Ezra Levant critiques Canada’s foreign minister Melanie Jolie’s March 13th declaration of regime change in Russia, backed by over 2,000 sanctions—yet Alberta’s Firearms Act, led by Tyler Chandrow, counters federal gun control while gun crime surges 92%. Alberta’s push mirrors Saskatchewan’s under Scoop Moe, signaling provincial resistance to Trudeau’s policies. Levant contrasts regime change rhetoric with Western trade loopholes and Ukraine’s Pandora Papers scandal, questioning consistency. Meanwhile, internal Conservative divisions—like Hugh Siegel’s "Red Tories" vs. populists—complicate opposition strategy in a left-leaning nation, as Gerald Butts’ WWF ties expose globalist hypocrisy. Levant’s anti-woke Kipling recommendations hint at broader cultural battles shaping Canada’s political future. [Automatically generated summary]
Today I want to talk about a statement made calmly and deliberately and carefully by our foreign minister that I just can't believe she said it, and I can't believe it hasn't gotten more coverage.
Melanie Jolie, Canada's foreign minister, said it is a goal, it is a definite goal, she said, of Canada and our government and our foreign policy to have regime change in Russia.
I've never heard of such a thing before.
In fact, Joe Biden blurted it out once and he immediately retracted and walked it back.
I want to show you the tape and I want to ask you if you think she's for real.
We also have a great guest interview today, Tracy Wilson.
I can hardly wait to show you that talk.
But first, go to Rebel News Plus at RebelNewsPlus.com.
Click subscribe.
That's the video version of the show.
We put a lot of effort into the video side and also the eight bucks a month.
You know, we rely on that because we do not get any government funds and it shows.
We're one of the freest companies, freest journalism companies in this country.
Go to RebelNewsPlus.com.
All right, here's today's podcast.
Tonight, did Canada just declare war on Russia?
It's March 13th, and this is the Ezra Levant show.
Shame on you, you censorious bug.
Last week, Melanie Jolie, the foreign minister, was in front of a parliamentary committee.
And what made all the news was this exchange between her and Michael Cooper, a conservative MP.
Jolie talked about staring down Vladimir Putin, and Cooper laughed at that.
I mean, say what you will about Putin, but he is deadly serious.
He's a former KGB agent.
He's an invader of countries, the country of Georgia, Ukraine twice.
Most likely, he ordered the assassination of his domestic political enemies.
And up against him was Melanie Jolie, who before she became an MP was a lawyer who ran for mayor of Montreal and lost.
That's her background.
Yeah, I'm not sure if it's an even match between her and Putin.
Minister Jolie, you've talked tough.
You've talked tough with your Beijing counterparts.
So you say you even stared into his eyes.
I'm sure he was very intimidated.
And now we learned today, and now we learned today or yesterday in the Logan Mail very conveniently that a visa was denied of a diplomat who wanted to work at the Canadian Beijing embassy.
One visa?
Is that it?
Well, that exchange bizarrely went viral.
Well, not really.
I mean, no one real, no one really cared.
It was passed around Ottawa as proof of how sexist the Conservatives were.
I mean, anything to change the channel on the Chinese corruption scandal that is engulfing Trudeau right now.
By the way, here's Chantali Bear saying Trudeau looks guilty as sin.
What is the crux of this story?
What is the issue?
If you can boil it down to one thing, what is the issue here?
So by now, to me, it boils down to an issue of political accountability.
And the political accountability that is being questioned is that of the prime minister.
After a week of evasions in the House of Commons, Philibustering to keep his chief of staff outside of a committee room, you kind of wonder whether the prime minister and his staff are trying to feed the narrative that they have something that they desperately want to hide.
I'm not saying that's the case.
How in the world would I know?
But that is what it looks like.
And it isn't the opposition that has made it look like that.
It's the government itself with the incapacity of the prime minister to answer fairly basic questions about what he knew when and how and what he did about it.
All those questions, and I've come to that school, could be answered in the context of a parliamentary committee by the prime minister himself.
So if Justin Trudeau wants to put this behind him without having a public inquiry, and I still have doubts as to the merits of the exercise of a public inquiry, let him go sit in a parliamentary committee and answer the questions, not provide evasions.
