Canada's Environment Minister Warns of Danger of Climate Change

Peter Kent in 1984, before he got sucked into the bubble, that facts can't penetrate.

Well the S.O.B. Did it. Canada Officially Out of Kyoto

The US announced their energy strategy in 2001 which was largely developed by Vice-President Dick Cheney and the large fossil fuel and nuclear industry companies. Capitalizing on the California energy crisis, which had been brought on by the market manipulations of another close Bush crony, Enron’s Ken Lay, the US Administration called for more of everything — coal, oil, gas, nukes. The only energy item excluded was energy conservation. As Cheney said, “While conservation may be a personal virtue, it has no place in an energy strategy.” Canada’s Minister of Natural Resources at the time, Ralph Goodale, commented that conservation was an essential part of the energy planning of “any intelligent society.” Where will the US find the vast amounts of energy it demands for its massively inefficient and polluting economy? George W. Bush has stated, “We’ve got a plan to make sure that gas comes — flows freely out of Canada into the United States.” (The Energy Onslaught: The Impact of the Bush-Cheney Energy Plan on Canada’s Wilderness. the Sierra Club)

If then energy minister Ralph Goodale, was challenging Dick Cheney by promoting conservation, what was the climate change denial industry going to do?

In her book It's the Crude, Dude; Linda McQuaig discusses the debate around Kyoto. Dick Cheney and the Bush Administration of course hated it, but they also hated any talk of conservation, something Cheney sneered at.  McQuaig reveals how a Canadian anti-Kyoto group sprang up overnight, sponsored by the oil companies, to defend Dick Cheney's position. (p. 133)

Some of Ernie Eves’s top cabinet ministers partied last week with Kyoto-bashers the Canadian Coalition for Responsible Environmental Solutions, a lobby group with close ties to both Ralph Klein and the energy industry ... It took place in the Queen’s Park dining hall and was a very chummy shrimp-and-wine gathering, a chance for members of the coalition -- the Canadian Association of Oil Well Drilling Contractors, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Landmen, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, etc -- to schmooze Tory heavies.

There were speeches by coalition organizers, and a particularly passionate Ontario energy minister, John Baird, made his anti-Kyoto rallying cry. Needless to say, the audience was very receptive. Baird’s parliamentary assistant, Scarborough MPP Steve Gilchrist*, who at one time helped block developers’ plans for the Oak Ridges Moraine, was busy propping open doors with chairs to give relief to a very hot and stuffy room. I couldn’t help remarking to him that perhaps the room was so unbearably hot because of climate change. He was not amused.

While Eves has been slightly slippery on just where he stands on Kyoto, it was interesting to learn that this meeting was organized by Guy Giorno, Mike Harris’s old chief of staff and ultimate Tory party insider. Giorno now works with National Public Relations (NPR), the coalition’s high-priced lobby firm. (Big Oil's Kyoto Party: Harris whiz kid pulls strings at wine and shrimp fete, By Josh Matlow, NOW Magazine, October 24, 2002)

A decade ago John Baird and Harper's former chief of staff, Guy Giorno, were sweating at a shrimp fete and rallying the climate change deniers.

The Canadian Coalition for Responsible Environmental Solutions, was an AstroTurf group created by Giorno and funded by the industry that he lobbied for.

Given that we have had a decade of this nonsense, is it any surprise that Canada is backing out of Kyoto?

The only problem with the billboard at the Copenhagen climate conference, is that Stephen Harper will never, ever, ever, say he's sorry for anything.  His job is to make as much money as possible for the oil industry, and he's doing that job.

I just wish he'd do the one he was elected to do and start standing up for the people of Canada.  We already have enough black eyes, did he need to give us a bloody nose and fat lip too?

The sad thing is that in their search for "balance" the media will somehow make this a good thing, allowing the figures that Harper has pulled out of his butt, to stand as fact.  I wish they'd remember that this is their country too, not to mention their planet.

*Steve Gilchrist was the former boss of Harper MP Paul Calandra

Durban Climate Conference Tells Peter Kent to Stay Home. I Wish He Would Just go Away!

Lesley Hughes was a popular CBC radio host and respected journalist, who had always been an advocate for the less fortunate members of society. In 2008, she was urged to run for the Liberal Party of Canada, in the Winnipeg riding of Kildonan–St Paul, to challenge incumbent Joy Smith.

Smith was a cohort of Stockwell Day's,  a social conservative who handled his Manitoba campaign when he was running for the party leadership.  Since Kildonan–St Paul is a swing riding, the Conservatives feared that Lesley Hughes could unseat Ms. Smith.

Waiting until it was too late to register another candidate, Peter Kent and the B'Nai Brith, publicly accused Hughes of being anti-Semitic, because of an article she had written in 2002.

It was called Get the Truth, and was in response to the "friendly fire" deaths of 4 Canadian soldiers.  Hughes, like most Canadians, questioned our involvement in the Afghan war.

Kent pointed to one paragraph, as being an attack on Jews.

German Intelligence (BND) claims to have warned the U.S. last June, the Israeli Mossad and Russian Intelligence in August. Israeli businesses, which had offices in the Towers, vacated the premises a week before the attacks, breaking their lease to do it. About 3000 Americans working there were not so lucky.

She does not suggest that the Jewish people were behind the attack, only that German intelligence had warned of the attack, weeks before, and since it looked like nothing was being done in the U.S., Israel was not about to let their people be victimized, just in case the reports were true.  And she provides her source.

Yet, with the help of the media, she was painted as being anti-Semitic and one who believes in a "Jewish conspiracy".  The incident not only cost her the election, since Dion was forced to remove her name, but severely damaged her career.  (B'Nai Brith Canada tells Liberals to dump star candidate)

This was not the first time that they tried to discredit Progressive candidates.

As a former journalist, I was surprised that Kent would sink to this level, but then he was with Canwest Global, a step up from Fox News, though it depends on what you're stepping in.

Peter Kent would also make headlines for his involvement in trying to influence student elections at York University.

"The Conservative party has no authority at all for getting involved in student politics and neither does the York administration. We're an incorporated, independent body," charged Krisna Saravanamuttu, who was elected president of the York Federation of Students in the controversial vote. "Prime Minister Stephen Harper's foot soldiers are deliberately interfering with student elections to help candidates more friendly to their policies." (1)

Through a Freedom of Information request, the student federation obtained 50 pages of email exchanges in which assistants for the two politicians, who represent student-heavy ridings north of the campus, repeatedly questioned university executives about the results of a student council vote this spring.

The students were right that the Conservatives had no authority over their elections.

I can't look at Peter Kent without being angry, and the thought of him representing us at an international climate conference, makes my blood boil.

He was shown on the National, blaming the Liberals for signing onto Kyoto in the first place.  Their biggest blunder says Kent.  And to bring some "balance" into the story, the National interviewed environmental expert Jack Mintz.  Isn't he an economist?  But then they can't really interview an actual scientist, because Christian Paradis (2), also not a scientist, has them all bound and gagged. Suncor got to weigh in though, and guess what side they're on?

Mintz is using China as a scapegoat, but even they have a better policy than we do.

And where are the environmentalists in this story? Our climate policies are now being decided by an ex-journalist (Kent), a corporate lawyer (Paradis) and Suncor.

This reminds me of a joke I shared before, when another non-scientist (Bernhard Rust) was heading up the science ministry in 1930s Germany.  It was published in a 1933 Time Magazine story, entitled 'Science: Jews Without Jobs':

Two Germans were eyeing a burly lout in the Nazi uniform who was striding through a university hall. First man: "What is the policeman doing here?" Second man: "Sh, sh. That is the man selected to succeed Einstein."

