Tag Archives: Conservative Party of Canada

@acoyne Adds Fuel to #Harper’s #DumpsterFire as @ezralevant rushes in:) #cdnpoli #elxn42 #DumpHarper #StopHarper

Yikes, that’s gotta really hurt, eh? But seriously, we covered this earlier this morning and provided some historical educational material as well. BTW: Who actually takes anything published via Postmedia seriously anyway considering they will go to extreme lengths to censor, scrub and remove any and all truths about Dear Leader Harper and his misfit ReformaCon Regime. Oddly enough, we have been cataloging these Ministry of Truth tactics for several years and believe us when we say, it’s not just Postmedia News or the other so called “right-wing” propaganda outlets, CBC News and the so-called “left-wing” nuts are all the same. Protecting the fear-mongering, war-mongering third rate (at best) Despot is not only job number 1 and it’s the only job in town.

Before we review the latest tweetorama, before you cast your ballot and since the entire thread of tweets is MIA in the “other” articles, start looking at who else has jumped ship ’cause when “lawyers” jump ship, unlike media folks who need a story, it’s goin’ down swiftly and then be sure to check out our archives for lot’s of archived evidence of media manipulation and propaganda in action.

Be sure pay close attention to how many turncoat ReformaCons are lashing out against a CONSERVATIVE! Now, join in and let your views be heard ’round the world…


So anyway… I have resigned as editor of Editorials and Comment for the National Post, effective immediately. I will remain a columnist.


2. Postmedia executives and I had a professional disagreement. Their view was that the publication of a column by the editorial page editor…


3. … dissenting from the Post’s endorsement of the Conservatives would have confused readers and embarrassed the paper.


4. My view was that that was what I was paid to do as a columnist: give my honest opinion on issues of public interest.


5. I don’t see public disagreement as confusing. I see it as honest. Readers, in my view, are adults & understand that adults can disagree.


*6. The confusion, if any, would have been to have left the impression that the paper’s views were mine, or that my views were the paper’s.


7. To be clear, the owners and managers of a newspaper have a perfect right to set the paper’s editorial line as they wish.


8. Likewise they have a perfect right to decide who and what they wish to publish in their pages.


9. Nobody has a God-given right to be published and the country will get along very well without me telling them how to vote.


10. My concerns were and are merely a) that there should be no suggestion that I was personally endorsing or voting for the Conservatives.


11. And b) that I could not do my job as a columnist if I was obliged to stay silent where these conflicted with those of management.


12. While Postmedia’s intervention was unprecedented in my experience, I could not allow the precedent to stand.


13. So to protect my reputation and to preserve my editorial freedom as a columnist, I felt it necessary to resign the editorial position.


14. I think that’s all I need to say on the subject. If anyone’s still interested, I will be voting for the NDP candidate in my riding.


15. The short-form reasoning: the Conservatives don’t deserve to be re-elected, and the Liberals don’t deserve a majority.


Finally, my prediction: Airheads 143 Fascists 116 Commies 71 Traitors 5 Ewoks 2 Unabombers 1 (#rathagainstthemachine – oh let me dream…).



Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

#Harper’s #DumpsterFire: #Despotism vs #Democracy (Explained in 1946) #cdnpoli #elxn42

Since it is early morning on the 42nd Election, 2015 Edition, we felt it may be in our best interest as a Nation to review an “Old Stock” educational film that explains the differences between Despotism and Democracy to encourage everyone to think really hard before traveling to the polls. We would like to especially deliver this to the “undecided” potential conservative voters that may, or may not, grasp the importance of placing their Country above the Harper Regime’s ideology. In other words, it may be worth considering the option of falling on your swords with dignity today with honour as opposed to casting your kids and grand-kids futures under the ReformaCon bus while falling under another’s sword in disgrace. Below you will find the video that we have uploaded via our ytube channel followed by the transcripts for those that may like to read along or have trouble viewing as it has been rumoured that this is being blocked in Canada. As always, we encourage sharing and commenting…


#Harper’s #DumpsterFire: #Despotism vs #Democracy (Explained in 1946) #cdnpoli #elxn42

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9YxkyF3CgY4


Despotism

by Encyclopaedia Britannica Films
Published: 1946
Usage: Public Domain
Topics: Political science

Measures how a society ranks on a spectrum stretching from democracy to despotism. Explains how societies and nations can be measured by the degree that power is concentrated and respect for the individual is restricted. Where does your community, state and nation stand on these scales?

