Shaun Newman Podcast - #969 - Vesper

Episode Date: December 16, 2025

He lives in Quebec, is a brand designer and during the lockdowns started VesperDigital on X with the purpose of exposing the government and getting Justin Trudea out of office. We discuss his theory on why the Bloc is pushing Bill C-9 and the Quebec separatist movement. Tickets to Cornerstone Forum 26’: https://www.showpass.com/cornerstone26/Tickets to the Mashspiel:https://www.showpass.com/mashspiel/Silver Gold Bull Links:Website: https://silvergoldbull.ca/Email: [e-mail] Grahame: [phone]Bow Valley Credit UnionBitcoin: www.bowvalleycu.com/en/personal/investing-wealth/bitcoin-gatewayEmail: [e-mail] Prophet River Links:Website: store.prophetriver.com/Email: [e-mail] the code “SNP” on all ordersGet your voice heard: Text Shaun 587-217-8500

This is Viva Fry. I'm Dr. Peter McCullough. This is Tom Lomago. This is Chuck Pradnick. This is Alex Krenner. Hey, this is Brad Wall. This is J.P. Sears. Hi, this is Frank Paredi.

This is Tammy Peterson. This is Danielle Smith. This is James Lindsay. Hey, this is Brett Kessel, and you're listening to the Sean Newman podcast. Welcome to the podcast, folks, happy Tuesday. How's everybody doing today when it comes to precious metals? Look no further than Silver Gold Bowl. You can find them at Silvergoldbill.com.

I'm on the charts right now. and silver today sits at $87.60. That's Canadian, and I've been, you know, fall along with the silver price for a while. A year ago, it was 43, 47, and I've been saying this story a lot. One of the first silver coins I gave out was $38. So now it's well over double that. So 8760 as we sit here today, something to keep your eyes on. And did you know you can hold physical gold and silver in your registered accounts? And silver gold bowl can help unlock the potential of your RRSP, TFSA RRIF or Kids RESP by adding physical gold and silver to your account. And the deadline this year coming up is March 2nd, 20206. Once you've made contributions into these accounts, you can invest it into physical precious metals at any time. And if you're looking for someone to talk to about that, text or email, Graham, it's down the show notes for details with this or any other questions you may have around investing

in precious metals or for feature silver deals exclusively for you, the S&P, listener. You can find all the details down the show notes. You can also go to silvergoldbowl.ca or dot com and just make sure to reference the Sean Newman podcast. Profit River, when it comes to firearms here in Canada, look to the experts at Profit River. You can go on their website, Profitriver.com, and they have a whole host of things there,

and it's pretty easy to interact with. You can see they've got used weapons, consignment, sitting there. They also got brand new stuff. Everything's there. You can also email the primary contact for the SMP listener, Joel, at SMP at Profitriver.com. Any purchases you make online, over the phone, or in person, just make sure to use the coupon code, SMP.

It gets you put in for monthly draws. Just go to Profitriver.com. They are the major retailers of firearms, optics, accessories. Excessaries, spit it out, serving all of Canada. So matter where you are across Canada, look to Profit River for all your firearm needs. Rect Power Products for over 20 years, they've been committed to excellence in the Power Sports industry.

If you are traveling through Lloydminster, stop at the unofficial border markers of this show, and that's rec tech. They're on the west side of town, open Monday through Saturday, and their showroom has got a lot in there. We're into the winter season, so obviously snowmobiles probably are the one that everybody would be looking at. But, you know, they got Lund fishing boats, they got C-Doo, they got side-by-sides, they got quads, they got it all. They got just a whole host of things. We stop in and see Ryan today and tell them, Sean sent you. If you're further out, you can look at them, rectech power products.com. And if you're, you know, wanting to escape Saskatchewan PST, slide on over to the Alberta side

and get a little discount from rec tech, you know, you get the point. PlanetCom, when you're busy running a growing business trying to stay on top of the ever-changing world of information tech, it can be overwhelming to say the least. Let them take care of that for you, leaving you to do your thing while they do their for the past 22 years, Planetcom has been here to boost your productivity by proactively managing every aspect of your IT infrastructure, both in the house and in the cloud,

and this ensures you're not too tangled up in technology to get anything done. If you want to see their handywork, go to the shan Newmanpodcast.com. You can see the website they built for me, and when it comes to Internet security, because on this side, we had my shonanumanpodcast.com stolen, become a Chinese gambling website.

They've been instrumental in making sure, that that doesn't happen again. And so if you're worried about that or getting a website built or a whole lot of other questions, go to planetcom.ca.ca and get in touch with them. Tell them I sent you.

They've got an excellent staff there that can make sure you're covered on that end. The Mash Bill, January 17th, we are a little over a month away from coming to Calmar, Alberta. We're going to have a day where it's, you know,

pretty relaxed a little bit of curling and hopefully you know have a little bit of fun don't worry if you're not a great curler because i certainly am not you can sign up as an individual we'll put you on a team or you can sign up as a team of four and just come to calmar have a little bit of fun down in the show notes is the link if you can't find it shoot me a text and i can send it to you the cornerstone forum returns march 28th in calgary it's going to be at the west in calgary airport. We just announced that Larry Johnson, Larry C. Johnson is going to be the latest addition to the group of speakers, including Tom Longo,

Alex Criner, Vince Lanchi, Matt Air, Chad Prather, Karen Katowski, Sam Cooper, Tom Bodrovics, and of course, Toos is going to be back there as well. You can get early bird tickets on sale until December 31st. Don't wait. I'm historically a procrastinator. Don't be a procrastinator. Go buy your tickets. cheapest they'll be is going to be the next couple weeks leading up to December 31st, then prices go up. You can find the link down in the show notes, or you can go to showpass.com backslash cornerstone 26. If you're listening or watching on Spotify, Apple, YouTube, Rumble, X,

Facebook, substack. Make sure to subscribe. Make sure to leave a review. And if you're enjoying the show, share with a friend. All right, let's get on to that. Tale of the tape. Today's guest lives in Quebec is a brand designer and goes by the handle Vesper Digital on X. I'm talking about Vesper. So buckle up. Here we go. Okay. Welcome to the Sean Numa podcast today.

I'm joined by Vesper. Vesper, thanks for hopping on this morning. Oh, man, you're very welcome. Great to be here. Well, this comes off of having Fateen on. Fateen and I were talking, and she's talking about Bill C9 and it being in committee and how the block are in cahoots with the liberals. And she's pointing to it, it's political, and it looks like it's being driven by the block. And then she says something along the lines.

If you know somebody from Quebec that would come on and try and explain this, you really should because I think it would be interesting to hear why on earth the block is pushing Bill C9. now you now you want the quebecer huh now you want the quebecer i'm like i give you a shout out because i'm like well shout out to vespher we're just going to have vespir on so if you didn't listen to feteen folks you should go back an episode listen to that conversation on bill c9 because it it literally leads into this one they're back to back right so vesper bill c9 why don't you give everybody a little bit of a condensed version about what that interview was so that it adds context to this sure well i think i think for for bill

c9 what you know it's like criminalizing hate speech hate speech being found in the bible right like different parts they're pointing to that and so it's in committee right now and so feteen walks me through you know it went through uh the first reading and then the second reading okay got passed in both, then it goes to committee, and this is where they're supposed to bring in expert witnesses and really argue it through and make sure it's a good bill. And what we're seeing is they're not bringing in witnesses. It's being, you know, shut down. They're trying to expedite it is probably the simplest way to say it. Yep. Yep. And it's being, there's 10 people in committee, as I understand it, four conservatives, four liberals, and two block. And the block are siding with the liberals. So,

you know, I do simple math. I go, okay, so it's going to go through committee. It's going to to go back for third reading, which now with, with Ma going across a floor, not to mention the block supporting it, not probably to mention that, I don't know, Elizabeth May is going to support it. It's like, it's going to pass third greeting. Then it's going to go to the Senate. We all know how we feel about the Senate and how many have been appointed by Trudeau. And you go, this is going to pass. Like, I mean, so Fetin is pointing to people calling the, the liberal writings that were uber close she's talking about calgary and some other writings and putting pressure on them to um basically not show up for the vote vote differently vote with the conservatives vote this down

but what we get to is like i'm like why does the block want this and she goes like political and henceforth you coming on well why is quebec is here's the real question why does quebec care secularism thing anyway what's the issue in quebec you can see everybody the cpc you know through andrew lawton uh you know all these people in committee you guys are going to attack religious free speech and on and on and on but there's a honestly there's a bigger more plausible answer beneath this religious attack that no one wanted to talk about and i think it does take an intuitive quebecer who understands the sentiment of this province to figure out what really is going on here kebec for the most part is i mean we have a mountain in the middle of quebec count

called mount royal with a cross on it and on that same mountain we have the biggest cathedral in all of Canada, okay? St. Joseph's Oratory. This place for decades has been Catholic. Now, I'm not saying there isn't a, you know, anti-religious movement to this whole thing, because, I mean, let's face it, Quebec is one of the most debauched places in Canada. Everyone else had age limits to go clubbing and go to things like strip clubs like 21. Quebec was 18 for the last 20 years. So they're very liberal, you know, in their hedonism. Let's put it that way.

So there was this kind of tension between the religious, devout Catholic French and the very liberal French that were in opposition. In fact, and I say this without sounding blasphemous, I know a lot of people joke about it. But even in the Quebecua Act language, the French language, the disdain for Catholicism among the population is laced in to our curse words. I don't know if you know that. So you must have heard tabernac. Well, what is Tabernac? Tabernacle.

That just means the tabernacle. That when you'd go to the church, that area where the priests would do, you know, so they would say tabernac. Esti. Well, that's the Ostri. That's the cup that the priest would hold. Literally, every curse word that you could think of relating to Christian religion has been laced into the curse words of the French population of Quebec. So that's one side. Then you have the more conservative, diplomatic side of things and politics where everybody says they're a Catholic and acts like a Catholic. So that's just laying the groundwork for how the environment here looks like okay are any of our leaders whether it be the mayors whether it be the p the the the the

premieres whether it be any of any leader frankly in terms of politics in quebec ever ever ever said hey i'm an atheist i don't believe in this religious stuff i wanted to be you know a religious this place and we need to go with this leicite secularism bill No, you've never heard any leader in Quebec stand up and say, I'm against religion. And you will not hear that because frankly, it would be the end of you politically. But there is policies that are being run. And I think we need to go back to what the purpose of this meeting that you asked me for. And we're going to be talking about a thread I put together yesterday.