I chuckle at the media suggesting that at Copenhagen we agreed to do what the U.S. does, despite the fact that Italy and Canada were the only G8 nations not invited to attend Obama's private meeting. The Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi was back home after being attacked by a protester earlier in the week, and Harper should have just stayed home. (3)

We were also warned by Americans that we should fend for ourselves:

.... speaking before a House of Commons committee on the environment, three experts on the U.S. effort to pass a climate change bill suggested Canada might be better off working on its own legislation then working to link it to whatever legislation the U.S. passes.

Gotta' love the media though. If Harper says it, it must be true.

The Durban climate conference is now telling Peter Kent to stay home.  I agree that he shouldn't attend the conference, but why do we have to be stuck with him?

Sources:

1. Stop meddling, students tell Tories, By Louise Brown, Toronto Star, July 6, 2009

2. Ottawa’s media rules muzzling federal scientists, say observers, By Margaret Munro, Postmedia News, September 12, 2010

3. Obama makes last-ditch effort to save climate deal, By Allan Woods, Toronto Star, December 18, 2009

Sorry Ezra. He's Not Just a Man in a Suit

While Ezra Levant and Sun Media "protest too much", the links between the Harper government, the English Defense League and the international patriot movement, which includes the Tea Party Express, continue to mount.

In the following Sun TV segment, Levant once again goes after the "anti-Israel, pro-terrorist" CBC. This time for suggesting that the Jewish Defense League was a terrorist organization.



Levant lists those on the U.S. State Department roll, which does not include the JDL.

That's because the JDL is on the FBI's list of domestic terrorist organizations. And for good reason. According to their files, the JDL has been involved in plotting terrorist attacks within the United States, including:

The two terrorist plots prevented by law enforcement in 2001 were being planned by domestic extremists. Ronald Mike Denton was planning to attack his former place of employment, the Chevron Oil Refinery at El Segundo, California, when he was arrested in March 2001. In December 2001 Irving David Rubin and Earl Leslie Krugel, members of the extremist Jewish Defense League, were arrested as they were in the final stages of planning attacks against the King Fahd Mosque in Culver City, California, and the local office of U.S. Congressman Darrell Issa.

Both were charged in the incident.

The JDL was also involved in a letter bomb incident that killed an office worker.

LOS ANGELES -- A California court has sentenced to life in prison William Ross, who, together with the American-Israeli couple of Robert and Rochelle Manning, was charged in a 1980 mail-bomb killing.

The sentence closes a case that aroused strong emotions and protests among Orthodox and nationalist groups in Israel and Los Angeles and has dragged through the federal courts since 1988. According to court testimony, Ross, a member of the Jewish Defense League, enlisted the Manning couple, also JDL members, during the 1970s to construct and mail a booby trap.

So Mr. Levant. Meir Weinstein (aka Meir Halevi, aka Marvin Weinstein) is not just a man in a suit, and the Jewish Defense league is indeed a terrorist organization.

I've posted on them and their close relationship with the Harper government before.

Who is the JDL?

The Jewish Defense League was founded by Rabbi Meir Kahane in New York City in 1968, and has been listed as a "right-wing terrorist organization" and a "hate group". They have been involved in the bombing of Arab and Soviet properties in the U.S, alleging that they were "enemies of the Jewish people".

Besides creating the JDL, Rabbi Kahane was behind the Kach Party in Israel, which was eventually banned as racist and undemocratic. They were behind the Cave of the Patriarchs massacre, a terrorist attack on unarmed Muslim Palestinians, while at prayer, killing 29 and wounding another 125.

Meir Weinstein, the national director of the Canadian branch of the Jewish Defense League, joined the JDL, at the age of 20, after reading the book Never Again written by Meir Kahane.

And though he denies involvement with the Kach Party, despite the fact that both share a clenched fist logo, his inspiration, Rabbi Kahane, was behind both groups.

After the Rabbi's assassination in 1990, the Kach movement split in two, creating the Kach and Kahane Chai. And for Ezra Levant's information, both of these are on the U.S. State Department's anti-terrorist watch list, as well as Canada's.

So he might want to rethink his claim that his buddy Weinstein, is just "a man in a suit" who hates terrorists.

The English Defense League

In January of this year, Weinstein and the Canadian JDL, held what they called their "first" rally in support of the English Defense league. According to the National Post:

A “support rally” for the controversial English Defence League is scheduled to take place at the Toronto Zionist Centre on Tuesday night. Tommy Robinson, the EDL leader, will speak at the rally through an on-line hookup. It is believed to be the first Canadian rally for the EDL.

“I am disappointed that the JDL would support an organization whose record in the U.K. is one of violence and extremism,” said Bernie Farber, CEO, of the Canadian Jewish Congress. “This is more than unwise and I sure hope they reconsider this decision.”

The rally took place as planned.

Meir Weinstein, announced recently that his group would ally with the British organization, which is known for violence and extremism ...The JDL said it is forging ties with the British group to "take a stand against the forces of political Islam."

In an online hook-up with English Defense League founder Stephen Lennon, who goes by the name Tommy Robinson, the Briton said Canadians "need to wake up. The Islamicization of your country is on its way." The Canadian Jewish Congress has opposed the alliance between the two rightist groups, saying that while Islamic fundamentalism is "a real threat," combating it with "generalized hatred against Muslims, as does the EDL, is only a recipe for fuelling more conflict.

Republican candidate, Rabbi Nachum Shifren, travelled to England to speak at a rally, calling the targets of their hatred, "Muslim dogs", and Pat Robertson's Christian Broadcasting Network, expressed support for the EDL, comparing it to the American Tea Party movement.

True "patriots" one and all.

Tommy Robinson is right.

Canadians do need to "wake up". But not to the threat of Islamic fundamentalism, but to the threat of home-grown terrorist organizations, that have aligned themselves with our current government.

And thank you Ezra Levant.

I've spent days researching the EDL, Geert Wilders and Anders Behring Breivik, pouring over hours of video. But my best links come from you.

Maybe you'd do less damage to Harper's credibility, if you just stopped talking.

Since When Did the Conservatives Have Cap and Trade on the Table?

I just love this headline: Tories take cap-and-trade system ‘off the table’

When did the Conservatives ever have any environmental plan on the table? Not one in five years.

They only suggested they'd do whatever the Americans were going to do. It bought them time and the media sang their glory.

Canada Needs an Environmental Minister. Not Another Environmental Spinner

I was reading Julian Fantino's campaign literature, and when I came to the section on the environment, I laughed out loud. He says, and I quote:

"Canada now has tough new regulations against toxic chemicals and one of the most aggressive plans on earth to reduce greenhouse gas emissions."

What is he smoking? Canada has NO plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and in fact we recently won another colossal fossil award for trying to sabotage climate change talks. That's the only aggressive plan this government has ever had.

The Toronto Star got it right. Peter Kent's appointment as our new, not so much an environmental minister as an environmental spinner, is nothing to celebrate.

Another day, another minister of the environment -- the fifth in five years for Prime Minister Stephen Harper. His latest choice for the embattled portfolio, Peter Kent, is unlikely to have any more impact than his predecessors. Indeed, Harper made it clear in the press conference following his Tuesday mini-shuffle that he wants his government to “stay the course.” In the case of the environment, that course has been to do the minimum possible while spinning to the max, especially on the climate change file.

Harper himself was spinning madly at the post-shuffle press conference. Asked whether Canada would be following the lead of the United States with stricter regulations on greenhouse gas emissions, he replied: “I notice the Obama administration is now talking about moving toward tougher standards on the electricity sector. In that particular case, they have a long way to go to catch up to us.” Strictly speaking, that’s true, when it comes to electricity. That’s because about half of the American power supply comes from coal-fired plants, whereas more than half of ours comes from emission-free sources like hydro and nuclear. What Harper didn’t say is that we have an emissions problem in another sector: Alberta’s tar sands, where development continues apace and greenhouse gas emissions are still growing.

And Impolitical reveals that Quebec, a province committed to the environment, is not impressed that Harper chose a minister who cannot speak French.

