 – Interview with Sam Westrop about Islamist movements, symbolic government action, and problems with enforcement
• 43:05-end – Audience letters and Levant’s closing remarks

Tone & Language

The tone is direct, polemical, and often combative—typical of Ezra Levant’s on-air persona. Levant uses biting sarcasm, rhetorical questions, and blunt language throughout, especially in exchanges with politicians. Guest Sam Westrop adopts a more measured and analytical tone, focusing on facts and trends.

Conclusion

This episode of The Ezra Levant Show argues that Bill C-9 and similar measures are largely political theatre, designed to appease public concern while avoiding the deeper, more controversial issues of immigration policy and law enforcement failures. Levant and Westrop agree that without willful, consistent application of existing laws and a willingness to address uncomfortable root causes, such symbolic bans will do little to reduce hate crimes or radicalism.