I didn't do it for me and then you found it. I did it to complement today so that we could facilitate this for, people what is in your mind when you think quebec and politics and i'm let's say you represent not only your province a few other provinces what comes to mind when you think politics quebec what do you think and i i don't there is no right answer here i just want to know what what comes to your mind uh they're a distinct group of people culture separism a separation like they want their own culture their own nation like To what limit had they gone to make sure that their culture is different than everyone else's culture?

Would it be our language, for example? Sure. Enacting laws that would criminalize people were the only province where you can't have the name of your company in English anywhere. They're cracking down on English schools year after year in Quebec to make sure that they don't lose their French identity. So it's this identity thing, identity, identity. Well, Catholicism is also your identity. Why are you attacking that? Well, it's actually simple.

What does Quebec not love about Canada? They don't want to be in Canada. It's that simple. And they've tried everything. So we go back to the 1990. And you and I talked about this for the Alberta separation thing. Remember that we did that whole. thing about, you know, how the whole, it's predicated upon the rulings of the 1998 referendum.

Quebec, the Quebec, Partique Quebecois, particularly. We're not talking about liberal federalists. Okay. So, guys, I just want everyone listening to understand this. I know a lot of people in the West are like, you Quebecers, you just take all of our money and you contribute nothing back. You're right. We do. But who's the one really doing this? It's the federalist. Quebecois. It's the Jean-Critians. It's the Pierre Chudos. It's the Brian Mulroonies. It's the Justin Chudos. These are not separatists, Quebec. These are the Laurentian elites that work with Ottawa to join and unify this Confederacy called Canada. If you left it up to the Parts Quebec, you know, the separatists in this, Sean, they won't, they wouldn't take your money and they would just split with. the province let's make that clear the frenchiest of the french don't want your billions they just want the province give us our province we don't want your money we don't want anything from you we want to just be our own country just like how alberta now is fighting to be its own country so next

time you guys think about quebec please remember that yes while it is quebec accepting your money it's not really because they necessarily want your money, it's because they're tied into this confederacy that these federalists have made sure is not easy to exit. You and I talked about the Clarity Act that you guys in Alberta, whoever's listening from Alberta, is facing now, how to overcome this hurdle to get a referendum and on and on and on.

Well, who did that? Jean-Cretien. He's the one after seeing how it could have gone sideways in 1998 in the referendum, decided, we are not going to let this happen again. We are going to make sure the law is very strong so that you cannot leave very easy. That's how it is for the Federalist Quebecois.

But the Parti Quebecois, we're going to see today in the video. The leader of the Parti Quebecois today is I-François Blanchette. If Francois Blanchette, the Party-Cubequois leader, has not been shy about saying, I do not believe in this thing called Canada.

I'm not the guy that you're going to bank on who wants this country. So this dude has been has been turbo Alberta separatist, but for Quebec for two decades. He was separatist before separatism in Alberta probably even gained any. I go back to I want to say it was the 2019 election. I want to say it was then, folks, but forgive me. you know everything blurs together when he's on the the the federal election english debate and they're asking him questions and he goes i don't want to be prime minister and i'm like the do like that was a real like i i'm like what why are you even there then why are you allowed

to be on the stage anyway so when you're talking about him being you know uh uh alberta's separation on steroids essentially i think anyone has to do is just go watch some of the things he's at going back in time in some very critical moments or key moments. And you're like, oh, it's been there since it's been evident. And we're going to show some of that today. But here's what's important, folks. Is Bill C9 about religion? Everything I've researched about this and known about this from Quebec,

I don't have sources. This is just me researching. And I, because I have history and knowledge of what happened in the referendum, and I followed the Parti Quebecois loosely before COVID and more so after COVID, particularly because, and not many people know this, the governing party in Quebec right now is called the CAQ. Coalition Avenir Quebec. That means the future coalition of Quebec, okay, of what's to come, blah, blah, blah.

The leader of this coalition is Francois Lego. Who is Francois Legoe? Francois Legoe, if you trace him back to like pre-referendum, Sean, this guy was allied with Lucien Bouchard and Jacques Parizot. And what comes to mind when I think Lucien Bouchard and Jacques Parizzo? Oh, yeah, they were the ones that initiated this referendum and he was Parti Quebecois. So just because you have a brand new pony that you now call the cack,

or as I call them the caca party, okay, and you try to ostensibly make yourself look like you are a very, you know, very reserved. You're not over the top extreme. Well, all you got to do if you have time is just study the policies. So let's look at one policy that Francois Legoe before we dive into this thing together. What is one policy? So remember, Francois Lego go look for pictures between Francois Legoe and Yves Francois Blanchette in photo ops. they are very rare

and that's by design because Francois Legoe wants to make himself separate from the bloc Quebecois, right? I'm the more conservative side. We dethrone the liberals in Quebec. We're now in charge. But the Block Quebecois doesn't have a premier. I mean, how could you be in the House of Commons

but not run in Quebec in terms of like running in popularity? Now, they are getting more popular. think people that know the polls are seeing that they're actually pulling away from even the liberals here in Quebec. But Franco Lago has tried to give the impression that he's not tied to the Pazzi Quebecois here in Quebec, but all the policies are on their face resembling very much what the Block Quebecois wants. So you have a guy that used to be, and we'll cover this, a Block Quebecois member under the most separatist of Block Quebecois region. which was Lucien Bouchard and Jacques Parizzo suddenly switches over to this new thing and runs under the platform of the CAQ and now the CAQ runs Quebec and they introduce Bill 21. Do you know what Bill 21 is? It's that whole religious symbolism stuff. Well, why why this push? Because that that sounds awfully a lot like what Lucien Bouchard and Jacques Parisou believed it.

So the secularism thing It's not about religion You guys were trying to create A constitutional crisis within Quebec All the people that I just named Are all Catholics Self-professed Catholics on video Then is it really about religion?

I make the argument that it is not And I'm going to preface this Before we open this thread together, Sean And I really do want you to take the helm in terms of bringing up one by one. I want to posit one thing. If this was about religion, then let me frame it this way. What would you say is Alberta's reason for leaving Canada?

They're going to the, the, what's the reason they have that we need to leave? The number, the number one reason is probably economics. Stop right there. Perfect answer. What's Quebec, the Parti Quebecois, the Quebecois reason, culture? So you guys have your economic stuff, but Quebec is arguing the Parti Quebecois specifically is arguing that our cultures are not compatible with the rest of Canada. And how do you make that even worse?

You take the hottest topic across all the country, and that's religion. and then you immediately attack that. Why? Because it's not like they don't know that this goes against the charter. I'm sure that in your last interview, it was made very clear that this breaks so many laws in Canada for you to take that amendment out of the clause. Even if it passes reading,

it's still going to get contested to the Supreme Court, then it's going to get defeated. And they're banking on that. Why? Why are they banking on that? Well, we'll get into that in a second. Now, before you do that, I know we're going to go through this thread, I DM'd you something that I think you should share, and I want you to read to everyone.

Let's show Francois Legoe, his mentor in August, Lucien Bouchard, who led the referendum. Not many people know this, and this is what's going to give, it's going to buttress everything that we do at this point. But this DM that I just sent you on X is going to show everyone as you read it with your soapy, beautiful voice, Sean. I've always said that from the day we met. I just want you to know that. It's going to show how everything that I'm showing you is based on the most plausible reason that it's never been really about religion.

There's an ulterior motive here. Okay. I'm going to pull this up here. Give me a sec. Sure. You might want to show the title. Lucian Bouchard urges party Quebec leader

to reconsider promise to hold referendum who's the party quebecua leader e francois blanchet the block right he's telling him don't hold a what this is in august this year wait a minute what hold on did any of you know that the quebecua were talking about a referendum the block did you know before today that they were talking about a referendum in august i'm going to say out here in alberta we're focused on Alberta and their talk of a referendum. Right, right. So all you hearing is Bill C9 religious texts, parting with the liberal, but you don't hear any of this.

This is what's really going on, and I want everyone to not get caught off guard. Keep going. Okay. You want me to read this? Yeah. You want me to read it? You have a better voice than I do. Former Quebec Premier Lucien Burchard is advising the leader of the party Quebec law to reexamine

his promise to hold a sovereignty referendum in his first mandate. if he becomes Premier. The former Block Quebecua leader and party Quebec Premier made the comments in a pair of interviews on Radio Canada on Wednesday, on air, Midi Info host, Alec. Castangay. Thank you. Bouchard said he doesn't want to hurt PQ leader Paul St. Pierre Plemondin, but I think he will have to seriously reflect before maintaining his commitment to hold a referendum.

It goes on to say, I'm sorry here, St. Pierre Plamondin, and the PQ have been riding high in the polls with a leader promising to hold a referendum on sovereignty by 2030 if the party wins the general election scheduled for October 2026. But Bouchard suggested it could be difficult for the PQ to be elected if a referendum becomes the central campaign issue, adding that such a framing would be a gift to the Quebec liberals who are staunch federalists. Ah, you notice the federalists, the separatists. Everyone just remember that out west and east. there is a there's a there's a faction here at war between federalists and separatists in Quebec uh here's a quote from memory there aren't a lot of Quebec political formations from the party Quebecwa who have been reelected with the promise of holding a referendum because

it becomes an election issue bushard said the liberals fuel themselves on that he also says that says the failed referendum in the 1980 and 1995 led to painful setbacks for sovereignty movement. St. Pierre Plymouth, he added, should consider whether the population is ready for a referendum and whether there's a reasonable chance the yes side would win. Bouchard founded the block Quebec law with a handful of conservative and liberal Quebec MPs in 1991. He became the leader of the official opposition when the block took 54 seats in the 1993 election and was the leader of the pro sovereignty side in 1995 referendum. He subsequently took over the party Quebec Waugh and served as premier from 1996 to 2001. He currently, uh, currently he is

representing Quebec's specialist physicians in their negotiations with the province on salaries and working conditions. It was given interviews in that capacity when he asked to comment on the possibility of a third referendum. In a separate interview on Wednesday, Bouchard told Radio Canada TV host Patrice Roy, I have confidence, uh, in St. Pierre Plemondin's judgment to re-examine the referendum question and to make a decision in public interest. Recent polls have suggested that St. Pierre Plemondin's party, Quebec, would form government if an election were held today. And the party has won the past three by-elections most recently.