Jeffrey Simpson in the Globe believes that Peter Kent's only challenge will be the ability to lie with a straight face:

With serious action ruled out in advance, the Harper government’s environment minister must be a smooth talker. He must be prepared to repeat things that are demonstrably false – as in Canada will reduce its greenhouse-gas emissions by 17 per cent by 2020 from 2005 levels – with a straight face while all those around you are cracking up in derision. When necessary, the minister must bluster.

I don't think he'll have a problem with it. He came from CanWest Global. It's what they do best.

But if he has a problem with making lies convincing, he can just call on Julian Fantino. He's got it down to a science.

Peter Kent, WikiLeaks and Why we Should be Concerned

During the 2008 election campaign, popular CBC radio personality Leslie Hughes, was running for the Liberal Party in the Winnipeg riding riding of Kildonan—St. Paul, against Conservative incumbent Joy Smith. A close friend of Stockwell Day, Smith had managed his successful Alliance Party leadership contest in 2000, for her area.

The day after the deadline for presenting candidates, the B'Nai Brith launched a formal complaint against Ms Hughes, claiming that in an old blog posting she had suggested that 9/11 was the result of a Jewish conspiracy. And they were supported in their claim by Conservative Peter Kent.

It was all nonsense. I have read the blog posting in question, and there is absolutely nothing in it that could be deemed anti-Semitic. See for yourself. She was only reacting to the "friendly fire" death of 4 Canadian soldiers.

But the media had a field day with it and Stephen Dion had little choice but to ask her to step down. She is now suing both Peter Kent and B'Nai Brith and I hope she nails them to the wall. This was a character assassination that not only cost her the election but her career, as few in the media want to hire her now that she is deemed to be anti-Semitic.

Omar Alghabra

Omar Alghabra was a former Liberal MP for the riding of Mississauga-Erindale, and is a wonderful man. I've had the opportunity to speak with him on-line and he is intelligent, funny and a champion of human rights.

But in 2005, immediately after winning his party's nomination, he was the victim of a smear campaign, in which several people claimed that in his victory speech he commented: "This is a victory for Islam! Islam won! Islam Won!" It wasn't true, and those involved were forced to publicly apologize. But that didn't stop neocon insider Tim Powers from trashing him publicly and calling him anti-Semitic.

Omar lost his seat in 2008 to Alliance party faithful Bob Dechert, but will be running again. I am so pleased. Dechert is a disaster.

Canadian Coalition for Democracies

The Canadian Coalition for Democracies was a group founded to incite hatred against Islamic Canadians, in a large part, by erroneously labelling public figures, anti-Semitic. They also lent support to Ezra Levant in his battle over publishing the horrendous Danish Cartoons.

Peter Kent was a founding member and Tony Clement was head of their Advisory Board. They were extremely pro-Israel:

The CCD generally supported the policies of the Conservative Party government of Stephen Harper, and the organization's leadership has urged its members to view support for the Conservative Party of Canada as equivalent to support for Israel. (Wikipedia)

The group also supported the controversial Falun Gong and a continued Canadian involvement in Afghanistan.

Other members of the group included:

Michael Mostyn: the Director of Government Relations for B'nai Brith Canada. When Ralph Reed, founder of the Christian Coalition, spoke in Canada to drum up support for Stephen Harper, Mostyn was in attendance and he ran unsuccessfully for the party himself.

Rochelle Wilner: past president of B'nai Brith Canada and the Conservative Party's federal candidate for York Centre.

Naresh Raghubeer: founder and former executive director of the of the CDD. In November 2004, the CCD, along with Stockwell Day, held a press conference calling the International Relief Fund for the Afflicted and Needy (IRFAN) of having links to the terrorist organization Hamas and of providing financial support to them. Subsequently, IRFAN-Canada filed a defamation claim against CCD officials Alastair Gordon and Naresh Raghubeer, as well as against Stockwell Day. IRFAN-Canada firmly held that the accusations were "false and malicious" and, to paraphrase their lawyer, wanted to clear their name from the allegations.

Raminder Singh Gill: Former member of Mike Harris's government, he has ran unsuccessfully for a spot in the Harper caucus. He has however, been given a patronage position under Jason Kenney, where he acts as a citizenship judge. The same citizenship department that says "no Muslims".

David Harris: is a Canadian lawyer and former senior fellow with the CCD. He was chief of strategic planning for the Canadian Security Intelligence Service and has suggested that Canada's immigration policy encourages the use of Canada as a base for terrorists, and has consistently advocated for harsher Canadian laws to combat terrorism. He is an outspoken defender of the Canadian government's use of security certificates to detain terrorism suspects without trial.

Salim Mansur: is an Associate Professor of Political Science at the University of Western Ontario and a contributor to the conservative blog Proud To Be Canadian, the same blog where American Anne Coulter has found a home. He is also featured on the documentary Obsession: Radical Islam's War Against the West produced by the David Horowitz Freedom Center and ran unsuccessfully for the Canadian Alliance party in 2000.

Peter Kent and Canwest Global

The late media mogul, Izzy Asper, hated the CBC. And he especially hated Neil Macdonald, the CBC's Middle East correspondent from 1998 to 2003, who contradicted his notion of Israel as a victim.

Macdonald was based in Jerusalem for five years, and was not shy about injecting his opinions on the Arab-Israeli conflict into his reports. His bosses back in Toronto were supportive. "To suggest that most of the world's media are involved in a conspiracy against Israel, it's just a totally extreme conception on Asper's part," declared Tony Burman, then head of CBC News. "There is something profoundly ironic about being told off about media bias by someone like Izzy Asper." This was a thinly veiled reference to the Aspers' practice of urging their papers to publish company-written editorials that expressed their owner's views ... (1)

And MacDonald was appalled that Asper's employees allowed their boss to engage in the suppression of journalism, which only escalated Asper's attacks against him, though he was not surprised.

"I expect more bullying, more bombast, more ideological, anti-journalistic nonsense. I used to work for the newspapers they now own. Several of my ex-colleagues, still there, tell me they find the Aspers' approach to journalism an embarrassment. But they cannot speak publicly. Thank heavens I can." (1)

And the bias in Asper's papers and television reporting didn't go unnoticed by others.

Asper's diatribe garnered him respect among Canada's Jewish community but condemnation elsewhere. British journalist Robert, Fisk, who writes for the Independent and had been a long-time critic of Israeli policies, labelled Asper's speeches "gutless and repulsive. "These vile slanders," he said, "are familiar to any reporter trying to do his work on the ground in the Middle East. They are made ever more revolting by inaccuracies." Fisk specifically took issue with Asper's interpretation of British-Palestinian history—pointing out that, for example, the expression used in the Balfour Declaration of 1917 was "a national home for the Jewish people," rather than a "Jewish State," as Asper had suggested.

More to the point, Asper didn't give a damn. He practised what he preached. Canwest Global was "unabashedly pro-Israel," declared Murdoch Davis, who spent several years as Canwest's Winnipeg-based editor-in-chief. He wasn't kidding. (1)

Eventually after fighting for freedom of the press, many of Izzy's journalists just refused to write anything at all about Israel. Peter C. Newman in his book Izzy, says "At the same time, there was no question that the worst form of censorship in this kind of editorial climate was the self-censorship writers and editors applied to their assignments and their copy, usually by avoiding the subject entirely."

But one Canwest Global media personality and executive, had no problem sticking with Izzy's guidelines. His name: Peter Kent. The same Peter Kent who is now the Minister of State for Foreign Affairs of the Americas, in Stephen Harper's cabinet. The same Stephen Harper who allowed Izzy Asper to help write the foreign policy of his Reform Party, in exchange for his financial and communications support. "Izzy pulled out all the stops on that one. He was prepared to invest his personal time and capital for the cause." (2)

Peter Kent and WikiLeaks

Yesterday, one of the WikiLeak documents revealed that the U.S. was angered at Canada's approach to Cuba. Peter Kent was personally named and his office responded by saying that their party's official policy is to not respond to any of the WikiLeak announcements.

