Harper's Victim List Continues to Grow. When Will it be Enough?

"Leadership is a combination of strategy and character. If you have to be without one, be without the strategy." General Norman Schwarzkopf

I posted a partial list of public servants who have run afoul of Stephen Harper, building on a list compiled by Jill Mahoney, in the Globe and Mail. I picked up a few more from Chantal Hebert, and now the Vancouver Sun has added several more.

And what were their crimes? They were under the mistaken belief that they worked for the public, hence the name.

But now that we are officially a fascist country, we need to change their name to Harper Servants. Although 'servants' gives a suggestion that they are free to serve others. Let's make it Harper Slaves, who answer to him and him alone. Harper of course, answers to Guy Giorno, as does God himself, but that's an entirely different matter.

The additions from the Vancouver Sun:

Adrian Measner: President of the Canadian Wheat Board since December 2002, his appointment was terminated in November 2006 by then-agriculture minister Chuck Strahl. Measner disagreed with the government's plan to end the board's monopoly over the sale of barley and wheat.

Sheridan Scott: Head of the Competition Bureau, she ran afoul of Environment Minister Jim Prentice over a brewery takeover. She resigned in December 2008 a few days early after being told her appointment would not be renewed. She was first appointed in January 2004.

Steve Sullivan: The first victims of crime ombudsman was not renewed after his three-year term expired in April 2010. Sullivan was critical of the "tough on crime" agenda of the government.

Bernard Shapiro: The first ethics commissioner was appointed in 2004 for a five-year term but clashed repeatedly with Prime Minister Stephen Harper. He resigned suddenly in March 2007.

Jean-Guy Fleury: The chair of the Immigration and Refugee Board resigned in March 2007, about six months before his five-year term expired. The resignation coincided with government actions to assert more control over appointments at the board and a letter from then-minister Diane Finley that was critical of the board.

Robert Marleau: The former clerk of the House of Commons was appointed as the Information Commissioner in 2007 to a seven-year term. He resigned after only two and a half years for personal reasons — but he had made public comments about funding cuts to his office and was skeptical of the government's commitment to reforming the Access Act.

Arthur Carty: National science adviser. His position was phased out when he retired on March 31, 2008. Carty was critical of the government's decision to disband the office. He was first appointed by then-prime minister Paul Martin and reported directly to him. After the Conservatives formed the government, he was shifted to the Industry portfolio.

And Lawrence Martin added a new one:

Michel Arpin: CRTC vice-chair Michel Arpin is being ushered out the door. His term expires at the end of the month; he’d like to stay on, but his request is not being granted.

And let's not forget Sheila Fraser, who is currently the victim of smear campaign, orchestrated by Kory Teneycke and Sun Media, in preparation of some reports she will soon be tabling.

My list so far, includes:

Michael Arpin
Remy Beauregard
Arthur Carty
Marty Cheliak
Richard Colvin
Jean-Guy Fleury
Sheila Fraser
Linda Keen
Paul Kennedy
Kevin Lynch
Robert Marleau
Marc Mayrand
Adrian Measner
Jeff Monaghan
Kevin Page
Luc Pomerleau
Louis Ranger
Sheridan Scott
Bernard Shapiro
Munir Sheikh
Pat Stogran
Steve Sullivan
Peter Tinsley
Mark Tushingham
Dan Veniez
Konrad von Finckenstein

Let me know if you have others I can add to the list. I'm also compiling a separate list of those in the private sector who have been demoralized by the Harper goon squad. That one is even longer.

And as Lawrence Martin has written regarding Harper's battle with the CRTC because they did not fast-track his bid to have Fox News North a mandatory station:

Observers of Mr. Harper have long noted that he doesn’t take kindly to commissions or agencies or anyone else who tends to get in the way of his wishes. It’s only necessary to look at what happened at, among others, Rights and Democracy, Elections Canada, the Nuclear Safety Commission and Parliament.

So the question naturally arises: Do the CRTC board members actually think they can get away with delaying or denying Mr. Harper’s wishes on Fox News North? Do they really believe they have some kind of independent power?

The CRTC chair is Konrad von Finckenstein, and his term doesn’t end until 2012. But insiders report that Mr. Harper now wants him out well before that date and replaced by a rubber stamper. The independently minded Mr. von Finckenstein, who did not respond to queries on the matter, is reportedly being offered judgeships and ambassadorships, one post being Chile. So far, he’s not biting. But the bait might get bigger.