At the basket. Yep. Okay. Riding earlier this month, a spokesperson for St. Pierre Plamondon said the PQ leader was not available for interviews. So when you read this and to everyone that's listening, what is it that you've heard over and over and over in that one article, that the former guy that I, held a referendum is telling the new guy that you should reconsider we consider we consider what a

referendum how many people here know that since august until now this has been the hot topic on the party quebecua the bloc's mind is to hold a referendum and to align everything for a referendum so the block so this is forgive me this is where it gets confusing for me because it's blending provincial politics with federal politics. Correct? Yeah. So you're talking, how many of us know the block federal has been talking about a referendum? That's what you're asking? Yeah. I would say I didn't. I've been, me and twos have been paying attention to the provincial polling and the fact that who's rising through the polls and dominating it, a separatist party. Well, let me ask you a question then. The provincial premier of Quebec,

who was a separatist in the PQ enacts a law called Bill 21. The leicite, the secularist bill, remove all religious symbols. The federal leader Blanchette is now asking the Liberals to cancel one of the most fundamental amendments, one that is protected by the Charter about religious free speech. Wow, that sounds a lot like as if they're talking to one another and they have the same motives is it really religion i don't know i don't think so so so as you're talking i think you know sitting here if pierre polyev had got elected

conservative and you have daniel smith conservative in alberta were they talking before that election the answer is yes full stop so when you go to when you go to quebec to act like the same thing isn't happening would be silly. Yep. Of course they're talking. Of course they're talking. Of course they're talking. Of course they're talking. And any one of the things that they don't, they're not aligned is either blind or just ignorant of the fact that the guy that's running this party that it calls itself the cack. It honestly is the party Quebeco. He could say whatever he wants. All your policies are geared towards Quebec sovereignty and Quebec nationalism. Everything about you, not just the language. Everything that is,

Francois legoe is Quebec first. Remember how they challenged even on the immigration thing with Mark Carney? We're not going to have any more immigrants here. We don't care. Look, let's go to the, let's go to the thread. You want the thread. Okay. Give me a second.

I think you and your people need the thread because I already know what the thread is. And I really hope that it helps a lot of people understand that while, yes, everyone thinks our religious freedoms are going to be in danger. Let me assure you, and I'm at a 98% certainty, that this will never pass the Supreme Court. There are too many laws that oppose this because it attacks fundamental charter and constitutional rights. Before we go to the threat, this is one thing that I did not bring up with Fadeen because I was going through, okay, you have two readings, then it goes to committee, it gets through committee, then it goes back for a third reading, and then it goes to the Senate. and what comes after the Senate and what you're like 98% sure is it's there's going to be court cases they're going to have a tonne and it's going to go to the Supreme Court of Canada oh yeah

oh yeah and that is one thing that uh Vesper we did not talk well I'm I'm sad I hope you do another talk one day about it because a lot of people that I've heard well no that's why you're on that's why you're no I know but I'm not a constitutional lawyer I do my best I'm I'm well red i try to make sure that i'm balanced but let me tell you something based on what i've seen it's iron clad you do not limit and and do the backlash the backlash like forget the supreme court this is we're talking like what quebec toronto every religious group is going to get up in arms you thought it was bad under trudeau wait till you see what happens but see this is the thing guys this is what Quebec wants because what is Quebec's end goal let's start the

thread and I think that the the end goal will become very very clear if it's not already okay well do you want me to read it line by line yeah well yeah unless you want me to read it I I don't mind reading it okay so here this is Bespers thread it says the block plot Bill C9 it's not about religion my theory is that the block is deliberately setting a constitutional trap with Bill C9 they know they will lose at the Supreme Court legitimizing that Quebec no longer fits into Canada. Real goal separation, okay? Scroll down.

Now, let's start with the preface. Let's just read out the preface to everyone before. I'll read it and you prepared, okay? This is the original narrative that the block wants you to believe that the reason is Bill C9 and that it's fight against religious extremism. More specifically, I'm adding this now, Islamic religious, religious, religious extremism because something had happened where an Islamist, I forget his name right now, but you'll see it in the video, was asking death to all Jews. And so Yves Francois

Branchet is picking up this and saying, how can this be legal and be protected under the laws of religious free speech when someone is clearly citing death to the Jews? So he will, we'll dive into this and it's a false refueled because they've demonstrated a pattern of this. So let's go. There's ulterior motives, but I want you to hear the official narrative. And I think it's going to be fascinating as you read after this, Sean, what the other narrative is. And which of the two do you think, Quebec separatists? All right, here we go. It's very close to hear in October of 2023 that Aziz El Sharkawi of sorrowful memory

pronounced words of considerable violence, which I am going to repeat, which I am going to repeat. He said in Arabic, of course, Allah deal with these Zionist aggressors. Allah deal with the enemies of the people of Gaza. Allah count them all, then exterminate them and spare not one of them. By any measure of wisdom, ethics, or civic responsibility, these words are criminal. that in Canada they are not. They are not considered as such because the criminal code specifically in Article 319 stipulates that if an individual utters violent and hateful statements actively calls for violence or openly encourages hatred, but if they do so under the guise of religious belief, claiming these actions stem from their profound convictions from their faith, then surprisingly that is deemed acceptable. Obviously for the Block Quebecois, and I think quite consensually for Quebecers, it is not.

So I want to remind you of the Block Quebecois stance, which we are the only ones defending. It's even fascinating to see parties from a G7 Western nation say, listen, in our country, you can make hateful statements if it's based on your religious allegiances. But it's also a commitment from us to resubmit a bill because, This is a struggle. We cannot abandon. We cannot give up on that. Hateful and violent speech. It is also sex-sic, because it is generally accompanied by a vision of the relationship between men and women that is built on the complete domination of one by the other.

And it is an invitation to the radicalization of these young people whom we are trying to protect, whom we are trying to shield from the call to radicalization that is taking place in certain environments within our cities, we therefore wish once again, and we are not the only ones, that the religious exception be abolished. Even the RCMP's chief superintendent in 2024 had said, yes, something must be done about this. And there is moreover a unanimous motion from the National Assembly. One of many unanimous motions from the National Assembly that don't always align with the federal vision, but always align obviously with the Quebec vision, which unanimously demanded that the religious exemption be repealed. I want to tell you that those who are against

our will to establish secularism in Quebec, as we understand it, are the same as those who oppose our law to repeal the religious exemption. These are the very same individuals who will be campaigning for much of the remainder of the campaign in the greater Toronto. area seeking to appeal to immigrant communities who in many instances were neither asked nor even encouraged to integrate. But I must take this opportunity to remind everyone, however welcoming we may be, there are certain limits. And here we are in Quebec. Thank you. Sean, how, given what you and I have talked about, given you understand, how unbelievably nefarious is this that you are going to use this religious it did happen and nobody

I don't condone any hate speech yes okay so how unbelievably nefarious is it that you're going to use a very real issue that happened in Canada and in Quebec but really if you listen to that message what did you make out of it Sean no actually no no no I am very very very very curious. You had a bunch of moments where you're like, uh-huh, right there, right there. In that, I'm curious what you're like, you got to pay attention to this. Yes. And to this. Yes. Yes. The delineation between Canada and Quebec and how we view things, how we believe these things, how we in Quebec, how are the only ones fighting for this. We're the only ones that believe that apparently in a G7 country, hate speech is allowed. We're the only ones that don't think this kind of stuff should be said.

What are they doing here in their stochatic arguments? Easy. We are not like you, Canada, who allows these hate-filled people to exist. You are giving them permission and he uses Toronto, right? Not only are you allowing them to continue spewing their evil, but you don't even care if they integrate into the country. What argument are they really making here? Is it about religion? No. This is about we are not Canada. And we will not be like Canada. And this is the setup. The setup is they need the perfect excuse. And we're going to talk about why the liberals are on board on this too. But I just want to show you why this is the real,

reason here. They want to create the perfect scenario where they are showing their constituents in Quebec that we are values, which is by the way a completely made up thing. As we had said, they're all Catholics. It's not a religious thing. This is the perfect excuse to say, you see, our values no longer aligned with Canada's values. We are a secular. If you would have read the Justice and Human Rights Committee from the Senate's, their dissent to the ruling by the Senate on this whole thing a few months ago. It's very telling that the Black Quebecois in their dissent letter referred to themselves as a nation of Quebec.

Did you know that? They referred to themselves often, not just as a culture, not as a society, but as the nation of Quebec. And these little things are signs of what these people really are after. They want the perfect excuse to run another referendum, just like you saw with the earlier article, where Lucien Bouchard is telling them, listen, guys, this is radioactive. If you do this, it might really hurt everyone, but they don't care. They are more rabid than the Alberta separatists. These guys, their differences, think of it like you have, to make this in a funny layman way, Alberta separatists are like the Terminator.

Okay. Blunt, cold, effective type of thing. These guys are like ninjas. Quiet, covert. Everything is under the radar. False this, false that. At least Alberta is clear about what it wants. Look at how Quebec is running their entire narrative. They want to make it so that Canada is allowing for extremism, right? Like these Islamic extremists, but Quebec, we don't tolerate. this. And so they already started, this is where the collusion now, right, between the premier and the blo quebecua, they already started with the religious stuff. And now they're bringing it to the federal level to create this, this kind of contentious controversy in order to say, we're going to run a referendum because we no longer share the values that Canada has. You guys want to support terrorists. We don't want to support terrorists anymore. That's the false narrative that they want to run now to prove that let's get to the second thing so you guys all heard how he said what he had to say and it was all so sanctimonious you know like we don't

believe like as if anyone else in canada believes that somebody should scream death to the jews or death to anybody they're acting like they're the only ones let's listen to the next thing which is the real reason here because this will help you realize what he was doing in the first video Can we run that one? Yeah, okay. Just maybe read the title because all of these are important. I wrote them to explain this. Sure.