Fine.

But when I hear Peter Kent's name, the only Canadian who is possibly more pro-Israel than Stephen Harper, I pay attention.

And bypassing the mainstream Canadian media, who wouldn't be allowed to pursue the story even if they wanted to, I instead went right to the source for any information regarding Canada and this foreign country. And the Israel Resource Review didn't disappoint.

Peter Kent's Canadian tax payer financed job, has been to protect Israel's interests in Latin America.

Kent noted that “ Canada ... has also represented Israel’s interests in Cuba through its embassy in Havana. There is a 1,500-member Jewish community in Cuba and as Kent said “It’s now possible for Cuban Jews to make aliyah.” ... Canada and Israel are also working together to pressure the government of Argentina to make reparations for the botched investigation of the 1992 bombing of the Israeli Embassy in Buenos Aires. Kent said Canadian and Israel also have (sic?) are concerned about involvement of ‘Latin American states with Iran.”

And remember, Kent recently suggested that it was not a matter of if there would be a preemptive strike agaisnt Iran, but when. (3)

Canadians are not anti-Israel, but we are rightfully concerned when our Canadian government consistently puts Israel's interests above those of ours. That is not what we pay them for.

We expect a balanced approach to foreign policy, not a one-sided approach that allows another country to get away with horrendous crimes against humanity.

We have got to start paying attention.

But how sad is it that the only one providing us with information to pay attention to, is an Australian activist?

Sources:

1. Izzy: The Passionate Life and Turbulent Times of Izzy Asper, Canada's Media Mogul, By Peter C. Newman, Harper-Collins, 2008, ISBN: 978-1-55468-089-4, Pg. 254-256

2. Newman, 2008, Pg. 83

3. Canada’s international do-gooder image shattered: Ottawa Loses Bid for UN Security Council, by Eric Walberg, Global Research, October 23, 2010

An Attempt to Remove All Reminders of Stephen Harper's War

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

On June 3, 2008; Canada's then Ambassador to Afghanistan, Arif Lalani, was interviewed on a U.S. radio program via telephone.

What the morning talk show host, Renee Montagne, wanted to know was why Canada was suffering a disproportionate number of losses in the war. The highest ratio of all NATO forces.

Whenever you hear that a NATO soldier has been killed in the Taliban heartland of Kandahar, it's probably a Canadian soldier. Canada only has 2,500 troops in Afghanistan but they are fighting in one of the most dangerous regions of the country. So while Canadian troops make up only a small fraction of NATO forces, they've suffered the highest number of fatalities proportionately. (1)

Soon after being elected in January of 2006, Stephen Harper made Afghanistan his first official visit anywhere as prime minister. There he gave his now infamous "cut and run" speech, which was simply a scaled down version of one that George Bush had presented at the U.S. Naval Academy* a year before.

"You can't lead from the bleachers. I want Canada to be a leader," Harper told about 1,000 troops at the Kandahar airfield base the day after he arrived on an unannounced visit to Afghanistan. "Your work is about more than just defending Canada's national interests. Your work is also about demonstrating an international leadership role for our country."

"There will be some who want to cut and run, but cutting and running is not my way and it's not the Canadian way," he said, to a round of applause. "We don't make a commitment and then run away at the first sign of trouble. We don't and we will not, as long as I'm leading this country." (2)

Up to that time, 10 Canadian soldiers and a diplomat had been killed, and 26 Canadian soldiers had been injured. But that was about to change. To impress George Bush, Stephen Harper sent our men and women into the most dangerous areas of battle. According to Rick Hillier: "It was Stephen Harper's decision to move Canadian troops from Kabul and reposition them in southern Kandahar province, where they are now at much more danger of being killed by roadside bombs." (3)

And speeches were not the only thing Harper borrowed from his mentor. He also made the decision to discontinue flying the flag at half mast as a show of respect to fallen soldiers, and forbid the media from capturing for history, the images of flag draped coffins.

"Look, don't bring the Airbus in, or if you bring the plane in, turn it away from the cameras so that people can't see the bodies coming off, or do it after dark, or do it down behind the hangars, or just bar everybody from it," Hillier quotes the PMO staffers as saying. "They clearly didn't want that picture of the flag-draped coffin on the news."It is Canadian military policy that every Canadian soldier killed in Afghanistan will be honoured as a war hero. Harper's disrespect for soldiers was the last straw for Hillier and prompted his early retirement at the age of 53. (4)

Harper expected backlash for this decision, from the media that he had already silenced, but was unprepared for the reaction of Canadians, especially from military families.

Nothing "casual" About Our Losses

Last week Canada revealed itself once again as a truly unique nation. In a world where dead warriors are commonplace and taken for granted, this country stopped, paid attention, lowered the flags and gave full military honours to four soldiers, who died inexplicably and tragically at the hands of our allies. (Lesley Hughes, April 2002)

Hughes was referring to the "friendly fire" deaths of four Canadian soldiers, the first reports of our country's losses in this war. And a nation mourned. Bill Leger, the father of Sgt. Marc Leger, spoke in reference to Stephen Harper's 2006 decision to ban the media from covering the flag draped coffins of fallen soldiers:

"... in 2002 it was a great thing for us to have the media there. It was something that we felt at that time, and still feel the same way, that it was a Canadian thing. It was something that we wanted to show all Canadians what the cost of their liberty is. It's nothing else but that. And it's still heart-warming to see the faces and everything else when people were lined up on the 401, in 2002, all the way from Trenton to Toronto. They wanted to be there. They had to be there. I was told that often, over and over again. And those are the memories that I have, and those are the things that I carry with me all my life." (5)

And Leger's mother was interviewed more recently:

Ask Claire Leger what the past decade has meant to her, and she'll tell you a story of abiding sorrow ... After the tragedy, Leger and her husband Richard planted four small Canadian flags in the garden of their home near Ottawa, in memory of Marc and his comrades, Cpl. Ainsworth Dyer, 24; Pte. Richard Green, 21 and Pte. Nathan Smith, 26.

Seven years later, the Legers haven't sought ''closure'' from their grief. As the war years have ticked by they've maintained a steady vigil, dutifully marking the death of every Canadian soldier in Afghanistan. ''Every time I have to go put a little flag in our garden, it feels like I'm burying our son all over again,'' she says. ''I send a card to every family that loses a soldier and I often get a card back, with a picture of their son or daughter.''''There's less and less attention paid to those who are killed and it's heartbreaking to me,'' says Leger. ''I wish I could share with other families the support we had when Marc died. We were embraced by Canadians. That's what kept me going - I felt people actually cared.''Leger is a fierce critic of what she considers an unwinnable war, and says Canada's participation has made us ''puppets'' of the Americans. (6)

Stephen Harper then did an about face, finding a way to make himself look good, and with the help of the ad firm Hill and Knowlton, quickly turned the war into a giant photo-op. Canada had not witnessed a propaganda campaign of this magnitude since the last world war. But it was not about "King and Country" this time, it was about Stephen Harper and ... well ... Stephen Harper.

His first defense minister, Gordon O'Connor had been an employee of H&K, lobbying for military contracts. In the United States, the ad firm was well known for using dirty tricks to sell wars:

Hill & Knowlton, then the world's largest PR firm, served as mastermind for the Kuwaiti campaign. Its activities alone would have constituted the largest foreign-funded campaign ever aimed at manipulating American public opinion. By law, the Foreign Agents Registration Act should have exposed this propaganda campaign to the American people, but the Justice Department chose not to enforce it. Nine days after Saddam's army marched into Kuwait, the Emir's government agreed to fund a contract under which Hill & Knowlton would represent "Citizens for a Free Kuwait," a classic PR front group designed to hide the real role of the Kuwaiti government and its collusion with the Bush administration. (7)

Canadians were no longer going to oppose the war. Belligerent nationalism would reign supreme, and they were going to instead cheer from the bleachers. Rah, rah, rah!