And don't be thinking you're going to get out of watching the trash. Stephen Harper has appointed 11 of the 14 current members of the CRTC. That may be all you get to watch.

Walter Natynczyk May be the Next to Lose His Job

As everyone who has ever spoken out against Stevie has learned. You don't speak out against Stevie. He has ways of making you "not talk".

So will Canada's top soldier Walter Natynczyk, be the next to feel the wrath of Steve?

Canada's top soldier, Gen. Walter Natynczyk, says concerns raised by the veterans ombudsman are "absolutely correct issues" and the controversial New Veterans Charter "doesn't work for everyone." At a news conference Friday, Natynczyk, the chief of the defence staff, was asked if veterans ombudsman Pat Stogran, whose term is not being renewed, has been doing a good job. "He has certainly voiced with clarity what the issues are," said Natynczyk, who held the news conference with his Dutch counterpart, Gen. Peter Van Uhm, who has been on an official visit to Canada.

But as Gerald Caplin points out, Stevie simply chose the wrong person to do the job. He chose a man who actually stood up for the troops and didn't hide behind them.

It's a seeming paradox that one of the genuine contributions of the Harper government to the commonwealth was the creation of the latest of these public advocates, an independent Veterans' Ombudsman. But its purpose, we can now see, was to stand up for the Harper government against our war veterans. But in retired colonel named Pat Stogran, the government seemed to have selected the wrong man for the job. Stogran apparently shared the plausible assumption that the Harper government cared about the welfare of our troops not only in the field but when they returned home bearing the deep scars of their military experiences.

This was an easy mistake to make. After all, anyone who had opposed the Harper government's war policies in Afghanistan were given the Joe McCarthy treatment, smeared as something close to traitors betraying the brave boys and girls who were putting themselves in harm's way in a distant land. As the Prime Minister repeatedly observed in a nice Orwellian twist, it was those who wanted to bring our young women and men home who were actually responsible for the danger they faced in the field.

And if you want to know what Harper's real priorities were, when it comes to Vets, according to Strogam: "“I was told by a senior Treasury Board analyst, who shall remain nameless, that it is in the government's best interest to have soldiers killed overseas rather than wounded because the liability is shorter term.”

Short term liabilities. I wonder if that's in the army manual. "At all times a soldier must try to die in battle because we simply can't afford to look after you if you don't. We do promise a parade if you will do this simple chore."

More than 1 in 5 Canadians soldiers are known to leave Afghanistan with psychiatric problems, though experts are certain this considerably lowballs the real figure, given what soldiers face there. A significant number return home deeply traumatized. As Pat Stogran discovered, to his horror, some of them become spouse abusers, drunk drivers, druggies, homeless, uncontrollably violent, attempted suicides and drunken thugs. Those who have endured multiple deployments become the walking wounded. Their families are often shattered, with all members facing their own psychological or physical nightmares.

Whether you support the war or not, no Canadian should support this. These poor men and women are as much victims as those who lost their lives. The difference is, they are still being victimized.

I posted a partial list yesterday, of those who learned the hard day, what happens when they cross Stevie. Chantel Hebert mentioned some I had forgotten about:

Marc Mayrand: Canada's chief electoral officer has been locked in a legal battle with the Conservative Party over campaign spending.

Konrad von Finckenstein: There is speculation that the CRTC chair is in the government's crosshairs after refusing to fast-track Quebecor’s application for a top-category broadcasting licence for Sun TV’s planned Fox News clone.

Remy Beauregard: The former president of Rights and Democracy died this year after a stormy meeting with the Montreal rights agency's board, which is led by Conservative appointees.

Hebert wonders:

Last winter’s prorogation backlash was unexpectedly strong. Over the summer, the level of engagement of Canada’s civil society on the census issue has been unprecedented, with otherwise Conservative-friendly constituencies among the vocal critics of the decision to abolish the long form. This week, the circle widened again to include more otherwise natural allies of the Conservatives like the veterans and the country’s police associations.

But there is still at least one significant constituency on which Harper’s approach to dissent apparently continues to work wonders. Apparently deaf to any voice other than their master’s, Harper’s MPs and senators have so far been content to dance to whatever tune the prime minister has taken a fancy to. On his watch, the cat seems to have gotten the tongue of even the most independently minded men and women who make up the cabinet and caucus.

Have they all been hypnotized or has Stevie demanded they all have lobotomies? I'm with the lobotomy thing because they are all acting so weird.

An unidentified source sent me this from their last caucus meeting. Of course they may not have simply wished to be "unidentified", but maybe just don't remember their own name.