This is what it says. Let's set the stage with the statement from block leader. Is it yet? I Blanchette. I Blanchet. This will underpin the true motives for this fake bait and switch from the block about C9. Quoted, I'm not the one to fight to have a nice and beautiful United Canada. That's what he said, guys.

Just remember that. I'm not the one to fight for a United Canada. If they are trying to create an oil state in Western Canada, they cannot expect any help for us. I still believe that Quebec will do better when it becomes a country. So I'm not the one that will fight to have a nice, beautiful and united Canada. We will keep fighting this idea to obsessively want to extract oil from the ground and make the planet warmer. If they aren't trying to create the oil state, you're the guy that's bringing on all these Westerners and the oil state. Why is he saying this? Why, we don't have oil in Quebec?

Of course we do. What's this issue then? You really think it's about oil? No. This is constantly wedging themselves and pitting themselves. Like he said, we want to be our own country and we don't believe in a beautiful United Canada. I mean, how's this kind of helping you when you called me, Sean, to come on and hopefully helping your viewers understand, how would you phrase this now that you're just into like

the very first second video? And they're not all videos, by the way. But how is this, what's this making you think before we jumped on today? Well, I here's one of the, so I'm not the one that will fight to have a nice, beautiful, and United Canada. that doesn't I don't know Vesper

I'm like I'm sitting here and I'm like I'm trying to play at Vesper's speed right so I read this this morning I sat and stood on it I'm sitting here and I'm like okay I'm watching Daniel Smith

and different factions here in Alberta do the things they're doing it's very much in not my wheelhouse but I guess that's the best way to put it. I'm watching it play out. It's very interesting to me. And then you're bringing up,

I'm still trying to decipher. Like, I laugh at my brain when I'm watching this clip. I'm like, okay, he is, what is he again? Right? Like, I have to, my brain is playing catch up because I don't pay attention to Quebec politics other than when we do it on the mashup and then we talk about it, right?

Okay, so it's like, how much do I stare at the block? No one. No one does. Not even in Quebec. Not even in Quebec. But what are you getting from a guy that says, is I do not believe in a United Canada. I believe in a country called Quebec.

Correct. Well, it's a direction. They want their own. And why use the oil argument? Because we have oil. Easy. Just keep making it so that we are in opposition to everything that is Canada. They went after the oil.

We don't want any oil. That's a point of opposition. Now they're going after. What's the issue that you brought me on for? Religion. bam and we're the most catholic place in all of canada it's not religion this is about a need to separate and they need an so perfect excuse to separate and the perfect excuse is to say all of you religious people that want to allow these muslims to say they're hateful comments

we're not like you we're going to go back to our people and say we can't belong here anymore They're gaining traction in the polls. They're pulling past the liberals. The premier is a covert separatist. And the block Quebec one, the federal government, is a flat-out separatist. What do you think is happening here? Is this really about religion? No, they know it's going to get defeated.

But it's going to give them the perfect ammunition to say, you guys, we want out. We're not aligned with you. Would you agree with if I'm staring at Quebec from a point? which I am they've been through the referendums yep and I've talked to different people who've moved from Quebec here and they always talk about the referendum is a quagmire it is it is a tough thing to get through because of all the things that we've already talked about and say you've got to be very careful there well okay you got you got two parties one's covert one is very like in your face we want a separate nation of Quebec they've already been through it in their

provincial history. Yeah, twice they've already been to it. So they already know the pitfalls of it. Yep. And so what you're laying out is they are. They're rabid. But they're being strategic. Yeah, of course.

This is not extremely strategic. What did Jacques Parisot say when they lost? I don't know if you remember this. He was drunk when they lost. Esper. I have no idea. I know, I know. I know. I'm being rhetorical.

He gets up on the stage, drunk. and says in French we lost because of the immigrants. That's what he got up and said. They were, they're like, we needed one point and we lost to the immigrants. And who made sure that they lost the Federalists? And so instead of blaming the Federalists, they blame the immigrants.

So this Block Quebecois, what are they doing? As we continue through this thread, folks, red folks, you're going to see there is a concerted effort with Bill 21 to also push out all the immigrants from Quebec. Get rid of the immigrants. And what's going to happen is you're going to have a whole lot of French people and they're all going to back you. Quebec Solidaire, where solid, we have solidarity among our people and our language and our culture will be preserved. But we got to find excuses and strategic excuses. to get rid of the, not only the immigrants,

which is where the hijab bands are, right? How many Muslims have left Quebec because of these bands? Well, as soon as you, you know, how do you get rid of any group of people? You know, of course, we're talking immigrants, but just how do you get rid of any group of people? You create the conditions that they don't want to be a part of. voila.

That's how they're doing it, guys. Now they're foisting this on Canada. It's not going to work on Canada, but it's going to give them the ammunition to say, well, we in Quebec want something different. And you guys don't want what we want, and we can't coalesce. I'm telling you, I want everyone to wake up. This is not about your religious freedom of speech. And I wouldn't worry about where this is going. This is the perfect playing ground.

It is my hypothesis after everything I've studied and reading. I have more things that we're going to show the thread. I don't want to take up the whole show. but I think we should just jump through the thread, man. Okay, okay. I'll bring up the next one. The long game succession plot. Bill C-9 is ideal for the block.

It forces a legal fight over the charter, letting them frame it as Ottawa imposing its will on Quebec. This fuels their sovereignty argument and recruits supporters from the resulting crisis. The DOJ acknowledges... Department of Justice. The Department of Justice. A acknowledges the bill engages the charter right

to freedom of religion section to a confirming the legal ground for the anticipated Supreme Court fight. One, they know, will fail and create a narrative of Canada not aligning with Quebec as an excuse. And it's right there in black and white. There's the charter. You see it? What does it say? I'll bring it up. Guaranteed rights and freedoms.

You go to section two. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms. Freedom of conscience and religion, freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression, including freedom of the press and other. You don't need to read the rest of it. Sorry. Everyone, you have... I like finishing out the sentence. I know, but think about it. everyone please listen the charter says it's in the law in the constitutions act you have the freedom of thought

belief opinion expression right they're amending these laws but this is not the charter the things that they're trying to do is in the the criminal code but there's other things like the charter of human rights the constitutions act what are they going to do with those they can't amend those that requires every province to jump on board and say, yes, we're okay with changing this. So the problem here is they know this is not going to go where they want it to go. There's a lot of fodder happening between the liberals and the block right now. We'll get into that in a second as we jump through. But let's set the groundwork. The charter is clear. It's much like the American constitution in terms of religion. You have the right to freedom of religion, freedom of thought, freedom of

expression. So how did they think that this is going to, what are you going to arrest me? Because I'm reading 1 Corinthians 12, for example. How's that work? Well, no, no, we're not doing it. It has to be in good faith. Who's to say you're not going to weaponize it? So I think jumping to the next post, unless you want to say something, Sean, is probably going to start helping because now we're getting into the nitty gritty of what is really been happening behind the scenes here. Prepping the judges for a new country. The Quebec judges, the Quebec judges, by the way the block links the c9 fight to judges roles in judicial precedence legal challenges against bill 21 Quebec secularism law already argues that its provisions on leicite or or secularism

impact judicial independents apologies this pro this provides the existing legal framework and arguments the bQ could later exploit in a mcgill law journal by frederick margaret yeah uh 20 20 titled lost in translation bill 21 international human rights and the margin of appreciation in section 1a de provincializing bill 21 a standout line from the essay states indeed the court has at times seemed to embrace whatever justification states threw at it when it came to curtailing the rights of religious minorities i mean we're not going to read the whole thing but i want you to see and i think you could share this with everybody and tell them to come to my thing if they want to read it i've already shared it on my x so if people

want to see the thread they just go and mine is my mine is pinned you can go to vespra digital it's pinned at the top you could read it for yourself this is one of the other lines that i find fascinating is in court the court in short may be tempted to not rock the boat too much by adopting judgments that manifestly run against the grain what art felt to be a particular society's heartfelt values and prejudices and that's where sean read indeed the court has at times how However, I'm putting that in, seem to embrace whatever justification the states threw at it when it came to curtailing the rights of religious minorities. And what is the excuse that the state is throwing at the court right now? They're saying, we're not open to religious extremists.

And they're going to throw this to the judges. And guess what kind of judges they're going to be looking for, Sean? Are they going to be looking for religious sympathetic judges or federalist type judges? no they're going to be looking for judges that align with the secularism laws of Quebec you were forgive me not for the thought just I guess the thought you're you're putting in me today Vesper is okay you have a province that wanted out they ran two referendums failed both times and you go did you learn anything from that I'm sure they did So now you have the block, now you have, right, you have these two different groups

who talk and are trying to frame it in a way to get back to a referendum. Would that be the goal? Yeah. Well, what did they learn the first two referendums? What's the real problem? Immigrants. The immigrants that live here, who are now citizens, the religious minorities, we need to find a way to make sure that they no longer feel comfortable here.

And the more uncomfortable we make it, and they leave. the greater the consensus for what our desire is, which is what? We want out. Bam. This is where the blunt force of Alberta doesn't even hold a candle to the tactical styles of these Quebecois in that they are not looking to persuade anyone anymore. They want to make it so that it's detestable to live in Quebec to these other people. And imagine Daniel Smith is getting a whole lot of flack from the separatists of Alberta because she's a federalist. But we have a covert separatist as a premier working in conjunction with the block who is an open separatist.

That's the difference, folks. Your people in Alberta, your premier is not a separatist. Ours is and pretends not to be. And the way you do it is you make it so that all these, because think about it. How often do you run into an atheistic Muslim in proportion to the rest of Islamic culture? Rare, very rare, right? You may argue that there are more atheist Christians than Muslims. How many atheist Jews would you say you would run into?