And what did they use to whip us into a frenzy?

Hill & Knowlton's yellow ribbon campaign [my emphasis] to whip up support for "our" troops, which followed their orchestration of Nayirah's phony "incubator" testimony, was a public relations masterpiece. The claim that satellite photos revealed that Iraq had troops poised to strike Saudi Arabia was also fabricated by the PR firm. Hill & Knowlton was paid between $12 million (as reported two years later on "60 Minutes") and $20 million (as reported on "20/20") for "services rendered." The group fronting the money? Citizens for a Free Kuwait, a phony "human rights agency" set up and funded entirely by Kuwait's emirocracy to promote its interests in the U.S. (8)

So in Canada, H & K not only had one of their own (O'Connor) as Minister of Defense, deciding which of their clients got what military contracts; they were also able to sell a yellow ribbon campaign that had been mothballed, to a country not known for outward displays of such aggression.

And to make sure that everyone stayed on message, Stephen Harper completely controlled the media, by completely controlling that message.

The Harper government used a pervasive message-control tool to persuade Canadians their foremost purpose in Afghanistan was building schools and fostering democracy rather than waging a war that was turning bloodier by the day.

An investigation by The Canadian Press shows the Conservatives systematically drafted “Message Event Proposals” as part of a quiet campaign to persuade Canadians their country was primarily engaged in development work to rebuild a shattered nation rather than hunting down and killing an emboldened insurgency.The government used MEPs literally to script the words it wanted to hear from the mouths of its top diplomats, aid workers and cabinet ministers in 2007-2008 to divert public attention from the soaring double-digit death toll of Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan. (9)

And when reports began to surface as early as 2007, that Canadians could be charged with war crimes:

WASHINGTON–Prime Minister Stephen Harper's office used a "6,000-mile screwdriver" to oversee the denial of reports of Afghan detainee abuse when the scandal first erupted in 2007, according to a former senior NATO public affairs official who was then based in Kabul. The former official, speaking on condition his name not be used, told the Toronto Star that Harper's office in Ottawa "scripted and fed" the precise wording NATO officials in Kabul used to repudiate allegations of abuse "at a time when it was privately and generally acknowledged in our office that the chances of good treatment at the hands of Afghan security forces were almost zero."

"It was highly unusual. I was told this was the titanic issue for Prime Minister Harper and that every single statement that went out needed to be cleared by him personally ... [my emphasis]" (10)

In February, the Hill Times reported on the suffering of our men and women who saw service in Afghanistan:

More than 6,000 Canadian Forces members and discharged veterans who are receiving physical or psychiatric disability benefits from Veterans Affairs Canada have either served in Afghanistan or have a disability that has been related to their service in Afghanistan, the department says. The majority of the soldiers receiving benefits are likely suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder or war-related psychiatric conditions, according to global figures the department and the Canadian Forces provided The Hill Times. They also do not appear to be included in Afghanistan combat or non-combat casualty figures the Canadian Forces compiled, even though the veterans and serving members who have psychiatric conditions likely have them as a result of serving in the Afghan war. (11)

And when this report came out, Harper's head media cheerleader, Jane Taber, turned it into a hyper-partisan sideshow. I have never been so ashamed.

So given Stephen Harper's callous disregard for human life, and anal control of the media, should we be surprised to learn that he is now attacking our veterans? Should we be surprised to learn that he has fired the man advocating for them? Or should we be surprised to learn that he has forbidden our broken soldiers from telling their stories?

A half dozen Afghan war veterans who wanted to talk about how their injuries affected their lives were told by senior military staff they were not to attend a press conference held earlier this week by Veterans Ombudsman Pat Stogran. The instructions come as the debate over how injured veterans are being treated reached a highpoint in Ottawa earlier this week, when Stogran held a news conference and criticized Veterans Affairs Canada and the government for not doing enough for the country's injured military personnel. Other veterans, no longer serving in the Canadian Forces, also spoke out at the conference about the failure of government to provide for them. (12)

Are you mad yet? Are you ashamed? Are you Canadian?

This may have been Stephen Harper's War when he changed our direction from Peacekeepers to Peacemakers, but this is now our war, as we go into battle against a government who would allow our veterans to be treated like this.

Are you in?

Footnotes:

George Bush (April 2005): "Some are calling for a deadline for withdrawal. Many advocating an artificial timetable for withdrawing our troops are sincere — but I believe they're sincerely wrong. Pulling our troops out before they've achieved their purpose is not a plan for victory. Setting an artificial deadline to withdraw would send a signal to our enemies — that if they wait long enough, America will cut and run and abandon its friends... To all who wear the uniform, I make you this pledge: America will not run in the face of car bombers and assassins so long as I am your Commander-in-Chief. (Applause.)"

Sources:

1. Canada Bears Brunt of Fighting in South Afghanistan, Interview with Arif Lalani, National Public Radio, June 3, 2008

2. Canada committed to Afghan mission, Harper tells troops, CBC News, March 13, 2006

3. A Soldier First, By Rick Hillier, Harper Collins Publishers, 2009, ISBN - 13:9781554684915

4. General Rick Hillier criticizes Stephen Harper, Lilith News, October 20, 2009

5. Canadian Government Imitates Bush Regime: Dishonors Their War Dead Too, Afraid To Let The Public See The Cost Of Empire, Associated Press, April 26, 2006

6. Afghanistan war: Canada's defining event of past decade, By Richard Foot, Canwest News, 2009

7. How PR Sold the War in the Persian Gulf, Center for Media and Democracy

8. How Bush Sr. Sold The Bombing Of Iraq, by Mitchel Cohen, December 28, 2002

9. Ottawa’s Afghanistan message: It’s development, not war, Government scripts told top diplomats how to frame the mission, Mike Blanchfield and Jim Bronskill, The Canadian Press, June 7, 2010

10. PMO issued instructions on denying abuse in '07: Former NATO official says response to reports was 'scripted' in Ottawa, By Mitch Potter Washington Bureau, November 22, 2009

11. Afghanistan veterans on disability now 6,000 Forces, Veterans Affairs reluctant to disclose casualty records after eight years of war, By Tim Naumetz, the Hill Times, February 8, 2010

12. Wounded vets claim they were muzzled by brass: Soldiers were willing to discuss injuries, but steered away from ombudsman's press conference, By David Pugliese, The Ottawa Citizen, August 21, 2010

Family Squabbles With a Twist: Arthur and Peter Kent

I've posted on the two Kent brothers recently, focusing in part on how different they are.

Arthur Kent is a seasoned journalist who has broken ties with the corporate media, so can report on issues more honestly and openly.

Peter Kent, on the other hand is a true, blue Reformer, and his actions against Lesley Hughes revealed that he had shed any credibility he might have once had as a journalist.

Arthur Kent has also been openly critical of the Harper government for supporting the corrupt Karzai regime, among other things. And he has warned our ambassadors in the past about the drug trade in Afghanistan.

They just refused to listen and Harper forbid them from speaking of anything nasty

AS KABUL FELL, DIPLOMAT TOOK TAINTED KARZAI’S KEEPSAKES
Ambassador Covered Up Cracks In The Regime
Arthur Kent
November 24, 2009

But Arif Lalani and his superiors in Canada’s Conservative government were staunch in their support for Karzai - and busy staunching unflattering facts about his ministries and security services, as has now been confirmed by a Foreign Affairs whistleblower.

Richard Colvin, a senior field investigator who went on to serve as Lalani’s number two at the Canadian Embassy, has accused officials including Lalani and David Mulroney, the former head of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Afghan task force, of censoring his reports about the abuse of prisoners transferred by Canadian troops to the Karzai regime’s security services ....