The companion Encyclopedia Britannica Film “Democracy” can be found here.
Run time: 11:00
Producer: Encyclopaedia Britannica Films
Audio/Visual:sound, B&W

Shotlist

Illustrates the thesis that all communities can be ranged on a scale running from democracy to despotism. The two chief characteristics of despotism — restricted respect and concentrated power — are defined and illustrated. Two of the conditions which have historically promoted the growth of despotism are explained and exemplified. These are a slanted economic distribution and a strict control of the agencies of communication.

The end of World War II gave impetus to the “one-worlder movement.” Sparked by the sense that nationalism engendered conflict, this movement for world government viewed nationhood as a relic made obsolete in an age of economic interdependence and rapid air transportation. The movement was marked by the release of films calling for world government, such as Man: One Family; We, the Peoples; Brotherhood of Man; and Our Shrinking World, and exposing the nature of fascist and authoritarian rule.

Despotism treats the idea of nationhood differently than most other educational films. It sees nations not as static entities but dynamically, moving towards democracy or despotism as conditions change. This outlook doesn’t mesh well with old cliches about patriotism and democracy, because it doesn’t necessarily see the American system as democracy’s highest achievement.

Despotism offers a number of indicators by which the degree of democracy or despotism in a society can be measured, using a sliding, thermometer-like animated scale. According to an article in The New York Times (March 16, 1946), an advisory board of educators debated for eighteen months (at seventy-five conferences) over the definition of the terms “democracy” and “despotism,” the titles of the two films released at the same time. Finally, a compromise was reached, resulting in the “respect scale” and the “power scale” that we see in Despotism.

So how does our own system measure up? The film becomes a little frightening as we consider where we stand with regard to indicators like economic distribution, concentration of land ownership, regressive taxation and centralized control of information. Draw your own conclusions.


[Despotism. An Erpi Classroom Film. Produced by Encyclopaedia Britannica Films, Inc. in collaboration with Harold D. Lasswell, Ph.D., Yale University. Copyright MCMXLV by Encyclopaedia Britannica Films Inc. All rights reserved. main titles graphic design art cards]

You can roughly locate any community in the world somewhere along a scale running all the way from democracy to despotism. One at the democracy end, another somewhere in the middle, and a third (inaudible). [rotating globes rulers animation graphs charts measurement quantification scales measures points pointers]

Let’s find out about despotism. This man makes it his job to study these things. “Well for one thing, avoid the comfortable idea that the mere form of government can of itself safeguard a nation against despotism. [maps charts wallcharts professors academics commentators authorities]

Germany under President Hindenburg was a republic. And yet in this republic an aggressive despotism took root and flourished under Adolf Hitler. [maps flags art cards swastikas animation James Brill narrators]

When a competent observer looks for signs of despotism in a community, he looks beyond fine words and noble phrases.” “. . . for which it stands, one nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all.” [saluting flag pledge of allegiance flags hands over hearts lynchings hangings gallows capital punishment condemnation death murder ropes nooses]

“Many observers have found that two workable yardsticks help in discovering how near a community is to despotism. The respect scale and the power scale. [goal variables charts graphs posters pointing fingers]

A careful observer can use a respect scale to find how many citizens get an even break. As a community moves towards despotism, respect is restricted to fewer people. [shared fairness equality]