Maybe a little bit, but I mean, when you think Jewish, you know, they do their Hanukas, they do all this stuff. What if I make it unbelievably unwelcoming for you here? You can't put a menorah anywhere. You can't wear your cross. If you're a cop, you can't have a cross on. You can't wear your, if you're a Catholic, you can't wear the saint. You can't go to, if you're a doctor, you can't have your hijab, if you happen to be Muslim. You can't do anything.

And we're going to make it more and more intolerable because the only people that can tolerate this level of existence are people that, what, are not overtly religious. or are not really devout. But all the devout people are going to fight against this. And they're going to say, hey, you know, you elected us. We're in power. We get to decide what the people want. And what they want is secularism. That's what they're saying.

Right. So now it's spilling into federal politics into the Bill C9 argument over this religious exemption by removing that protection. But again, guys, this is going to work. it's working in Quebec, this won't work in Canada. And I'll give you all the reasons why. Let's keep going with the thread. Okay, I'm going to scroll down here.

I hope this is clear. I hope this is clear so far, Sean, to you at least. I'm sure to the people that are listening, they're going to unpack something out of this. Let's get through the thread. And I'll see, I'm enjoying having additional thoughts from you, Vesper, because, you know, obviously you wrote it. And then there's additional things you're adding in.

And I probably have a few questions towards the end. But let's continue on here. The religious identity purge. This is a darker but is supported by data on the real world impact of Quebec's secularist push. Academic studies show that Bill 21 has led to Muslim and seek women feeling less safe, less accepted, and more marginalized. The outcome is the BQ's intended shift in cultural as it is as its goal. By the way, BQua stands for Bloch, Quebec, everyone. Whenever we say BQ, it's Bloch, Quebec,ua.

In an association for Canadian study, ACS survey May June, May to June, sorry, 2022 by researcher Merriam Taylor titles Law 21 Discourse, Perception and Impact. She describes her findings in Section 4 of key findings. And I can, do you want me to read all the yellow? No, no, yeah, just the yellow. You don't have to read the other parts. Law 21 has been touted as a law. By the way, Law 21 is the Quebec law, folks.

Remember that, Bill 21. This is the, this is underpinning Bill C9. So before you get the C-9, you have to understand Bill 21 from Quebec's perspective. And I think we all remember this as, forgive me, this was how it was framed in my brain, probably from what I took in, is like a Muslim man can't wear the head garb as a police officer. That's right, but then, but then it's like, but you've already pointed out, but if you're Catholic, you can't wear the cross and you can't have. Yeah, and they're okay with that. They're okay with that. See, it's funny, right? They can't, most of their constituents are Muslim. Why didn't you just make the request in Bill C-9 and Bill 21 only about Islamic extremists? Well, because you have Christian fundamentalists that also attack the LGBT party sometimes.

These are the extremist Christians. And what will happen is they don't want to deal with this headache. How about we just get rid of all of these people and just get the most, what's the word, you're not hot, you're not cold, the most neutral, watered down religious people, the secularist Christians. Lukewarm? Lukewarm, the lukewarm Muslims that don't really obey their religion and the lukewarm Christians that, yeah, they'll go and ask the Father for forgiveness, but they'll go back out and

just live their life the way they want to. They're not over the top committed to their faith. So one of the things you're going to keep reading now is the highlights, but the cycle that she portrays here is such a perfect picture of how the block strategy is going to work and what they're doing on the federal level now with this Bill C-9. Go ahead. It says, in addition, women in all three religious minority communities reported more important declines in their levels of safety and freedom of expression than their male counterparts.

dimensions of life that are vital if we are in search of genuine equality that removes obstacles to full potential, declines in readiness. Well, I mean, you might want to read just, I know I didn't highlight it, but you might want to read the percentages. 73% of Muslim women, 46% of Jewish women, and 85.7% of Sikh women relayed a decline in their sense of safety in public over the last three years. declines in readiness to express oneself freely in public were also high among women in all three groups mussels what are they doing what's the climate they're creating you're not welcome here you should feel threatened being here because of your faith this was happening in bill 21 folks and you're going to explain this vicious cycle to those that aren't watching what is the cycle that miriam here in her research paper on law 21 says it starts with fears and anxieties

then it goes to validate and reinforced provide legitimacy to the legislation legislation acts as a normative force reinforcing prejudice stigmatization of people and symbols and then it goes right back to fear and anxiety they are looking folks they are creating like sean said the conditions to create this fear and anxiety which then leads to this kind of overreaction which then leads to them saying well we need legislation now to combat this extremism, but you created the conditions that created this extremism. You're telling people they can't wear the religious symbols or say religious things. What do you think is going to happen? Wait, are you saying because people are going to riot over the fact that you're telling

them not to say or read whatever they want, then now they're suddenly extremists? Yes, that's what we're telling you. We're going to create the conditions that make you all look like extremists. And then we're going to create legislation to fight you extremists. So they're going to poke the bear. The bear is going to roar. They're going to create the problem. Then they're going to bring in the solution. And that's what Quebec is doing now.

They did that with Bill 21. They're still facing opposition. But because they have such a stranglehold on the province, right, with businesses and all these special interests, it's going to be very hard to remove them from government. normalizing anti-religious laws across canada the bQ is pushing once again i should stop saying the bQ and say the block correct yeah well you could do that yeah that's fine well nobody calls them the bq they call them the block it's called them the block is pushing for the removal of federal protection to religious expression religious groups opposing the amendment explicitly

warned this action weakens the charter's application it could be used as shield bill 21 from future challenges from the federal government. The Catholic Civil Rights League wrote an open letter to the Liberal Party addressing the blocks push with C-9 in a letter titled CCLR statement on liberal block Quebec agreement on Bill C-9.

So what did we say these block people are in their personal lives? Catholics. Who's writing them a letter telling them you guys are dumb? The Catholics. Explain that. Let's read what they say.

Look at what this statement says. Just those three sections. The CCRL, sorry, the deplores expressions of hate and anti-Semitism, but our concerns extend to religious expression, which may be opposed despite being based on church teachings on sexual morality. Ah, that's the gender LGBT argument. See? Most significantly, the proposed removal of the safeguard in the existing legislation requires

leave of a provincial attorney general to proceed with a hate crime charge will likely result in spurious or targeted attacks on individuals expressing Christian moral teachings. Then says Catholic bishops find these developments may create a climate of fear for good faith expressions of religion, religious beliefs, religious belief, sorry, an expense church. Expose. Sorry, expose the church. My eyes aren't working best. and expose church and faith leaders to criminal charges

by anyone seeking to pursue a charge to advance a non-religious viewpoint. What's the operative word that you picked up there? I'll share it with you. The Catholic bishops, the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, finds these developments may create a climate of fear. What's the play here?

It's the same with Bill 21. People will be. be muzzled, they'll either go one of two ways. Either they'll riot or they'll leave or they'll leave. And if you riot, we'll arrest you and your life will be permanently damaged. Better that you leave. I know you're not liking this for a Monday morning, brother, but it is what it is. Setting a trap for the conservatives and the liberals. Now, this is important. Everyone wants understand why the liberals and the block working together on this. Okay, let's go. The partisan strategy is confirmed by multiple media reports on the negotiations. They detail the block liberal deal

and the immediate public opposition from the Conservative Party demonstrating the successful creation of a wedge issue and the justification of Quebec's view on cultural divide in Canada at large. They will use the battle between the conservatives and the liberals to their advantage to demonstrate Quebec is at odds with the rest of Canada. With the rest of Canada. they will use the uh use the desperation of the liberals to gain a majority to achieve this and while banking on the resistance of the conservatives to lay the argument down as need for Quebec to separate now just so you know yeah just so you know before you get into this even sean fraser you know the dodo for the liberals yes was was like there's no reason for this

it's redundant yeah but we still want this you want our support who holds the real power in committees right now it's not the ndp anymore they're gone who's the real person that holds the power right now well i mean you have committee of four liberal four conservative and then two others are the block the block the block is the new ndp folks the block is now the new nDP and they're smarter than jag meet sugar nuts sing they know what they want they're not they don't give two sense about union all this garbage they want independence and they will play these two like a fiddle to get what they want hey liberals you want a majority yeah give us what we want but if we do that our constituents will hate us yeah but you'll have a majority and they know that even if they give it to them and it goes

and it passes and it goes to the supreme court they'll lose it that's fine they also want the conservatives to look bad so they want to make the liberals give them what they want so that the conservatives oppose it and then by the time this goes up the supreme court and gets defeated They're going to end up coming out and say, listen, we tried to work with you two clowns. But there seems to be no place for Quebec in what it wants. So we want out. They're literally creating a storm by playing these two parties and what they want to a fiddle. It's brilliant.

It's scary, brilliant, how they're playing this. We'll give you what you want to get us to where we want to be. and we want these clowns to oppose us called the Conservatives so that we could say, you see, these guys want terrorists. They want people to say terroristic things against Zionists. I thought you guys have defended the Jews. How can you guys allow these Muslims to say these evil things like death to the Jews, conservatives? Hey, liberals, give us the opportunity to remove this.

Yes, but our constituents won't like it. You'll be able to explain it to them that this is really a hate crime thing. You know, you guys have been posting a lot of bills about hate crime and online speech. So what's this extra thing to put in there? Well, I mean, yeah, but this is about the, you're criminalizing what people want to say about religion. Not too long ago, Mark Miller said something in committee. I don't know if you recall, Sean, you guys might have talked about it in the mashup where he's like, you know, there are certain things in the Bible that are also hateful, you know, namely things like in Leviticus, things like Roman. Well, why was Mark Miller doing that?

Isn't Mark Miller a staunch Catholic, as Mark Miller says? Easy. What are they doing politically, guys? don't be fooled by the stupid surface level religious arguments. That's not the issue here. They want the support of the block. The block has been showing a lot of leaning toward the conservatives. Let's bring them back to our side.

And that way, we can win on anything. Not only do we're going to have a majority, we will win in every committee as well for the period now, just for the time period. Okay. We're going to put that over there just for a second. Yeah, yeah. Question.

Sure. Okay. They're at, they're one away from a majority. Liberals, I'm talking. Right. They just had Mago across the floor. Yeah. And twos had just positioned in the last mashup.