Jane Taber now discusses this family squabble in the Globe. Well worth a read.

Prorogation riles many Canadians - and splits the Kent family
Jane Taber
January 15, 2009

Peter Kent isn’t feeling the love from his little brother these days.

Arthur is the brother in question – an award-winning foreign correspondent, whose reporting (and good looks) during the first Iraq war earned him the nickname the “Scud Stud.”

Arthur Kent is based in Calgary. Besides making documentaries, he has of late been writing thoughtful but extremely pointed pieces critical of Stephen Harper and his government’s decision to shut down Parliament. He says the Prime Minister prorogued Parliament to try to contain the damage from the fghan detainee inquiry ....

When Canada Was a Democracy we Were Able to Ask Questions

What happened to us? I mean seriously, what happened to us?

I came of age in the 1960's and we questioned everything. This questioning gave rise to the civil rights movement and a new approach to looking at the world.

But we've now gone back to the 1950's, where we believe everything our government tells us, even when much of it is absolutely ridiculous; and allow them to make decisions for us, simply because we're obviously too lazy to make them for ourselves.

Even the seemingly progressive thinking George Stroumboulopoulos, is framing his questions to George Galloway in the video above, with the usual rhetoric. In my day Stroumboulopoulos would have been considered a stooge, yet he's now one of the more enlightened in the media.

Now don't get me wrong. I like George. He's certainly a breath of fresh air compared to people like Rex Murphy, but he's got to do better than this.

When Jason Kenney banned George Galloway from visiting Canada, he claimed it was because he sent aid to Palestine, and they are in his estimation terrorists. Yet Kenney spoke at a rally of the Mujahedeen Khalq. When it was pointed out to him that they were on Canada's Terrorist list, he shrugged it off, claiming not to know.

I think he banned Galloway because he spoke out against the war and our involvement in it. This is a government that does not allow dissent. You're with them or against them. If you question the war, you're a 'Taliban dupe'. If you question Israeli aggression, you're anti-Semitic.

Journalist and former CBC personality Lesley Hughes learned this the hard way.

In April 2002, after hearing of the deaths of 4 Canadian soldiers, as a result of so-called 'friendly fire', she sat at her computer and wrote a column encouraging Canadians to seek the truth about our involvement in Afghanistan.

At the time, her column reflected the feelings of many Canadians. We were angry and grief stricken and started looking for answers. Yet six years after this piece was written, born again Reformer Peter Kent, pounced on it; trying to paint Hughes as not only anti-Semitic, but a nut for listening to experts, who had many questions about this so-called 'war on terror'.

Because of Kent's actions and his close ties to the entertainment industry, formally known as the Canadian media, (He was an executive at CanWest Global) the press went nuts. Hughes had been running as a Liberal in the 2008 election, but because of Kent's insanity, she not only was removed from the race, but lost her career in the process.

And all because she wanted us to seek the truth. Oh, the horror!

The irony of course is that, Kent's brother, Arthur, is very outspoken on Afghanistan. In fact, he repeatedly warned this government that they were propping up the corrupt Karzai regime, when it had no legitimacy in that country. He also warned our ambassador about the drug trade, and Karzai's involvement in it; and helped with a video 'Freedom From War'. Is he a 'Taliban dupe'? Hardly.

We are pouring billions and billions of dollars into this war. Money that we don't have, but have to borrow. And we are losing too many of our soldiers. When are we going to start asking questions?

We have got to start to RETHINK AFGHANISTAN!

Afghanistan and the Drug Trade. Who Are we Protecting?

When the story first broke about former foreign affairs minister Maxime Bernier leaving sensitive NATO documents in the apartment of a girlfriend, the media became focused on the sexy side of the story, ignoring most of the important issues. Like what was in the documents, and why is he taking them home?

But the woman in question, Julie Couillard, revealed something else that Bernier had told her, stating on national television that Maxime had said “the war in Afghanistan has nothing to do with building democracy in that country but has to do with the global control of the opium trade. It’s a drug war.”... "the War In Afghanistan was about the control of the global opium trade, not democracy".

According to a United Nations report in 2006:

UN anti-narcotics chief calls for wide-spectrum action against Afghan opium production

Afghanistan, the world’s largest opium producer, is already a “narco-economy” and risks becoming a “narco-state,” with drug production its largest employer, the top United Nations drugs and crime fighter warned today.

UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) Executive Director Antonio Maria Costa called for a wide range of international action to curb production, trafficking, demand and accompanying corruption, terming the reduction of heroin demand “the mother of all drug control challenges.”

“Afghanistan has already become a narco-economy in the sense that drugs are now Afghanistan’s largest employer, income generator, source of capital, export and foreign investment,” UNODC Executive Director Antonio Maria Costa told a ministerial conference in Moscow on drug trafficking routes from the country. “It has become a narco-society in the sense that many Afghans are now hooked on the drug money and now it risks becoming a narco-state,” he added.

“Pyramids of protection now connect the upper world of the Afghan establishment to the underworld of Afghan mafias.”

Seasoned journalist Arthur Kent, shown in the video above, is also concerned with the drug trade and made his concerns known to our ambassador in Afghanistan, Arif Lalani; when he first arrived. He told him that there members of the Karzai government involved in the illegal drug trade, but his warnings fell on deaf ears. Now remember, Arthur Kent is the brother of Reform-Conservative Peter Kent, so this is not a partisan issue.

The New York Times recently reported on the issue, but are suggesting that the Taliban are the only ones involved and that the drug trade is supporting their forces.

WASHINGTON — The United States-led counter narcotics effort in Afghanistan, viewed as critical to halting the flow of funds to the Taliban and curtailing corruption, lacks a long-term strategy, clear objectives and a plan for handing over responsibility to Afghans, the State Department inspector general said in a report released Wednesday.

The report said that military and civilian anti drug programs lacked clearly delineated roles, and that civilian contracts for counter narcotics work were poorly written and largely supervised from thousands of miles away.

We learn that there are new anti-drug initiatives, but are they really working? This from the Associated Press on December 24, 2009: US anti-drug effort in Afghanistan criticized
Afghanistan produces roughly 90 percent of the world's illicit opium. By MATTHEW LEE

WASHINGTON — The State Department's internal watchdog on Wednesday criticized the agency's nearly $2 billion anti-drug effort in Afghanistan for poor oversight and lack of a long-term strategy. The department's inspector general said the Afghanistan counter-narcotics program is hampered by too few personnel and rampant corruption among Afghan officials.

The inspector general's report also noted that despite a consensus among U.S. agencies that eradicating poppy fields is essential, the focus has shifted to interdiction of drug organizations and alternative crop projects ....

One more reason to RETHINK AFGHANISTAN!

How Do You Keep Karl Rove Off Parliament Hill?

And the answer to that question. Get the Reformers off the Hill!!!

For any of you who don't know, Karl Rove is one of the most despicable men on the planet. He helped George Bush steal an election and is responsible for some of the dirtiest politics known.

He once distributed a push poll when Bush was running against John McCain for leadership of the Republican Party, that asked the question: "If you found out that John McCain had an illegitimate child with a black woman, would your opinion of him change?"

McCain's wife had adopted a little girl from Africa, who was included in family photos, but those pictures and that seed of doubt did the trick.

Of course Stephen Harper and his Reformers, use the same tactics. In fact, Harper's campaigns have been handled by a Republican pollster, John McLaughlin, and another Republican Frank Lutz, is still working behind the scenes.

Don Newman recently stated that he noticed politics got a whole lot dirtier when the Reform Party first entered Parliament, and an American journalist noticed a change in our political discourse when Stephen Harper became Prime Minister.

Now we are seeing similar tactics used by the Harperites, when dealing with sticky situations. And of course the media is complicit in the nonsense, because they not only condone it, they promote it.

