The person suing us for defamation is this guy – Keean Bexte.
2. Bexte works for Rebel Media.
Its owner, Ezra Levant, threatened to sue us in August after I called The Rebel "assholes, conmen and grifters" and criticized Bexte's behaviour.
Levant asked for me to retract & apologize.
I refused.
Then we got a visitor to our newsroom.
3. If you don't know Keean Bexte, he used to work for a website that sold white supremacist memorabilia. ricochet.media/en/2422/rebel-…
4. Levant calls Bexte The Rebel's "troublemaker." He often confronts people with shocking accusation-questions. Here he is following Greta Thunberg into her hotel, being accused of harassment, and asking about her "mental illness" (Thunberg is autistic).
5. Here he is asking U.S. Congresswoman Ilhan Omar if she married her own brother, and getting accused of ambushing her.
6. He called Wet'suwet'en Hereditary Chief Woos a "wifebeater." Here is is confronting Woos at a gas station.
7. Bexte called the Parliamentary Press Gallery "incestophiles" who should all be fired.
He called former Alberta Premier @RachelNotley a "witch" and a "coward," and told her "you disgust me."
8. Then he asked to be granted entry to the Alberta Press Gallery.
9. The Alberta Parliamentary Press Gallery denied The Rebel accreditation because they said that The Rebel are not real journalists. I took issue with this – I didn't like the Press Gallery (or anyone else) getting to decide who is and who isn't a journalist.
10. My opinion is that it's ok to deny Bexte entry based on his behaviour alone. If you act as he does, there are consequences.
I think it's fine for me to have this opinion, and to voice it.
But Bexte is suing me for these comments.
11. Keean Bexte claims I have diminished his reputation and his credibility, and that because of what I said people will think that he is unprofessional, disruptive, and not a real journalist. embed.documentcloud.org/documents/2040…
12. In defending myself and my company, I am prepared to prove in court that Keean Bexte has no reputation or credibility to lose, and that this is because of his own behaviour, not because of my comments. embed.documentcloud.org/documents/2040…
13. Canadaland will fight this case, first and foremost because one of Bexte's demands is that we shut up and stop saying these things about him.
But we report on the media, Rebel Media included.
So gagging ourselves is not an option.
14. We will argue that Bexte's case is an attempt to silence our criticism of The Rebel and its staffers.
We are not alone...
15. The Rebel and/or Levant are currently suing:
-The National Observer
-PressProgress
-The Narwhal/DeSmog
-Al Jazeera
-Maclean’s columnist @Scott_Gilmore
-A critic on Twitter, Robert Day (@canadiancynic)
- Another Twitter critic, Adam Stirling
Those are the ones we know about.
16. Reporter @Justin_Ling recently revealed that The Rebel's lawyers threatened him & Corus Entertainment with a lawsuit after he criticized The Rebel on the radio.
He was sent a similar gag order.
17. I am not aware of a single Canadian who has filed more lawsuits against journalists, news organizations and critics than Ezra Levant.
18. Levant has called himself "Canada’s Foremost Freedom Fighter," a champion for free speech.
Two Ontario Superior Court Justices called him a person with "a reckless disregard for truth."
But truth matters.
19. Truth is what backs up the opinions I expressed about Keean Bexte.
We will defend my comments with evidence and with facts.
20. This fight may be long, stressful, and expensive. But what we are fighting for is our right to speak, and the ability to do our jobs as journalists.
21. We are not fighting criticism or "cancel culture" - we are fighting a $150,000 lawsuit demanding that we erase our words and never repeat them.
This lawsuit against our news org is what a true threat to free speech looks like.
22. For the full story, and to read Bexte's statement of claim and our statement of defence, click here: canadaland.com/podcast/346-we…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Craig & Marc Kielburger will testify at a Commons committee tomorrow. It's a rare opportunity to ask them Qs. They've never accepted our intvu requests or answered us directly & I'm unaware of either of them ever agreeing to an accountability intvu from another news org. (cont'd)
Still, I worry that the time will be squandered with partisan speechifying & an over-emphasis on the youth volunteer grant. I realize the grant is the focus, but larger questions about WE are clearly important in assessing the gov't's due diligence here, or lack thereof. (cont'd)
Watchdog @CharityCanada has published a good list of questions they would ask the Kielburgers. charityintelligence.ca/research-and-n… I'll add to those. Here's what I would ask the Kielburgers if I had them under oath:
Here's a story about #CancelCulture from one hundred years ago.
In 1920, Henry Ford was one of the most wealthy, powerful and respected men in America.
He was also a disgusting bigot who owned a newspaper.
Ford's Dearborn Independent ran a NINETY ONE part series, starting in 1920, called "The International Jew: The World's Problem."
It was heavily based on "The Protocols of the Meetings of the Learned Elders of Zion," which is Russian fake news from 1903. Many conspiracy theory idiots believed it to be the actual minutes from a secret meeting of the Jews who run the world (some still do).
1. Just posted a small but perhaps important update to our last story on WE Charity in Kenya.
I'll provide a bit of context on it here.
2. If you read the story, you know that we obtained a recording of Marc Kielburger on the phone in 2017 with the person who ran WE's Kenya operation, Peter Ruhiu. soundcloud.com/canadaland/i-c…
3. During the call, Ruhiu makes death threats about one of Kielburger's employees, talks about paying-off government investigators, and mentions their organization's "criminal offences." Marc listens calmly and agrees that the situation is "mission critical." He offers his help.
1. I finally had a chance to take a close look at the reporting on this story about @puglass "refusing" to vacate her office, and I think people should be wary of it and think hard about where it came. Here's why... cbc.ca/news/politics/…
2. The narrative CBC published is loaded & the language seems engineered to set off a series of emotional responses: @Puglaas is "refusing" to leave, she's "no longer entitled" to "occupy" her "suite" of offices with a private bathroom. And she calls the *other* side petty...
3. It goes on. CBC dedicates 7 paragraphs to the fact that @puglaas had an elder bless the office. The implication is that she is playing the race card and basing a claim to keep the office on this blessing. But she doesn't.