“Warren Kinsella's book, ‘Fight the Right: A Manual for Surviving the Coming Conservative Apocalypse,’ is of vital importance for American conservatives and other right-leaning individuals to read, learn and understand.”

- The Washington Times

“One of the best books of the year.”

- The Hill Times

“Justin Trudeau’s speech followed Mr. Kinsella’s playbook on beating conservatives chapter and verse...[He followed] the central theme of the Kinsella narrative: “Take back values. That’s what progressives need to do.”

- National Post

“[Kinsella] is a master when it comes to spinning and political planning...”

- George Stroumboulopoulos, CBC TV

“Kinsella pulls no punches in Fight The Right...Fight the Right accomplishes what it sets out to do – provide readers with a glimpse into the kinds of strategies that have made Conservatives successful and lay out a credible roadmap for progressive forces to regain power.”

- Elizabeth Thompson, iPolitics

“[Kinsella] deserves credit for writing this book, period... he is absolutely on the money...[Fight The Right] is well worth picking up.”

- Huffington Post

“Run, don't walk, to get this amazing book.”

- Mike Duncan, Classical 96 radio

“Fight the Right is very interesting and - for conservatives - very provocative.”

- Former Ontario Conservative leader John Tory

“His new book is great! All of his books are great!”

- Tommy Schnurmacher, CJAD

“I absolutely recommend this book.”

- Paul Wells, Maclean’s

“Kinsella puts the Left on the right track with new book!”

- Calgary Herald



IMG_6063.PNG


Yep.

That’s what he said: it caught them by surprise.

That’s what RCMP Assistant Commissioner Gilles Michaud actually said at a shambles of a press conference on Wednesday, looking feckless and useless: the attack on Parliament Hill – the murder of Corporal Nathan Cirillo – “caught us by surprise.”

It caught them by surprise, despite the fact that the killer – a nobody, a pathetic loser who does not now deserve the buckets of ink being spilled about him – had previously been prevented from obtaining a Canadian passport, because federal officials regarded him as a potential terrorist.

It caught them by surprise, despite the fact that an ISIS-linked Twitter account yesterday somehow made available a photograph of the killer holding a rifle and wearing a keffiyeh. Despite the fact that he had had a string of criminal convictions, some violent, stretching back more than a decade.

Despite the fact that, two years ago, Public Works spent $9 million to buy new blockades for Parliament Hill. And an engineering firm was paid more than $1.5 million to design the barricades.

Despite the fact that, after a Greenpeace protest thoroughly embarrassed them in 2011, the RCMP spent an extra $6.6 million to boost security.

Despite the fact that the RCMP’s Parliament Hill detachment were issued 9mm semi-automatic pistols, and even issued Heckler & Koch MP5 submachine guns, to be carried in their cruisers as a secondary weapon.

Despite the fact that there are concrete blocks, and removable fences, and chains and metal detectors and cameras – hundreds and hundreds of fancy cameras – all over Parliament Hill. Despite the fact that there are no less than four police forces, and thousands of officers (some of them trained snipers), with joint responsibility for keeping Parliament Hill safe.

This all happened – the cold-blooded murder of an unarmed soldier at the War Memorial, the storming of Parliament Hill by a religious extremist who was mere feet from the Prime Minister and his cabinet – despite all that was already known about the killer. Despite all the money that has been spent to render Parliament Hill a fortress. Despite all those cops who are up there.

Are many of us angry about the extraordinary events of the past week? Damn right we are. But not just because two CAF members – two good, decent men – lost their lives needlessly. We’re angry because these things like this keep happening at the location of our democracy itself. And because the RCMP brass, and the other so-called security experts, seem completely incapable of dealing with any of it.

Let me give you a personal example.

On April 7, 1989, I was the police beat guy at the Ottawa Citizen. I got word that terrorists were storming Parliament Hill, so I raced up there with my pens and notepad.

A Greyhound bus that had been hijacked in Montreal – and which several police forces had literally lost track of, somewhere between Montreal and Ottawa – was mired in the Spring mud on Parliament’s lawn. As I stood between the Centennial flame and the bus, I heard a sound. Then another.

A cop ran over to me. “Get the f**k out of here!” he yelled, crouched down. “That was a bullet going over your head! Get out of here!”

So I did. Ran into a building across the street, holed up in the office of a Senator I knew, and called the desk. CNN wanted to speak to me, they said, so I did.

The hijacker, turned out, was a Lebanese guy named Charles Yacoub, and he was upset about something in the Middle East. So he decided to hijack the bus at gun point, get to Parliament Hill, and fire off shots at American tourists (and me, apparently) when he got there.

After an eight-hour standoff, and after I got out of the Senator’s office, I spoke to some of the dozens of RCMP officers milling about in front of Parliament. Here’s what one of them said to me:

“We are never going to let something like this happen again.”

That’s what he said.

Yep.