And if the prime minister believes, as he said in the house, that anything he would do would still be doubted by many Canadians, maybe it's time he reconsiders whether he wants to be the prime minister.
See, the thing about that is, Chantali Bear herself is a Trudeau Foundation fellow.
As in, she was paid money from the same crooked organization that China later poured money into when they realized they could just buy the Liberal Party and the goodwill of Trudeau.
Imagine how bad Trudeau must be doing if even a fellow grifter from the Trudeau Foundation, no less, is saying he's gone too far.
Anyways, none of what I just mentioned was the real news last week.
While the Liberals and the Liberal media were chasing this proof that Michael Cooper was sexist because he laughed at the prospect of Bambi scaring Godzilla, Melanie Jolie actually said something newsworthy.
I can't believe I didn't catch this until now.
She said that Canada's goal, and she's the foreign minister, so this isn't a pundit, this isn't a backbencher, this isn't some crank, this isn't some junior person.
Regime Change Debate00:13:37
This is the foreign minister.
This is the real deal.
This is our woman who's going to go head-to-head with Xi Jinping and Vladimir Putin.
She said calmly, clearly, it wasn't blurted out in an accident, she said, our goal as a country is regime change in Russia.
And in case you were wondering, it was definitely the goal, she said.
Here, take a look.
I heard you news before referring to Russia.
You talked about regime change.
And I was just wondering at what point in time did that become Canada's policy to advocate for.
And I wanted to ask Minister Witfeld if that's the right approach to advocate for when it comes to Russia.
Well, we believe that we need to isolate Russia diplomatically, economically, and politically.
And that is the regime that I'm referring to, of course.
And as I mentioned earlier in the discussion, I always make a difference between the regime and the people of a given country, which is fundamental.
I think also that we've imposed very strong sanctions, more than 2,000 sanctions since the beginning of the war.
The goal is definitely to do that, is to weaken Russia's ability to launch very difficult attacks against Ukraine.
We want also to make sure that Putin and his enablers are held to account.
And that's why I also referred to the different actions we're taking regarding accountability when it comes to war crimes, when it comes to crimes against humanity, and also the crime of aggression.
Now, look, I understand helping to defend Ukraine by sending weapons.
I understand that.
It's a bit embarrassing when you literally send one tank.
I don't know why we did that.
That's a German-made leopard tank.
That's what it's called.
I don't know.
Was it the only one that was up to par with the other NATO countries sending leopard tanks?
Was it the only one that was maintained and working well?
Was it the only one we could spare?
I don't know.
Why just one?
So I get sending weapons.
Of course, there's the question of who will operate these weapons, who will maintain them, who will fix them.
I'm not sure how practical it is to train the Ukrainian army on new equipment in the middle of a war.
How long does tank training normally take?
Months?
I'm guessing.
Maybe if you know how to drive a Russian tank, which is what they use in Ukraine, maybe really quickly, a few weeks you could run the Leopard 2 tank.
I don't know.
But how long would it take to learn how to do maintenance of it?
How long would it be?
I don't know.
I just don't know.
I'm not an expert in those things.
But I can understand it, or at least I understand the idea.
I also understand the idea of sending cash too, but it makes me more nervous given how corrupt Russia and Ukraine both are.
I mean, take it from this guy.
Pre-war, you know, the Ukrainian government is one of the worst in the world.
You know, corrupt, controlled by a few rich people.
I mean, really unfortunate for the people in Ukraine.
Even Bill Gates knows that.
And I understand economic sanctions on Russia.
Jolie announced, it was actually Christia Freeland who announced a couple more of those too.
Here's how the Canadian press reported those new sanctions.
Here it is, as picked up by the National Post.
Also Friday, Finance Minister Christia Freeland announced a ban on imports of steel and aluminum, which she said will help undermine Moscow's ongoing invasion of Ukraine.
Figures from the Department of Industry show that Canada imported $208 million in steel products from Russia in 2021 and $79 million last year.
Canada also imported $44 million in aluminum from Russia in 2121 and another $16 million last year.
So you can see it's already plunging anyways.
Now, I googled the size of Canadian iron and steel market because I didn't know.