The Globe and Mail even ran a headline that the character assassination of Richard Colvin is working, meaning that the Ref-Cons will only step up their attack. Shame.

What's also interesting is that while Peter MacKay is suggesting that there is no proof of torture because Colvin didn't witness it personally, he claims that the opposition are supporting "people who throw acid in the faces of schoolchildren and who blow up buses of civilians in their own country." Did he personally witness any member of the Taliban throwing acid in the faces of children or blowing up buses? How does he know that the Karzai government didn't do it, or the Americans?

He would probably argue that he just knows. Well... you don't have to see it for yourself to know that it's happening, and MacKay's argument is weak to say the least.

Tories using smear-your-opponent U.S. Republican-style tactics, say Grits and NDP PM Stephen Harper's government is using 'boiler-plate wedge politics' and 'poisoning the well' of Canada's political culture.
By TIM NAUMETZ
November 23, 2009

The Harper government is using smear-your-opponent tactics borrowed from the U.S. Republican Party that are "poisoning the well" of Canada's political culture, NDP and Liberal MPs say.

They cite as one instance Defence Minister Peter MacKay's (Central Nova, N.S.) heated responses in the Commons to allegations last week the government tried to cover up knowledge that Canadian troops handed detainees over to Afghan forces during the early stages of the Kandahar mission knowing there was evidence the prisoners would be tortured.

The allegations from Canadian intelligence officer Richard Colvin, made in testimony at the Commons Committee on Justice and Human Rights, included charges that senior government officials up to Prime Minister Stephen Harper's (Calgary Southwest, Alta.) office were aware of the information but suppressed it and instructed him to keep it out of official internal memos.

Although aspects of the Afghan prisoner controversy first became public in 2006, and the government later instituted a new prisoner transfer agreement with the Afghan government, Mr. Colvin's claim of a cover-up added a new and potentially damaging charge, one which Mr. MacKay was determined to defuse the minute it hit the Commons floor following Mr. Colvin's testimony.

Mr. Colvin said he spoke to four of the detainees claiming abuse and admitted he was certain only one had been handed over to the Afghans by Canadians, but he referred also to information from other sources, including the Red Cross. Mr. Colvin told the committee many of the prisoners were farmers, truck drivers and peasants "in the wrong place at the wrong time" but others likely did carry arms for the Taliban, possibly for pay or under coercion.

In fact, at the time, the Foreign Affairs Department referred to some detainees in the Kandahar prison where they were taken as "political prisoners" and Canadian Forces also referred to its detainees as suspected Taliban supporters.

"According to our information, the likelihood is that all the Afghans we handed over were tortured," Mr. Colvin told the committee.

When the opposition seized on his allegations of a cover-up and wider Afghan abuse of prisoners Mr. MacKay responded with an accusation that Liberal MP Bob Rae (Toronto Centre, Ont.) was relying on testimony from "people who throw acid in the faces of schoolchildren and who blow up buses of civilians in their own country."

Mr. MacKay said the opposition was relying on "second and third hand information and Taliban information."

The claims prompted NDP Leader Jack Layton (Toronto Danforth, Ont.) to recall the government's attacks against the opposition during a 2007 controversy over detainees, when Harper accused then Liberal leader Stéphane Dion (Saint-Laurent-Cartierville, Que.) of sympathizing with the Taliban. Conservative MPs at the time also derided former NDP MP Dawn Black in similar fashion, heckling her as "Burqa Black" and "Taliban lover" during Question Period.

"I can understand the leader of the opposition and members of his party feel for Taliban prisoners; I just wish they would show the same passion for Canadian soldiers," said Mr. Harper said to Mr. Dion. The claim shocked the opposition and Mr. Dion demanded an apology, saying Mr. Harper had "insulted the entire Parliament."

The opposition response was similar after Mr. MacKay's latest charge that the opposition was relying on evidence from Taliban terrorists as they pressed the government about Mr. Colvin's cover-up allegations.

"This is McCarthyism, this is absolute McCarthyism," Liberal MP Ujjal Dosanjh (Vancouver South, B.C.) said in reference to the 1950s-era Republican Senator who was eventually censured for widespread and unbelievable allegations of Communist sympathy in the United States. "This is absolutely unthinkable, that a Canadian minister would accuse those who want to restore and protect the reputation of this great country of being Taliban sympathizers. I can't comprehend that."

NDP Leader Jack Layton (Toronto Danforth, Ont.) cited the response as being among the reasons the opposition is demanding a public inquiry into Colvin's claims. "These are very, very serious allegations and the government is attempting to sweep them under the rug and divert attention by calling those who raise questions names," he said.

The opposition says the governing Conservatives have mastered more-recent Republican-style wedge politics in attacks against their Commons opponents, including the use of flyers suggesting the Liberal party supports anti-Semitic groups and other flyers that targeted opposition MPs for allegedly supporting the federal gun registry.

Liberal MP and former justice minister Irwin Cotler (Mount Royal, Que.), who is Jewish, claimed Conservative flyers distorting the Liberal position on anti-Semitism, terrorism, and Israel were circulated in his Montreal riding, which like others where similar flyers were circulated, includes a large Jewish population. Among other things, the flyer claimed Mr. Cotler and other Liberals participated in a conference in Durban, South Africa, that took on anti-Israel tones. Mr. Cotler, as he argued the flyers breached his Parliamentary privilege, pointed out Liberals and other Canadian MPs went to Durban to attend a world conference against racism, but it became a controversial conference dominated by anti-Semitic and anti-Israel sentiments.

In the case of Conservative flyers targeting opposition MPs over the gun registry, Commons Speaker Peter Milliken (Kingston and the Islands, Ont.) ruled there was evidence, on the surface of a complaint from Nova Scotia NDP MP Peter Stoffer (Sackville-Eastern Shore, N.S.), that a Conservative flyer on the topic circulating in his riding may have breached his Parliamentary privilege.

The circular under the name of Saskatchewan Conservative MP Maurice Vellacott (Saskatoon-Wanuskewin, Sask.) claimed Mr. Stoffer had voted in favour of the registry—even though he has consistently opposed it—and also included false allegations about Mr. Stoffer's position on the registry. On a motion from Mr. Stoffer, the House agreed to send Mr. Vellacott's possible breach of Mr. Stoffer's Parliamentary privilege to the Procedure and House Affairs Committee for an inquiry.

"This is boiler-plate wedge politics," says NDP MP Paul Dewar (Ottawa Centre, Ont.). "We've seen this used with the Republicans in the States; I'm sure they've been sharing how to take that kind of approach, during the (U.S.) health debates they've been using it. But this goes back further, that's how the Republicans gained a lot of ground. It poisons the well of our political culture."

Holy Schmoley. I think I've Upset Mark Steyn Fans.

Yesterday I posted a piece on Mark Steyn's article that got him hauled before the Human Rights Commission. It was meant to be a continuation of my concern over the power that the Religious Right now have in this country, especially when it comes to foreign affairs.

Canadians seem to be in a stupor, suggesting they will vote for the devil they know. I just want them to know exactly what that might mean.

I do firmly believe in freedom of speech and freedom of the press, which is why I was glad that the charges against Steyn were dropped. He might not be someone I read on a regular basis, and I'm sure he won't lose any sleep over that.

But when Stephen Harper stated that he knew he couldn't simply count on the neo-cons to keep him in power, but had to tap into the wealth and power of the theo-cons, this should raise a lot of red flags, especially with this statement: “The truth of the matter is that the real agenda and the defining issues have shifted from economic issues to social values,” he said, “so conservatives must do the same. "Arguing that the party had to come up with tough, principled stands on everything from parents’ right to spank their children to putting “hard power” behind the country’s foreign-policy commitments ... " ( Stephen Harper and the Theo-cons, The rising clout of Canada’s religious right, by Marci McDonald, October 2006)

Foreign policy should not be based on a biblical prophesy, and I've outlined this prophesy in several posts. This is something that needs to be debated extensively.