He sees a liberal majority coming in 2026 because they're going to find another way to pull one more across, then they have majority. Yeah, but you could still have an election. But. No, no, hold on. That's important. I don't know if twos mentioned this. They can still veto bills that's asking. for money non-confidence votes can still be brought in it doesn't matter if you're a majority

the conservative party can still say there's a non-confidence vote i've confirmed this with multiple people one of them is northern perspective i talked to ryan i'm like can we still can they still table a non-confidence is absolutely they can't i'm like okay but what doesn't it get overriding yeah well doesn't that get overrided if they have a majority no what do you mean Because you're asking for money and I think you need a unanimous consensus. And even if you get a majority, when it comes to these things, the conservatives can stand up and say, based on what I've heard from Northern perspective, that you can still vote non-confidence and it would lead to an election.

How does that make that make sense to me? Because if you have a majority, you get to decide when the election comes. Do you not? Well, yeah, but what about when you're tabling certain bills? And I don't want to go more into it because, frankly, I don't know where it is in the Our Commons or the Green Book. But the laws state that if somebody proposes a budget or is asking for particular money, there's always votes on this. Okay. And if somebody votes non-confidence in, let's say, a particular sum of money that you're requesting at that time, you can vote non-confidence in the government as the opposition.

But if I see a hole in the block's strategy, if the liberals get. majority. They no longer need the block unless in committee it's still 4-4 and block holds the tie break. Any bill they eventually want to get through has to go through committee. Just give me a second. Just give me a second. I'm pulling it up right now. Give me a sec. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Because I think that's a really as you walk through the train of thought of the block and just all the the provincial party as well of Quebec and their strategy if the liberals are being basically bent over a barrel at this point they're going to ramp up trying to get a majority faster so they can get out from the boot of the block unless they still

hold the the sway in committee because if it's still if they get a majority it's still four four and two then they they they they have this linchpin of holding they can side with the conservatives anytime yes of course no no no of course because look i mean it even says it here it says an election is typically only triggered by a confidence motion failing the budget being voted down if the government is in a minority government majority government an election before the fixed date the third monday whatever yada yada yada only happens if the prime minister requests an early election from the governor general in summary for a majority government like the hypothetical one in your question the budget debate is an important political event but not a threat to the government

survival because they had the necessary votes locked in the conservative motion would fail to trigger an election however if others choose to side with the conservative party that would trigger an election so if there's another bait and switch let's use an example say they get them to propose this let's use a hypothetical here okay the block sides with them on this thing and then backstabs them can we not see something like that i mean look at what michael look at look at look at what michael mages did one day he was partying with them yeah next day he goes to that side who's to say that they're not going to tell them do this bill to make them look really bad and then they're going to side with the conservatives when it comes to that budget vote but

but in fairness to that that's why the liberals are going to ramp up trying to get a majority because then they can vote down if they have the majority they can't get overruled well you know the the floor crossing issue and I think you've talked about it enough and I don't want to deviate from what we're talking about here the no no no I once again I think I don't think it's deviating Vesper I do want to get through the rest of the threat but right there if they if the liberals get a majority when it comes to running government I don't think they can be unless certain well what if somebody well what if somebody leaves sure but but but but they would hold the sway in any vote because they have

majority okay no no no that's fair for the quebec or sorry for the block if they still hold swaying committee then that is still a very very very very vital role well this is why they're this is well this is why i'm saying this is what this whole thing is they're playing both sides they the block does not care about the conservatives they don't care about the liberals they care about only the block they don't believe in a united Canada and they will use it very clear yeah not only in this but everything i've seen for yeah so every move they're going to make in committee uh is really where we need to pay attention to what the block is trying to do and i think this bill c9 religious thing has less to do with the religion aspect of it and more to do with the fact that they want to get

what they want to get and they will deal and you know i you find it kind of weird right you would think that for you would think that for the liberals to get the support of the block that the block would ask for a lot more but all they ask for is this one thing don't you find that weird you're asking for this one change to the amendment well why why are you asking for more funding more money more infrastructure more power more whatever for cabb no we we want you to create this amendment and remove that for us what i find strange if i'm being honest is i go back to one of your earlier comments which is like why aren't they just picking on let's call it muslims for this point instead of all religion well because they

have a population here of LGBT and progressives because look Quebec is very but you'd force that but you'd force them out too like when you're talking about Or do the LGBTQ in Montreal or Quebec, I should say? Well, I mean, they're not making laws in Quebec that you can't run around naked. But do they want to, like, if the goal is separation, Fasper. Yeah. And they point to immigrants as being, you know, going back to when they lost and the comments made. Okay, they're looking at this.

Well, what is it, hold on. What is it that you know about immigrants that are devout, let's say, or semi-devout? that is a problem to Quebec politics. Easy. Their allegiances do not lie with the culture. Their allegiances lie to their faith before their culture. Okay. And the Quebecois don't see that their faith is intertwined with their culture.

They just see their culture. So if I have a bunch of people that are religious or hold somewhat to their religion, then they are always going to be an obstacle to the cultural progress of French and Quebec as a nation. We need to get all these people who, if push comes to shove, will side with their beliefs over the culture. And let's face it, they're kind of right. A lot of people that come to Quebec. I mean, look, I speak perfect French-Cabweil, like even the accent.

Most Lebanese do not have a very good French accent. They have still their Lebanese, Parisian accent. Many Afghanis, Somalis, Haitians, They all come here and they don't really integrate. They go into their little boroughs and they don't want to become Quebecois, for example. Now, there are. There are people that go watch the Canadians, you know, like we love Montreal. We will watch the expos if we had them.

But the idea of like French, you know, culture and all that, well, I mean, dude, I'm not French. I'm Lebanese. I just came to Canada and I live in Quebec, but I'm not French. You know what I mean? Like, I'm not French. So how much of that am I really going to cheer on? If I lived in Greece, would I be like, I'm Greek? No, I'm Lebanese.

You know, like, I'm not going to support you the way you people who are born here support this movement. I won't hate you, but how could you expect me to, like, my kids go to English school, right? The Quebec government is constantly fighting to cut and slash funding for English schools in Quebec. Right? And the only thing that's holding them back, I kid you not, is the federal government. it's not them it's the federal government that's holding them back because if you're going to ask people to speak french in other provinces you better damn make sure that there's english in your province

you cut that tie there's no more english here in anything you can have it as a second language but it will never be english schools will not be around so look let's just go through this and we'll go into all this stuff after because it's probably important for people to just get the backing of why what I wanted to achieve today and I think I think to some measure we've already done this is to show you this isn't really about religion religion is the crutch

here okay the block says liberals fear backlash concerning this is an explicit official reason given by Block Quebec law leader Blanchet yes thank you and is confirmed in legislative debate commentary this source directly quotes

the block's official stance on secularism. The bloc has had an itch for quebec independence and will use the most extreme of policies to create this divide going so far as pitting the liberals against their own constituents to achieve this proposal failing this is not about religion this is about separatism please remember that and then this is the article where block says liberals fear backlash uh the block quebec law leader is promising political consequences if the liberals back down from accepting his party's controversial amendment that would remove a religious exemption for hate speech from the criminal code down at the bottom uh well i don't know do you want me to read the the pink as well you decide

whatever you want it's your show man i i think the most important part is that he is already saying that if he backs down yeah there's going to be problems there's going to be problems and and now you have to ask yourself a question why give them such an incendiary topic in the first place again I'm asking the question, why religion, why not more funding, why not more anything? Why religion? Of all things, because that's the one thing, the rest of Canada, are you going to convince Canada to become a secular country? No.

You're damn sure not going to make the West become a secular province. I'll tell you that right now. You're not going to make Halifax become a secular province. i'll tell you that now prince edward island man even quebec doesn't want to be a secular place they want to be welcoming of everyone but these politicians want to use this crutch because they know this is like the trudo style politics right let's hit the most sensitive nerve and the most sensitive nerve is religion judicial pre-packing for a new state the blocks official dissenting report on a previous committee study explicitly argues that Quebec model of secularism

is different and legitimate framing judicial decisions that oppose it as cultural bias, intolerance, thereby justifying measures against Anglo-American liberal judicial philosophy. To simplify that, we're not like the American liberals who still tolerate religion. We're not like them. We're different. The way we want to run our judicial system. is very different. Don't paint us there. Now, you got to remember, this is a dissenting letter that the block responds to the Senate, and we're going to read it. This we have to read. Because remember

those things that you said, Vesper, you're catching these things and what's being said, right? Just go back to the, no, go back to because it's important to undergird before we get into the picture. Please observe the language in the Senate Committee on Justice and Human Rights record where the block decries what they call the smearing of Quebec secularism, of not note in the dissent is this statement. We can appreciate that the political philosophy and conception of citizenship underpinning Quebec's approach to secularism can be foreign to Canadians influenced by Anglo-American liberals. Ah, it is foreign to all of you Canadians, isn't it? All right, good. Whether or not they are interested in knowing Quebec's rich history, nothing gives them

the right to judge Quebec's democratic choices. Is this becoming clear, Sean? Yeah, it's becoming clear what are they saying in quebec in quebec secularism is not a barrier to respecting diversity but rather a condition for it this is all the more important in our education system where we defend the right of quebec students to secular public education in this way the act respecting the secularism of the state contributes to the secularization of quebec schools which began with the creation of the Department of Education and Public Education System in 1964. Furthermore, statements equating the democratic choices... No, you need to read the pink part.

Okay. We can appreciate that the political philosophy and conception of citizenship underpinning Quebec's approach to secularism can be foreign to Canadians influenced by Anglo-American liberalism. You see, so what are the Quebecois saying here? We can appreciate that we view things differently. You rest of Canadians view, like secularism, through... the lens of Anglo-American liberalism. Remember that.