And if this study is right, the market is $11.6 billion last year.
So Russian imports, they're not even close to even 1% of our steel uses.
I just don't think this is going to dent the Russian economy.
I think it's more symbolism.
By the way, if you remember when we sent Jeremy Lafredo to Moscow to see what life is like for ordinary people during the war, he reported that Google and Google Pay and Apple Pay, you know what those are?
Those are the payment processors on your phone and your smartwatch.
They work in Moscow.
They just don't work with Canadian or American banks, but that's the banks doing that.
It's not Google or Apple.
They're still doing tons of business in Russia.
There's still plenty of trade going on between the West and Russia.
And of course, Trudeau personally intervened to amend Canada's sanctions last year so that SNC Lavaland could repair Russia's natural gas pipeline turbines, which I dare say is a bit more strategically important to Putin than $16 million worth of steel exports.
So I get sending tanks or sending tank.
I get sending cash, though.
I really doubt that money is going to go where it's intended.
I'm sorry.
I'm skeptical of all politicians, but Ukraine really, they're so sketchy over there.
Every party over there, frankly.
I mean, just do a Google search, if you like, for Zelensky and the Pandora papers.
You've probably heard of the Panama papers, the Pandora papers.
You'll see thousands of stories about Vladimir Zelensky hiding money in secret offshore accounts.
It was revealed in a massive investigation dubbed the Pandora Papers, but you'll notice that all of those stories are dated 2021 or earlier.
For some reason, the media stopped talking about that corruption after Russia invaded and Ukraine became the new thing.
So I get the photo ops.
I get the sanctions.
I get sending the tank.
I get it.
And I think it's appropriate that Canada express its opposition to countries invading each other.
But regime change, regime change in Russia, even during the Cold War, I don't think that NATO ever called for the death or assassination or removal or regime change of the Soviet Union.
I don't think anyone ever said that.
I think certain things were off limits for perhaps moral or legal reasons, but also for pragmatic reasons.
If you say I'm going to try and assassinate or remove the Russian, or at the time, the Soviet leader, it was a giant game of tit-for-tat and brinksmanship, you would expect that they would do the same to you.
I mean, has Trudeau or Melanie Jolie called for regime change against any other leader in the world?
I mean, anywhere?
I tried to find it.
Here's a news story about Justin Trudeau calling Iran a bloodthirsty regime.
So he uses the word regime about Iran a fair bit, but I couldn't find any evidence that he ever called for outright regime change as a goal.
I really think the only country in the world he said that about is Russia, or Melanie Jolie did in his name at least.
I mean, Trudeau says he would like a new regime in Iran, but he's not saying our goal is regime change.
He only said that about Russia.
Now, Joe Biden, who is not all there mentally, he once said a similar thing.
Here he was in Poland, and apparently this was not a scripted remark.
Take a listen.
A dictator bent on rebuilding an empire will never erase a people's love for liberty.
Brutality will never cry down their will to be free.
Ukraine will never be a victory for Russia.
For free people refused to live in a world of hopelessness and darkness.
We will have a different future, a brighter future, rooted in democracy and principles, hope and light, of decency and dignity, of freedom and possibilities.
For God's sake, this man cannot remain in power.
Cannot remain in power.
That's tantamount.
That's not as far as Melanie Jolie went.
Now, Anthony Blinken, who is about 20 years younger than Biden and still has his mental faculties, he knew what a disaster and a risk this was.
He was in Israel.
The very next day he said, no, don't misunderstand that.
Take a look at this.
As you know, and as you've heard us say repeatedly, we do not have a strategy of regime change in Russia or anywhere else for that matter.
I think the president, the White House, made the point last night that, quite simply, President Putin cannot be empowered to wage war or engage in aggression against Ukraine or anyone else.
Yeah, look, he said it, but they wanted to pretend he didn't say.
You bet they were on the phone to Moscow saying, oh, it was just a gas, a gaffe.
Here is the White House gaslighting a great reporter who was just asking some basic questions.
Her answer was, no, no, no, no, never happened.
Don't believe your lying eyes.
Take a look.
Thank you.
Thank you very much.
I know you're going to ask a really nice question.
Well, it's an important question, I think.