 

 


Here is an incredible video shot by Josh Wingrove of the Globe. It is looking down the Hall of Honour towards the library of Parliament. On either side of the hall are the rooms where MPs meet for caucus every Wednesday.


Actually, wait. If you don’t come, I will talk at you incessantly, without pause.

That will motivate you better, I suspect.

IMG_6026


For Shift! For Chris Turner! For Evan Solomon! For civil liberties!


So sayeth Abacus.  The polling firm didn’t ask, but I suspect that they would have found that Canadians don’t think the President is doing what he’s doing because of his ego, either. Libs, take note.

 

IMG_6052.PNG


The murder of the CAF member in Saint-Jean-sur-Richelieu by an avowed ISIS sympathizer had political implications, and within minutes.  Yesterday, the Prime Minister stood in the House of Commons to speak about the terrible event – even before the rest of us knew it had happened – and explicitly linked it to terrorism.

“The individual who struck the two CAF members (Canadian Armed Forces) with his car is known to federal authorities, including the Integrated National Security Enforcement Team,” PMO later said in a written statement issued Monday evening. “Federal authorities have confirmed that there are clear indications that the individual had become radicalized.”

All that may be true, but all of us should be profoundly uncomfortable that any politician would be speaking about this tragedy – and assigning motive – before the police.  That is not the way our system works.  And it raises the distinct possibility that Harper and his advisors are willing to reduce a soldier’s death to a talking point.

If that’s true, then we are piloting through some very dangerous waters, indeed.  In the aftermath of the (strikingly similar) May 2013 murder of British Army soldier, Fusilier Drummer Lee Rigby of the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers, British public opinion became dangerously inflamed.

English hate groups, like the English Defence League (which, by the by, is partnered with the Jewish Defence League here in Canada) used Rigby’s murder to whip up support. There were riots and violent street clashes, and dozens of arrests. Anti-Muslim sentiment exploded.

The Prime Minister and his government have a responsibility to (a) let the police do their job (b) ensure public opinion isn’t needlessly inflamed (c) resist the temptation to politicize a soldier’s death.

Will they do any of those things? Don’t hold your breath.

As someone once said, we live in dangerous times.

 

 


Evan Solomon will be there, and he may speak to you!

IMG_6026


Politicians write books for different reasons.

They write them to show that they are men and women of substance. They write them to demonstrate that they are brimming with ideas and character.

They write them because they want to go above the heads of the news media. They write them because they have experienced some trials and tribulations, and they want to put the best possible spin on them. They write books to be taken seriously.

Justin Trudeau’s book – whose title is ‘Common Ground’ – has likely been written for all of those reasons. Trudeau wants it known that he is a person of substance, a serious person of character. He wants it known that he has ideas to share, and some revelations, too.

The book is only out officially today, so many of us haven’t had a chance to read it yet. But, hopefully, it contains more about the highly revealing exchange Trudeau recently had with sports writer Bruce Arthur. That encounter resulted in a fascinating, wonderfully-written story, and one hopes it – or something like it – makes its way into Common Ground.

In the story, Trudeau talks about his March 2012 charity boxing match against Conservative Senator Patrick Brazeau, in which Trudeau wiped the floor with the disgraced Tory. It is highly revealing.

“My dad taught me how to box as just a little kid, among other things,” Trudeau told Arthur, getting off some well-deserved jabs at Sun New Network along the way. “He was a black belt in judo and he wanted us to be adept in a wide variety of athletic pursuits.”

Trudeau recalled the insults being hurled at him ringside by the Sun people, and others. “Obviously you learn to ignore nasty negative attacks, but you also learn not to give credence to the people who think you’re wonderful because they loved your father,” says Trudeau. “People who say [I’m a silver-spoon kid] forget what kind of a man my father was, and what kind of father my father was…He was a tough man, and he was disciplined, and so filled with love for us; he knew we would have extra baggage to deal with and to carry, because of the name he was giving us, and he wanted us to have to tools to deal with it.

“So he never would have wanted us to take the easy way, or to take things lightly.”

As such, Trudeau told Arthur about the moment when he knew he was going to take Brazeau down. “I suddenly had permission. One of the things I had to learn as a kid, the eldest of three brothers, is to control yourself. To not lose your temper, to not get carried away, because I was bigger than my brothers. We were three boys close in age, and I had to learn to restrain myself a little bit.

“And in politics, as a teacher, my personality is to be nice, and it works in politics. But suddenly this was a moment where I was allowed, and fully expected, to give rein to a side of myself that I don’t normally allow out there, which was a ruthless and forceful side. It’s that moment that where push comes to shove, do you have it? And I always knew I did; I just knew I could never show that in life, and suddenly here was a moment where I could.”

And he did. And everything changed for him, after that.

Many of us don’t know if there’s more of that sort of passion in Trudeau’s new book. But one thing we do know: that passion, that ruthlessness, is already in him.

As they ready themselves to climb into the ring with Justin Trudeau, perhaps Stephen Harper and Tom Mulcair should reflect on that.


apishkadaysm