They're making a distinction. How we view secularism, you guys and us in Quebec, is very different. You're looking at it like Anglo-American style, which means you're tolerated. You're very tolerative of religions and that you want everyone happy. We don't see it that way. furthermore statements equating the democratic choice of quebecers with a kind of intolerance that is inherent to the nation are themselves an expression of intolerance the product of cultural bias that must be condemned what's he saying here in the block they're saying you guys are

calling us intolerant who are they who is the federalists the senate in this particular case why did they call them intolerant because of the religious bills because of these anti-religious bills you guys are intolerant of these religions no you can't say that that itself is intolerant the fact that you're calling us intolerant that's how this is the block dude this is how quebec is moving okay they want to frame it like we're not the intolerant ones you are you won't let us be what who we want to be all things considered the federal parliament does not have the authority to judge quebec laws and the house of commons should not repeal uh sorry should not repeat the affront committed by the Senate, which took part in the denigration of Quebec's distinct

character. Are you noticing the pattern now? Are you seeing it more and more as you're going here? They're painting this picture. We are not you. We are not you. You guys won't let us be ourselves. We don't believe in secularism the way you do.

You guys look at it like through an Anglo-American liberalism kind of secularism. We don't. And they want to amplify this more and more. they will use this religion thing to create the swedge between Quebec and Canada. It's just going to keep growing, I'm telling you, unless they lose the general election in Quebec and massive seats in the House of Congress, this will continue. The anti-conservative party collusion holding the keys. This source provides a detailed political analysis that confirms the liberals actively sought

block cooperation due to the minority dynamic. block Quebec holding the balance of power on committee and describes the resulting pressure it puts on the conservative party leader. Here, let's pull this up. It says, pressure is mounting on Poliev to keep the caucus united ahead of a January leadership review. Committees dictated much of the dynamic in the fall sitting, in the fall sitting. With a block Quebec law holding the balance of power on committees, split evenly between the liberals and conservatives. the liberals needed to reach across the aisle to advance studies and prevent committees from defaulting to opposition driven agendas rather than government priorities if the liberals can woo

an additional floor crosser they would need to prorogue parliament to reset committees that's okay okay okay that that rate there is important because i i go if they get majority what the heck are we talking about they got majority but power still relies in committee so if you're the liberals if you're if you're the liberals right now this is where i go back to there the pressure is going to like twos use the the analogy in the mashup of you're sitting waiting for an overbook flight and they come out and say we'll offer you two hundred dollars okay and you know you can see everybody looking and they're like well if they go up to a thousand i'm taking it right yeah and so right now they have one spot remaining for the liberals

to have a majority right so if we're looking out into the future they're going to find one to take it because they're going to do something to offer whatever it is, floor cross or boom, they got a majority. And what that article just says to get out from under the heel of the Quebec, of sorry, the block,

is to pro-road government, reset the committees so they have majority. And now they can do whatever the heck they want. Right. And if you're in the block and you want this fight to continue, you're going to do everything you can to push them as hard as they,

can go in January so that this goes through committee and then through the next reading before they can get that's that's the thing to watch isn't that the thing to watch also you have to consider that the possibility right and we have no proof for this but there's a possibility here that maybe quebec doesn't want a liberal majority why because what who is the official opponent of the bloc quebecua in the patsi quebecua in quebec the liberals why would we give liberals majority I don't know how much say you got in it, though. No, no, no, I'm talking even now. For all we know, I mean, this is something I could also entertain.

For all I know, they're sabotaging the liberals with this demand. First of all, the real stupid thing is why the liberals even want to join them on this whole crusade. They should have just said, no, we'll do it without you and just get our majority. But the block is saying, well I don't know I mean we could sway a lot of things if we wanted to and I think we underestimate what the block actually has in terms of influence in parliament well the block right now Vesper holds the keys because of committee yeah not because anything else no I know I mean the liberals are literally sitting there and they got the NDP and the green party that gives them

a majority to make sure they can push whatever they want to push yeah but it has to go through committee and right now who sits there the block yeah and the only way you're going to pro rogue well i don't know i actually don't know the answer to well let's continue because we're almost done sure sure sure sure you could talk about all this other stuff we're literally on the last one here okay so number but it's important that you guys all notice that what is kebac consistently repeating from the blocks side of things is that they want to be a nation and that we're being flagged by the senate by the house of commons that we're being intolerant and on and on.

Yves Francois Blanchet is saying, you know, there's no place for hate in Quebec and blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah. All this is to say we view secularism and we view everything that Quebec represents as very drastic and different from the rest of Canada. We want to create the atmosphere and the perception of such a difference and distinction that we will have all that we need to go to a referendum. We're going to make it, A, intolerable for our own people that are opposing us within the province to leave. And let me a sec. I actually turned this off before, but for some reason it's on. We're going to make it intolerable for them to stay, but we're also going to make it so that Canada is going to oppose us. And then when we go to the Supreme Court, it will create a crisis because we're going to say, but this is our values.

This is what our government in our province is representing and saying we want. and you guys are not letting us do it. Let's finish with this one. The irony and hypocrisy of secular Catholic Catholicism versus devote Catholicism in the block, very few are aware that those who are advocating these laws, such as Bill 21 or Bill C-9 are adamant, oh, sorry, admitted Catholics.

The Premier of Quebec, Francois, Lago has been very open about his faith. He stated to the governor of California that he is indeed a Catholic himself, which then begs the question, if you're a Catholic, why are you pushing anti-religious laws? Why would a Catholic want to curtail their ability to express their faith? We're left with two options. Either you're not devout and simply wear the mantle of a Catholic Christian or B, which is more plausible, given that Francois Lago, who started his political career under the Lucien Bouchard, who was the leader of the Block, Quebec law from 1996 to 2001, and was a prominent figure beside Jacques Perise

and was staunchly on the yes side of the separation during the 1998 referendum in Quebec. So while Lago may tell out that he is not aligned with the block, his past suggests that he may very well still believe and want his separation from Canada himself, albeit convertly. Covertly. Thank you. Yeah.

So I posit this argument to all of you. feel free to go and check and read these things for yourselves you can find the sources online there is a more plausible argument because everybody can't make sense of why this religious thing is a big deal to the block why is this such a big deal to the block

why do they hate religion so much they don't they need the perfect excuse to get out of Canada and for us in Quebec here for the Quebec it's to show that no culture our cultures are incompatible. We are creating the conditions to create an incompatibility with the rest of Canada.

Just listen to the leader, as you said, Sean, he said it time and time again, I'm not the one that's cheering on a United Canada. I want a free and prosperous Quebec as a country. That is the real motive and play here. Okay. I'm going to go back to Bill 21, right? 21 is the religious symbols right and that's by the way just so we're clear to everybody that had nothing to do with blanchette that had everything to do with the premier of quebec consoil lego yes we're

talking provincial right now for a second right right if your goal was to create conditions to push people out of there so that you could get closer to a referendum yes maybe i'm wrong on this and i'd be curious your thoughts best for the people who wear their symbols most noticeably are probably Muslim Sikhs over even Christians. Christians all wear their crosses underneath their clothing, don't they? I mean, don't get me wrong. It comes out. No, no, that's fair.

You can tuck it away. No, no, that's fair. We're talking about the most obvious religious symbols. The most obvious. So if you're a Christian in Quebec, that doesn't really feel like an attack on you. That actually feels like an attack on what you're seeing. And what you're seeing is the heck they're being worn. Yeah, well, I mean, look, a Jew also wears a Yamika.

Sure. And the Hasidic Jews. But up until you saw the, forgive me, I should know what it's called. Turbin, thank you. I don't know why I was basing on it. Up until the turban started showing up on police forces and everywhere, because it's very noticeable. did you ever see a Jew wear a cop wearing one while he's at work does is that a thing no I don't think that's a thing so I don't think I haven't I know in Toronto it's there with Sikhs and so on

but in Quebec I haven't seen it so so the attack is actually although they can say it's against everyone most of everyone's like well I'm I'm wearing my cross but I tuck it underneath it's not that big a deal but if you're wearing a turban that is an attack well you also have to remember that CIS and the RCMP has had reports that one of the biggest dangers, I mean, it's like this in American. I think you've had some people from America talk to you about how the FBI was flagging white Christian nationalists as the greatest threat, terrorist threat to the nation. I suspect it's because they know that that population of people, now I'm not talking that I'm not siding with them, but people that are very devout.

and cling to their religion have an allegiance higher than the state yes and they don't want that the separation of church and state in Quebec is coming at a full-on collision and I would argue we've already been colliding but with the implementation of it now on a federal level. Quebec is arguing to sever ties with Canada on this very issue of culture. And then what would that do to all the Quebecers that are religious here in Quebec? They would either have to flee or acquiesce to the new laws. And so I suspect that not many Muslim women are going to be taking off their hijabs. Not many Sikhs are going to remove their turbans to live in Quebec. What am I expecting?

Well, they're kind of piloting this now by saying you simply can't work and wear this stuff, which is already a travesty. But now can you imagine a state where they say, you cannot wear this outside? Well, then who the hell is going to stay here? Everyone in the rest of Canada is going to be getting or they're going to go to the states. But what's left if they all begin to leave? Well, guys, I will say it again. Again, what did Jacques Parizzo in the 1998 referendum say to everybody about why they lost, the immigrants?

What did the block Quebecois understand? We're not going to win this referendum if we have immigrants. A foreign population that isn't purely Quebec associated. And let's also now make it a wedge issue. So please remember, the block is making it a wedge issue to. create the conditions to say we are no longer compatible in quebec we are creating the conditions to prepare the work for a hopeful referendum by making it intolerable for the people of quebec that don't adhere to our laicite our secularism it's a perfect storm are you seeing this

like one dude is playing inside the other dude is playing outside maybe i'm wrong on this vesper it feels completely opposite to how alberta is framing it 100% i told you you guys are honest you're direct about what you want like in alberta it's like you're going to have freedom you're going to you're going to have economic freedom you're going to have all these different things that give you the ability to be who you are and live where you are and do the things and in quebec it's like you're going to live this way we're going to protect culture and if you don't like it get out dude quebecers can say whatever they want to me when i came to the this country, I was being called the N-word in French because of my color.

They are not every all, not all of them, but many were very intolerant of the immigrants coming to this country in Quebec. And they would say like you, you know, you immigrants, you know, you don't belong here. And if I go to a Tim Hortons and speak in English, they'll say, We talk French here. No other place in Canada has a linguistic stasi where they will walk into little Italy and tell the Italian restaurant, you can't call it pasta on your menu,

you have to call it pat. They literally have people, language police. Guys, where else is this happening in Canada? Language police who walk in, from the government telling you you're going to get fined if you don't change your menu. Like imagine, guys, Quebec is such a weird place compared to the rest of Canada. You're completely right. Alberta wants to prosper everybody if they leave.