Are you worried that other leaders in the world are going to start to doubt that America is back if some of these big things that you say on the world stage keep getting walked back?
What's getting walked back?
It made it sound like, just in the last couple of days, it sounded like you told U.S. troops they were going to Ukraine.
It sounded like you said it was possible the U.S. would use a chemical weapon, and it sounded like you were calling for regime change in Russia, and we know none of the three occurred.
None of the three.
None of the three, Mr. President.
You interpret the language that way.
I was talking to the troops.
We're talking about helping train the troops in that are the Ukrainian troops that are in Poland.
That's with the context.
I sat there with those guys for a couple hours.
That's what we talked about.
Yeah, sure.
But what are you going to do when you have a cleanup on aisle three?
You just have to clean it up.
And I'm sure there was a lot of private diplomacy behind the scenes reassuring the Russians that know the United States was not, for the first time in its history, calling for the removal or assassination of the Russian leader.
That would be a whole different thing.
I mean, look, Biden is a doddering old fool, but even he knew he screwed up.
But what's Melanie Jolie's excuse?
And if she screwed up, where is the walking back?
Like, give the White House credit.
They walked it back.
How can regime change be a Canadian goal?
I mean, a goal usually is something that you work towards, often as a team.
Good goals are realistic and achievable and understood and believed in by whatever organization has the joint goal.
So what does she mean?
Is Canada working towards that?
How?
By banning steel imports and sending a tank?
That can't be right.
That's not going to do regime change.
Regime change is something different from helping Ukraine.
It's not defensive.
It's a dramatic incursion into Russian sovereignty at the very top.
I don't even think that Russia is trying to achieve regime change in Ukraine.
They're trying to conquer eastern parts of Ukraine that they claim are Russian by ethnicity and history.
But I don't think they're trying to kill or exile Zelensky.
I mean, obviously they would be happy if those things happen, but I think even Putin is sane enough not to assassinate Vladimir Zelensky.
I think if they wanted to, they could have done it by now.
So back to the question of the day, is Canada planning to kill or exile or remove Vladimir Putin?
Is that what regime change means?
How would we do that even?
Are we the only country in the world with that goal?
Is it wise to tell that to the world, including to the Russians?
I mean, Putin was a KGB agent, and I'm not sure if the KGB is something that there is a past tense to.
I think once KGB, always KGB, it's called the FSB now.
I think he's probably killed people personally.
I think it's certain that he's ordered people killed.
Is it wise for Canada's foreign minister to say we want to kill him or remove him or whatever regime change means?
And we don't really know what it means.
Journalists were too busy asking about the feminist thing.
I mean, I think Vladimir Putin might laugh when he sees Melanie Jolie.
I think Michael Cooper might be right on that, but I presume Melanie Jolie wants to be taken seriously, doesn't want to just be a joke.
Do we, in this case, even want Russia to take her seriously?
What do we think might be the consequences of that?
Surely someone has thought that through.
I mean, every single person in the White House and Joe Biden himself pretty quickly realized that he had done something terrible when he had said something like that last year.
And he wasn't even as brazen as her.
Do we have no grown-ups in Canada?
Serious Considerations00:04:17
There's no one saying, yeah, we'll just walk that one back.
Now, I remember the Cold War.
That's how old I am.
I'm 51.
I remember watching a movie as a child.
I was 11.
The year was 1983.
And there was this movie just on regular TV.
100 million people watched the movie.
It was called The Day After.
It was terrifying.
It was about a nuclear war between Russia and America.
I thought it was terrifying as a kid, obviously.
I want to show you a trailer for the movie.
I think this movie did a lot of mental health damage to millions of people.
It scared me for years.
Take a look.
The president is presently in direct communication.
Current world intelligence situation, and we might pay particular note to the nuclear submarines off the east and west coast.
Having already captured NATO advanced positions.
Hey, any of you guys hear anything about an alert?
I really don't think either side wants to be the first to use a nuclear device.
It's not a question of who, but where.
East Germany sealed off the borders to West Berlin.
People are crazy, but not that crazy.
I don't believe this is happening.
We have a massive attack against the U.S. at this time.
ICBMs.
Over 300 missiles inbound now.