In my post, I did question why the Religious Right rallied behind Mr. Steyn, then linked to a column by Star columnist Haroon Siddiqui , where he claimed; "The subtext here is Muslims." (not in relation to Steyn but Human Rights Commissions)

If this was simply about freedom of speech, then why did they not come to the aid of Lesley Hughes, when she was brutally attacked by Peter Kent, over an article she had written several years ago? Should she not enjoy freedom of speech or freedom of the press? Should I not?

As I have stated in all my postings, this is not about attacking some one's religion. However, once these religious groups enter the political arena, they have to accept that they will be subjected to all aspects of political debate and discourse. They can't use their religion as a shield, and I don't believe they should receive tax breaks as religious organizations, once they cross the line and actively campaign for a single party.

Fundamentalism is absolute, and not open to debate; but the majority of Canadians are not fundamentalists, so where does that leave us, if our Prime Minster and a good portion of his caucus are? If the Religious Right are part of his infrastructure for the 'right-wing revolution', then I have a right to say that I think his architects lack vision and are destroying the Canadian scene.

Did Peter Kent Interfere With Student Elections at York University?

In 2005, journalist Jeff Horwitz went undercover at the Leadership Institute of Morton Blackwell's, and enrolled in a seminar, part of their Campus Leadership Program.

One recent Sunday, at Morton Blackwell's Leadership Institute, a dozen students meet for the second and final day of training in grass-roots youth politics. All are earnest, idealistic and as right wing as you can get. They take careful notes as instructor Paul Gourley teaches them how to rig a campus mock election.

It's nothing illegal -- no ballot stuffing necessary, even at the most liberal colleges. First you find a nonpartisan campus group to sponsor the election, so you can't be accused of cheating. Next, volunteer to organize the thing. College students are lazy, and they'll probably let you. Always keep in mind that a rigged mock election is all about location, location, location.

"Can anyone tell me," asks Gourley, a veteran mock electioneer, "why you don't want the polling place in the cafeteria?" Stephen, a shy antiabortion activist sitting toward the rear of the class, raises his hand: "Because you want to suppress the vote?" "Stephen has the right answer!" Gourley exclaims, tossing Stephen his prize, a copy of Robert Bork's "Slouching Toward Gomorrah." (1)

That is just one of the techniques that would be future conservative leaders are taught at the Institute.

There is no better place to master the art of mock-election rigging -- and there is no better master than Morton Blackwell, who invented the trick in 1964 and has been teaching it ever since. Blackwell's half-century career in conservative grass-roots politics coincides neatly with the fortunes of the conservative movement: He was there when Goldwater lost, when Southern voters abandoned the Democratic Party in droves, and when the Moral Majority began its harvest of evangelical Christian voters. In the 1970s, Blackwell worked with conservative direct-mail king Richard Viguerie; in 1980, he led Reagan's youth campaign. Recently, he's been fighting to save Tom DeLay's job.

Over the last 25 years, more than 40,000 young conservatives have been trained at the institute's Arlington, Va., headquarters in everything from TV makeup for aspiring right-wing talking heads to prep courses for the State Department's Foreign Service exam. Classes are taught by volunteers recruited from the ranks of the conservative movement's most talented organizers, operatives and communicators. (1)

The Canadian conservatives are now hoping to cash in on Blackwell's success and indeed the [Preston] Manning Centre for Building Democracy, also offers a Campus Leadership Training Program. Manning's Centre was started with a ten million dollar anonymous corporate donation, and is fashioned after Blackwell's model. (2)

And with the rise of Conservative party interference in student politics at universities across the country, it's important to expose this new trend.

It's not unusual for a political party to speak to students, but this kind of interference is unprecedented.

Peter Kent and York University

Students at York University cried foul when federal Conservative MP Peter Kent and Ontario Conservative MPP, Peter Shurman got involved with their election, hoping to bring forward a "... conservative, pro-Israeli" candidate.

"The Conservative party has no authority at all for getting involved in student politics and neither does the York administration. We're an incorporated, independent body," charged Krisna Saravanamuttu, who was elected president of the York Federation of Students in the controversial vote. "Prime Minister Stephen Harper's foot soldiers are deliberately interfering with student elections to help candidates more friendly to their policies.""I find it bizarre for a federal minister (Kent is Canada's minister of state for foreign affairs in the mericas) to try to interfere in a student election," said CFS chair Shelley Melanson. "If students were concerned about the election process, there are mechanisms on campus for expressing those concerns."

In one email to Tiffin at 2:14 a.m. the night of ballot counting, Kent's special assistant said he was there on campus and was concerned nobody from the university was monitoring the process. (3)

The campus conservatives had suggested that the election was rigged, but it was not up to the government to step in. The university is mandated to handle these situations. However, this is all part of movement conservatism, where every element of society is dragged in.

Sources:

1. My Right-wing Degree, By Jeff Horowitz, May 24, 2005

2.The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Random House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8

3. Stop meddling, students tell Tories: MPPs deny they were trying to sway York election results, By Louise Brown, Toronto Star, July 6, 2009

I'm so Disappointed in Peter Kent and His Views on the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

When I first learned that Peter Kent had 'quit' his journalistic endeavours and was running for the Conservative Party, I almost saw it as a good sign that the party might be moving to the centre.

I must admit I never watched his show. Can West Global is a little too bias for me. Almost like Fox News in the U.S. ('Republican good ... Democrat bad ... ugh'!)

However, I assumed that Mr. Kent was able to do more than just read copy. I assumed he had a keen mind and an independent spirit. I mean he often locked horns with his bosses because he wanted to write his own broadcasts. I guess I can now see why they didn't let him.

What a disappointment. From his horrible assault on fellow journalist Lesley Hughes, to his unwarranted involvement in the York University student election. The man is tyrant. A tyrant with too much power and too few intelligent thoughts. Maybe he's only capable of reading copy after all.

Canada Complicit with Israeli War Crimes

Canada lives in the unfortunate position of being under the thrall of U.S. media for most its information and cultural relevance. At the same time, its own media, apart from the national broadcast company CBC, is highly centralized under the influence of two media empires (Canwest Global and CTV GlobeMedia) who support the same kind of biased coverage that is provided by the U.S.

In sum, Canadians who wish to receive a balanced view of events in the Middle East, Gaza in particular, have to rely on alternate or external media. Canwest Global (Israel Aspers' media empire) provides nightly updates with little context and "balanced" reporting of showing deaths in Israel from the Qassam rockets as being equally as devastating as the IDF attacks in Gaza.

The current Canadian Conservative government under Stephen Harper is very much a shadow of U.S. conservatism: right wing Christian moralism; a hawkish if small military projection to give the world what it needs (whether it asks for it or not); and an unquestioning support of 'neoliberal' free trade practices. As such it echoes/mimics/supports the all too familiar U.S. perspective that Israel is the victim and Hamas the perpetrator of events in Gaza .... In early January, 2009, Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Peter Kent said, "The government of Canada has been very clear since the beginning of this crisis that it believes that the Hamas rocketing was responsible for the initial development of this crisis and for the continuing deepening humanitarian tragedy."

It's unfortunate that we have to go to alternative news sources if we want to learn both sides of this issue. The dimwit Jason Kenney has said: "People in Canada need to exercise freedom of expression responsibly and should be wary of the rise of a new form of anti-Semitism cloaked in debates about Israel's actions in the Middle East.

"Exercise freedom of expression responsibly"? "Should be wary of the rise of a new form of anti-Semitism cloaked in debates about Israel's actions in the Middle East." John Hagee must be so proud of him. Jason has obviously memorized his book, because hot dang if Hagee didn't say the same thing, only using 'People in America'.

IS THIS REALLY YOUR CANADA?