They're not asking anyone to change their religion. They're not asking anybody to suddenly stop believing whatever they want to believe. They just want to get out of under the shackles of Ottawa. Quebec's reasons are very different. They want a cultural purge. And I guess the other, you know, so then. And they're Catholics. They want a culture. Guess what's going to happen when all the immigrants are gone?

All the Catholics are going to get together. And then they're not going to be a need for this religion's exemption. We got all the immigrants out. We got our country. We preserved our language. Let's go to church. that's how it's going to work the other thing that's been interesting at it and forgive me because i i go to 2026 and i just look at it and i go okay you're the liberals you're courting one more because then you have a you have a majority right and if you get majority then we should all expect they're going to prorogue government so they can reset committees so that they can have

the balance of power yeah but how's that going to work with it with the block right now how How much is it going to take for them to actually, like, say they lose one seat or one person crosses over to the conservative side? Because, remember, it's not like they're getting a clear majority, right? Like a massive majority. We're talking by like a spread of like 10 seats above everybody. They're getting... No, no, no, no. I don't deny that.

Listen, let's use a hockey analogy. What would be a blowout? Nine to two. sure five to six is not exactly a blowout and if you're in the third period and it's five to six i'll you know i'll defer to you in your experience five to six heading into the third period right what are the chances that you could lose your lead if it's five sorry i'm i'm delayed if it's five two they always talk about three goal leads being one of the worst going in the third period.

Okay, but what happens if it's 5-6? Well, if it's 6-5 and you're down by a goal, I mean, the game... And the third period has just started. Yeah, there's plenty of game left to win. Well, would you say that the Conservatives, if they get that extra seat, are they in a 6-5 scenario or are they in a 5-2 scenario? they're more like in a i think they're more in a five two scenario really i see this in six five because what would stop one or two people from the liberal party to cross over to the

conservatives if they woo them over i mean what would happen then let me ask you what would happen if two liberals all this garbage happens then two liberals cross the floor to the conservative party What happens to that majority? I get it, but we don't see. No, I'm just asking. I'm just asking. Let's play the hypothetical game. Sure.

If you play the hypothetical game. Let me give you two examples. Joel Lightbound has demonstrated already that he's had problems with the liberals. Anthony Housefather has had more and more problems with the liberals based on this whole narrative of the Palestinians, the intifada, all this stuff. He's had to advocate for Jewish rights. so on and so forth. I see a scenario where Housefather might go over to the conservatives. Let's use these two. These two cross over to the conservatives in a month after they get their

majority. You know that one guy you're talking about? They get him? Perfect. Come February, two liberals cross back to the conservative side. Then what happens? I mean, they're no longer a majority, right? Then what would be the logical thing to do at that point if it was up to you? would you call an election call a non-confidence vote so if if crossing the floor so if i can so then you then you do what twos said twos is predicting five people are going to cross he thinks it's going to be a mass conversion okay well that's a prediction and that's fair nobody can i can't disprove that and neither can you disprove the fact that uh five could cross and then 10 can come to the conservatives no one's going to the block i'll say that right now so not that's not to

not to completely deviate off the topic here guys i hope it's become very clear at least from this conversation with sean that the block is playing a game with the rest of the parties their main aim is not they don't hate religion they are themselves religious they call themselves catholics they go to church they do mass this has more to do with quebec just all of you remember that go to my thread read it see for yourselves you're going to understand that quebec is playing a very shadowy game here and it's nothing like how alberta is playing its game alberta is very clear about what it wants and it's saying what it wants and quebec is just they realize to get their referendum they got to get rid of the immigrants and those that are believers and they got to make it so that it's

impalatable anymore it's no longer palatable to be in canada well they're based on values they're pushing things that cause a lot of canadians to dislike quebec and if you're in quebec then you feel is confrontation and you want to well i assume i'm assuming you're like no dude i'm i'm lebanese i'm lebanese i have yet to meet an alberton that has insulted the i mean i'm a lebanese canadian but no one has insulted me as a lebanese person but in quebec i will get insulted so it clearly isn't about race okay mass immigration is one thing but i i haven't met anyways I'm sure there are, but I haven't met a mass outpouring of people telling me, hey, brown leb, go back to your country.

I didn't hear that. But in Quebec, there is that tension, right, between the French-Cabecua and every... Dude, just on language. Forget my color. Forget who I am. Just on language, there's an issue. Just on language, there's an issue. And so can you imagine, if you don't speak French in Quebec, you're immediately hated by some people.

so let's put it to rest i think we've beaten this horse over the head well i just want to add in one final thing because this is going to play in my brain and i assume it's playing in somebody else's brain okay let's play out they get a majority they pro rogue government how would that then all the committees are struck down all the things that have been in there go away what happens to bill c9 goes away for the time being right and who's going to bring it back the liberals no no but i was wondering okay they have a majority which means they can get it through all the readings but what happens in committee because you have to form committee again

and this is now forgive me this is a i folks so take it with a grain of salt says standing committees the most common type are permanent established by the standing orders of the house of commons but their membership is reset and appointed anew at the start of each session striking committee roll early in a new session the standing committee on procedure and house affairs acts as a striking committee it prepares a report of lists proposed members of for all standing committees and the House of Representatives on standing joint committees party import input and proportionality membership is negotiated among party whips lists reflect the proportional standings of recognized committees in the house if a party holds

50 percent of seats it gets roughly 50 percent of committee spots if the government typically holds a majority on most committees it has a majority in the house so if they have a majority in theory they would get majority of the committee correct right and then the block would lose in theory but but what's control but again no but again please they're banking on losing they want to make it look like Canada is not wanting to play ball with them they don't care about Canada let's get that straight the block does not care about Canada Eve Blanchet just told it to you. I don't care about the Canada.

I care about the nation of Quebec. We don't care about your stupid committees. We don't care about your stupid liberals. We don't care about your stupid conservatives. We certainly don't care about your stupid NDP people. What we care about is we want out. And we're going to take this to court and say that we are no longer, if you turn down what we're requesting,

that you amend in the bill, then you are giving me the perfect ammunition to go to the Supreme Court and create a constitutional crisis. Our nation's values are secular. You are not willing to allow that. It's almost like, you know how Albertans are saying were indentured servitude

to the money we're giving? Well, now Quebec gets to argue like as if it was the woman in a relationship, Like, I want to leave this marriage because you're an abusive person. You won't let me practice my secularism. You keep beating me over the head with your Bible and your Quran. That's abuse. And what's the Supreme Court going to say?

God. We thought we just had Alberta. Now we have Quebec. And they're coming with two different problems except the Quebec one. I mean, they have a major majority. They've been working overtime to make. it very hard for immigrants to stay here. And believe me, there are immigrants that are leaving Montreal because of these laws that are implemented provincially. And now when this federal

thing, it's timing, right? There is a timing to this whole thing. They're going to be ramping up. And mark my words, in Quebec, they're going to be ramping up these religious laws more and more. And they're going to create them so as to cause the people that would normally support a no vote to not be here. I guess you're what you're pointing out to me. I keep focusing on committees and how much power they have. What you're saying is, if they have it, then they push this way. And if they don't have it, they push this way.

Well, yeah. But once again, they're going to try and create the conditions where they can move closer to a referendum, not further away from it. Yeah, I mean, the proof is in the pudding. You just read it. You saw Lucien Bouchard. He's advising them, don't go for a referendum. No, we're going to go for a referendum.

We want a referendum. where we want to separate. There are more and more talks now about separatism. Look it up, just on your own time. To anyone listening and to you, Sean, just type up Quebec separatism. You'll see it's going to flood your feed. Not just on X, on Google, on anything. It's the new talk.

The thing is, it's all talk to engineer and the sentiment, right, to get everybody on board with this thing. And they need to play it really intelligently. They asked for the most incendiary thing you could ask for, making people afraid. They're already doing it in Quebec. You just read that. You just read the Miriam's research paper.

Sikhs Muslim women and Jewish women are in the 70 to 60% range, more afraid to express what they believe. There's a fear, a culture of fear being created in Quebec over people's beliefs. Well, now we're going to take this and say, well, this is what we believe. And what's the excuse? we don't want Muslim extremists saying these things. So let me get this straight. One or two douchebags say this stuff,

and now you want to make everybody pay for it. That doesn't make any sense. Why would you do a sweeping law like this when it's only happened maybe a handful of times? Well, because it's the perfect excuse. Wasn't COVID the perfect excuse to do and enact all these new laws, take out all this new money. Governments will always capitalize on a tragedy to further their power.

And we all know once they get that power, they don't want to give it back. It's the same thing here. We're going to create the conditions to create a problem in order to grant ourselves more power. And in Quebec, it's the religion thing. Nowhere else in Canada is religion more suppressed than in Quebec. Well, now they want to bring that to Canada, knowing full well that Canada is going to basically tell them to go take a hike. And the second the Canada says, well, sorry, go take a hike. Great.

We'll see you in court. And by that time, by that time, they would have galvanized their base. I hope this makes sense, Sean. I assume there's going to be a few different texts come in. Either way, Vesper, appreciate you giving me some time this morning. I think it's important to try and, you know, kind of bring out this discussion of what the heck is going on with Bill C.9. Because when I thought it was just the liberals, it made, I thought, complete sense. But knowing the block is behind it, you have to kind of scratch your head and wonder.

So I appreciate you walking us through your train of thought this morning and giving Canadians, Americans, a whole bunch of different people who are tuned in the show, something to think on. And if you didn't listen to Fadeen, the episode prior to this, you should listen to that and then come into this one. because I think it gives a more broader view to the entire discussion. Either way, Vesper, appreciate you coming on and doing this. You're very, very welcome. And guys, again, Vesper Digital on X. You want to come and read it for yourselves.

It's there. Sean, thank you for sharing it. And again, I always appreciate being with you guys and talking to these things.