Either we fired first, and they're going to try to hit what's left.
Missiles out of the ground in time.
One millisecond to take you beyond imagining, beyond tomorrow, and into the day after.
You know, that was scary, but in a paradoxical way, it gave certainty back then.
Mutually assured destruction, the acronym being mad.
It was the theory that neither side, neither the Soviets nor the Americans, could win a nuclear war, so neither side would start that war.
It kept things frozen.
It was called a Cold War for a reason.
It was tense.
It was stressful.
But it kept the peace for 50 years.
But there was a fear underneath it all, wasn't there?
People had bomb shelters back then.
I remember our neighbors built a bomb shelter.
They used it as a wine cellar.
People really thought those things would happen: stop, drop, and roll, duck and cover.
And of course, it might, and of course, it still might.
But I don't think I've ever seen anything so reckless during the Cold War as Melanie Jolie, an affirmative action gender quota high, let's be honest.
A foreign minister with no foreign policy experience, failed mayoral candidate, telling nuclear-armed Russia, telling KGB agent Vladimir Putin that Canada's goal is to have regime change in Moscow.
Now, I don't think they'll take her seriously.
I mean, I don't think Canadians take her seriously.
But this is a special level of stupid.
I'm not even talking about Ukraine anymore.
I'm talking about essentially declaring war on Russia itself.
But really, it's one thing to call for regime change.
To call for regime change when you literally won't say that about any other country in the world, but to call for regime change when none of your allies will say the same thing, when Biden's retracting it because they all know better.
Alberta's Gun Legislation Move00:15:11
And Canada's leading the way.
Are you scared?
I think you should be just a little bit.
Stay with us for more.
Well, Danielle Smith ran for the leader of the United Conservative Party to be the successor premier to Jason Kenney, in large part on something she called the Sovereignty Act.
What's that?
Well, it certainly got the media all agog, but it was really just Quebec's approach for the last generation, which is under the Canadian Constitution, provinces have a lot of rights that the federal government sort of barged its way into, and Quebec would like to reassert its rights in those constitutional areas.
I don't know if you know Section 91 and Section 92 of our BNA Act, our Constitution Act of 1867.
It delineates what Ottawa can do and what the province can do.
Well, few provinces have stuck up for themselves as much as Quebec has, and look at how it's profited them.
And so Alberta is taking a page from their book.
And the Sovereignty Act is one thing, but Alberta is starting to flex its muscles to take up some space to crowd out incursions by the federal government.
Without further ado, let me show you an excerpt from an announcement made last week by Tyler Chandrow, the Justice Minister of Alberta, announcing that Alberta was going to introduce its own Firearms Act to crowd out any invasions by Justin Trudeau's gun grabbers.
Take a look at this.
It would also empower our chief firearms officer to advocate more strongly on behalf of Albertans to have the federal government reconsider policy changes that infringe on their rights.
And it would enable Alberta to leverage the areas of jurisdiction that we have through regulations that help to preserve public confidence in the integrity of the firearms control program.
Now, specifically, Alberta could create regulations to respond to federal actions that negatively impact law-abiding firearms owners here in the province.
For example, the seizure and confiscation of firearms.
Because of this legislation, Alberta could create a regulation regarding who in this province can be involved in taking part in this.
Through regulations, Alberta could also establish our expectations that firearms owners are fairly compensated for seized firearms.
Well, the legal theory is simple.
Provincial rights, certain matters are those of the province.
If the province doesn't legislate, well, maybe Justin Trudeau can get away with it.
But if Alberta crowds out and says, we're going to pass a bevy of laws regulating firearms, well, that, the theory goes, would trump the same laws that would have different purposes issued by Justin Trudeau.
I love the idea.
It's very Quebec-ish.
And so I would certainly hope that any critics of Alberta taking back its jurisdiction would say the same thing to Quebec.
Of course, they will not.
Joining us now.
Vaya Skype from Ottawa is someone who knows this battle very closely because she is the vice president of the CCFR, the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights.
Tracy Wilson is a regular guest on Sheila Gunread's show, but I'm delighted to talk with her today.
Tracy, how are you doing?
I'm doing good, Ezra.
Thanks for the opportunity.
Well, it's a pleasure.
And I know that you and our friend Sheila Gunread talk a lot.
Sheila's more familiar with the firearms issue than myself.
I think it's important because I think Justin Trudeau demonizes legal gun owners for the delight of urban voters in Toronto and Montreal, Vancouver, who think guns bad.
But of course, the guns that are bad in those cities are pistols, revolvers.
They're not the long arms that Trudeau tries to license in Alberta or the prairies.
Tell me what you think of this chess move by Alberta's justice minister.
I'm fascinated by it.
What do you think?
Well, this is just one step in a series of measures that the Alberta government has taken to protect Albertans from government overreach from the federal liberals.
You'll remember not long ago, they also introduced Bill C2 or Bill 211, which prevented municipalities from introducing a handgun ban.
Because at one point, the Trudeau liberals were promising cities that they could ban legal ownership of handguns within their jurisdictions.
So they preemptively put legislation to block that.
And they've also intervened on our federal court challenge against the big sweeping May 2020 gun ban.
So Alberta is definitely leading the fight as far as provincial support for Canada's most trusted vetted citizens.
So yeah, this bill is interesting.
It's got a couple of different things it does.
It will introduce the ability to make regulations that would allow for the licensing of seizure agents.
So Justin Trudeau is looking at ways of grabbing guns from millions of Canadians who've done nothing to warrant it.
And what Alberta is saying, okay, well, if you want to come do that in our province, they're going to need a special license in order to seize guns.
Well, who would they apply to that license for?
To the Alberta government.
So I think it's a very clever workaround.
And I think it's interesting.
They're also fighting for fair compensation for gun owners in Alberta who may want to participate in some sort of buyback confiscation program.
They're demanding better testing, which I think is something that everybody on all sides of this debate would support.
We need to know where crime guns are coming from.
And for the most part, we know they are coming from across the border.
And then, of course, they're also this legislation, Bill 8, would make a requirement that municipalities within the province of Alberta would have to meet certain regulatory requirements before accepting any federal funding for gun grabs.
So, you know, I think it's a lot of putting up a lot of blockades for justice.
I love it.
Yeah.
And I'm thinking back to my time at law school.
I remember one of the provincial domains, like the feds have control over crime.
The criminal code is federal.
Okay, got it.
But merely owning property is a provincial matter.
Property and civil rights is a provincial matter.
So until someone commits a crime, the feds cannot get in there.
And so if now you've got to deal with this provincial gun grabber, and guess what?
There's not going to be any licenses for gun grabbing issue.
I think that's fascinating.
And of course, I remember also from constitutional law that cities are a creature of the provincial government.
Theoretically, the provincial government could abolish a mayor and city council.
I mean, it's very rare that that would be done, but legally they could.
So I think it's a great idea that they're ordering city councils not to play footsie with Trudeau, because that's the crazy thing about Alberta.
It's such a conservative place, but for some weird reason that I've never been able to figure out, they always elect left-wingers as mayors.
Calgary's been doing that for most of my life.
Edmonton is even worse.
So this is the province saying, guess what?
You have to behave and you can't do.
tricky deals with Trudeau.
I really like this.
I don't like Tyler Chandra because I remember him as the oppressor during the lockdowns and I'll never forgive him for that.
But I sure feel good about this latest move by him.
And the fact that he brought it in under Danielle Smith, as opposed to under Jason Kenney, his previous boss, tells me that the credit probably belongs to the premier here.
Yeah, that's right.
So most of these moves that have happened, Bill 211 did happen under a Jason Kenney government.
But intervening on our court challenge, we had actually invited them to come and we invited all the provinces to intervene.
And at that time, they didn't.
And then when Danielle Smith took over, we heard back from the Minister of Justice.
And yeah, he went ahead, filed, and was granted intervener status by the Associate Chief Justice of the federal court.
So another interesting tidbit for your listeners out of that Tyler Chandro press conference is he admitted that during a meeting with the other deputy minister's provincial counterparts and Marco Mentichino, Marco let loose the fact that they will be extending the amnesty for that original gun ban, which I know it gets confusing.
We've had three in three years, but it looks like they're going to extend that amnesty, which was due to expire in October.
So it shows us that at the end of the day, Marco has no idea how to even implement this.
The idea and the logistics and the administration of this, I've said it many times.
It's actually impossible.
So, you know, here we are three years later.
These guns are so dangerous, you know, too dangerous to own that you are forced to keep them for years and years on end.
You know, Marco Mendocino always seems a little bit clueless to me.
He's so goofy.
I think he was atrocious during the whole trucker convoy and the martial law.
In fact, if I recall, his own staff didn't even bother to circulate certain memos to him because they knew he wasn't the real decider.
He's sort of sort of pitiful.
But, you know, you made me think, I wrote, I just had a flashback.
And forgive me, Tracy, but I'm going to indulge myself here.
20 years ago, I wrote a book called Fight Kyoto, referring to the Kyoto Protocol.
And I said, I went through the Pyoto Kyoto Protocol.
I was young, so I'd probably do a better job now.
I wasn't, you know, I was still learning things, but I'm trying to still learn things now.
But my recommendation was that the province of Alberta legislate climate and environment to stop the Kyoto Protocol by putting in provincial space taker upper legislation, just like Chandro's doing on firearms.
So I'm glad he's doing it on firearms.
I'm glad he's making the feds blink.
I'm glad he's showing that long arms and hunters and farmers are not the problem.
I like that.
But it's also opening up my mind to other ways that the province could scoot out Ottawa from provincial affairs.
And I remember 20 years ago, I wrote in my book, the province should take up that legislative jurisdictional space.
It sounds like a technical lawyer's argument.
It sort of is, but it's really a way of saying to Ottawa, you've been mucking around in things that are not your business for decades.
Get out.
That's what I think this is really about, kicking them out.
Yeah, well, and at the end of the day, I think I can speak for all gun owners when we just want to be left alone.
I mean, even handgun owners.
I own handguns.
Every handgun, legally owned handgun in Canada is registered and can only be used at a government-approved shooting range.
This entire thing is focused on the wrong problem.
And at the same time, we've got a 92% increase in gun crime.
We've gained crime.
We've got a 33% increase overall in violent crime.
So the liberal record on public safety speaks for itself.
And they're spending years and billions of dollars chasing around sport shooters and duck hunters.
And it's insane to me.
At the same time, they're tabling legislation to let repeat violent offenders back out of prison quicker.
Yeah.
Oh, tell me about it.
I live in Toronto and I follow Toronto police operations on Twitter.
And every day, like it's just shocking.
And so I probably shouldn't look at it because I like every day.
I mean, it's a stabbing or a shooting or a drive-by.
And I'm pretty sure they're not licensed law-abiding farmers and duck hunters, but it's politically expeditious for Trudeau to pick on folks like that and folks like you.
Tracy, I have enjoyed our conversation so much.
And you've just given me a twinkle of, give me a twinkle of hope.
And I don't say that very often, but I think this is a good move.
Do you think other provinces might do the same?
That's Scarp Moe of Saskatchewan.
He's on the sovereignty agenda also.
Do you think he might do something like this?
Yeah.
So Saskatchewan actually introduced legislation to protect their gun owners before Alberta did.
I'm not sure if it's as fulsome as the Alberta legislation, but he's also taking great steps to intervene in Justin Trudeau's war on legal gun owners.
So yeah, you've got a couple of provinces sort of taking up the fight.
And I think as we go and provinces see, you know, rising crime just going out of control, I think they're going to see that this isn't the way to go.
And they are in the best position to force Trudeau to reroute his focus on reducing actual crime, violence, and gun smuggling.
Well, you know what?
I'm very rarely optimistic, but I'm optimistic today.
Tracy Wilson, great to have you on the show.
Thanks very much and keep up the fight.
Oh, you know I will.
All right.
There you have it.
Tracy Wilson is the vice president of the CCFR, the Canadian Coalition for Firearms Rights.
Stay with us more ahead.
Hey, welcome back.
Your letters to me.
I am Mama says they always project what they're doing onto conservatives.
It's always opposite day with the left.
If you want to know what the left is doing, just listen to what they accuse others of.
You're so right.
That especially goes for Justin Trudeau and Gerald Butts.
Gerald Butts blocks me on Twitter, but when I see people screenshotting what he says, it's the only way I can see it.
He always accuses people of taking foreign money, being in league with foreign troublemakers.
And all I can think of is Gerald Butts used to lead the World Wildlife Fund when it took foreign money to attack Canada's oil sands.
So every insult he has, everything he says he hates about his opponents, they don't do.
He's done it.
He preempts you asking questions about him by accusing you first.
It's what Trudeau and every male feminist does.
Am I right?
Multivalent says, as much as many of you want to believe it, the Canadian Conservatives aren't the good guys either.
They're on board with the globalist agenda.
They're against fundamental rights and they're pretty woke themselves.
I think there's a battle on for the soul of the Conservative Party of Canada.
I mean, surely the words Conservative Party of Canada cannot have red Tories like Hugh Siegel and populist conservatives like, oh, I don't know, I might even put Michael Cooper in that category, but I don't know if he's particularly populist.
The Battle for Conservative Soul00:04:09
Can you have one party that is that big a tent?
I think you can.
I think you should if you want to win in this country that is naturally tilts to the left.
I think the conservatives have to have a big enough coalition or they're just going to keep losing and losing and losing.
But I think the part of that coalition that doesn't like the other is the Red Tories don't like the Blue Tories.
The Red Tories are the more censorious.
And I was disappointed when Pierre Polyev attacked the MPs for meeting with Christine Anderson, the member of the European Parliament.
It was very cancel culture-ish, very woke.
And I don't see populist conservatives trying to cancel the Red Tories.
I don't think it should be the other way around.
Christopher says, I did manage to get my hands on one of your long ago recommended books, Red Color News Soldier by Li Jun Sheng.
The story of that unthinkable widespread public madness and literal worship of one man would almost be unbelievable if it were not for the photos included.
I wonder what generations years from now, when they look back on the society and see that a detailed example of where this all inevitably will lead us was available for us when we did nothing, will think.
Are there any more books that you recommend and think are helpful in understanding our current era?
I have a lengthy reading list, but I'll add any recommendations on the must-read soon roster.
It's funny you say that.
I just took out that red color news soldier the other day and I was showing it to my kids.
You know, it's incredible to me how few kids have even heard of Mao.
And as I said to my kid, and I don't want to tell personal stories, but you would think they would have heard of Chairman Mao or Mao Zedong.
He killed more humans than anyone else in the history of our species.
Killed more than Stalin, more than Hitler.
And I don't think we study him enough.
I don't think we study Hitler or Stalin enough either.
I think those words are forgotten to the new generation.
As to your real question about what books I recommend, I want to give some thought to that before I answer.
But let me give you a small answer in the meantime.
I was in an antique bookstore, which is such a pleasure.
It's such a luxury, just to thumb through the books in an antique bookstore.
It feels like you're doing something secret.
It feels like you're in a time machine.
I really enjoyed it.
I must have spent an hour in there.
And in the end, I only bought two little books.
I couldn't afford what I really wanted in there.
But I got some original printings of Rudyard Kipling.
Kipling wrote the jungle book.
I think it's probably his most famous book.
Every kid knows it, you know, The Bare Necessities, The Movies, The Cartoon, The Disney cartoon.
Great story.
He wrote an incredible story that was turned into a movie with Michael Caine and Sean Connery called The Man Who Would Be King, one of my favorite movies of all times.
I think I've watched it five times.
He also wrote a lot of poems.
Every November 11th, Remembrance Day, I read his poem Tommy Atkins about soldiers and how we don't treat veterans properly.
He has some other very politically incorrect poems that I don't know if you're even allowed to read these days.
One of them is called The White Man's Burden.
One of them is called Ganga Din.
One is called The Stranger.
He said things.
He thought about the world.
He spent a lot of time in India, a lot of time with people of different cultures and backgrounds.
He was really at the height of the British Empire.
And he gives you a thought into a window into the mind of someone who loved the empire and had his reasons for it.
And I don't know.
I haven't read all of his works, but I find them fascinating.
And he was strongly political, absolutely.
He was the anti-woke, perhaps the most anti-woke person who's lived in the past century, Rudyard Kipling.