A community is low on a respect scale if common courtesy is withheld from large groups of people on account of their political attitudes; if people are rude to others because they think their wealth and position gives them that right, or because they don’t like a man’s race or his religion. [drugstores soda Palmer Pharmacy pharmacies prescriptions candy cosmetics Scarlet Stores pedestrians people walking sidewalks storm troopers goons fascists military uniforms SA men SS men brownshirts brown shirts Nazis Sam Browne belts leather boots spectators Good Germans Jewish people Jews anti-Semitism antisemitism racism prejudice bigotry private doors offices bosses employers management class chauvinism classism For a quiet, restful vacation. Camp Gentilhomme on the Lake. Reservation Blank.

Gentlemen: Enclosed please find $ — deposit for my party of: name, address, date of arrival, religion. We solicit Gentile patronage only. Are there any Hebrews in your party? Yes or no. I hereby swear that the above statements are true. Signed application blanks pencils pointing]

Equal opportunity for all citizens to develop useful skills is one basis for rating a community on a respect scale. The opportunity to develop useful skills is important but not enough. [schools colleges universities lawns trees graduates steps stairs mothers cap and gown mortarboards parental pride pictures snapshots photography parents diplomas]

The equally important opportunity to put skills to use is a further test on a respect scale. [newspapers jobs applications employment offices unemployment work lines employment agencies]

A power scale is another important yardstick of despotism. It gauges the citizen’s share in making the community’s decisions. Communities which concentrate decision making in a few hands rate low on a power scale and are moving towards despotism. Like France under the Bourbon kings, one of whom said, “The state – I am the state.” [shared concentrated political power democracy equestrian statues horses statuary public art]

Today democracy can ebb away in communities whose citizens allow power to become concentrated in the hands of bosses. “What I say goes. See, I’m the law around here. Ha ha ha.” [government buildings smoke fires political power Tammany Hall machines laughs laughing newspaper reporters press]

The test of despotic power is that it can disregard the will of the people. It rules without the consent of the governed. [Declaration of Independence July 4, 1776 booklets opening inserts printed pieces In Congress, the unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.]

Look beyond the legal formalities of an election in measuring a community on the power scale to see if the ballot is really free. [fascists Nazis elections voting booths rigged storm troopers soldiers terrorism voters crosses hats uniforms Sam Browne belts hats control]

If the citizens can vote only the way they are told, a community approaches despotism.

When legislatures become ceremonial assemblies only, and have no real control over lawmaking, their community rates low on a power scale. “Sieg Heil. Sieg Heil.” [Germany Third Reich Nazis Adolf Hitler swastikas ceremonies applause clapping newsreels salutes fascists fascism]

In a downright despotism, opposition is dangerous whether the despotism is official or whether it is unofficial. [signs fences concentration camps Camp 33 for Political Offenders political prisoners prisons prison camps hoods hanging nooses ropes executions deaths capital punishment condemned people murder flames fires burning crosses Ku Klux Klan terrorism hoods racism]

“The spread of respect and power in a community is influenced by certain conditions which many observers measure by means of the economic distribution and information scales.” [instrumental variables]

If a community’s economic distribution becomes slanted, its middle income groups grow smaller and despotism stands a better chance to gain a foothold. [balanced distribution of wealth money affluence poverty]

Where land is privately owned, one sign of a poorly balanced economy is the concentration of land ownership in the hands of a very small number of people.

When farmers lose their farms they lose their independence. This one can stay on, but not as his own boss any more. To the extent that this condition exists throughout a nation, the likelihood of despotism is increased. [couples men women John J. Shea v. Walter Leeds.

Judgment of Foreclosure and Sale. mortgages fingers pointing United States maps animation]

In communities which depend almost entirely on a single industry, such as a factory or mine, maintaining economic balance is a challenging problem. [company towns monopolies smokestacks factories animation]

If this condition exists over the nation as a whole, so that the control of jobs and business opportunities is in a few hands, despotism stands a good chance. Another sign of a poorly balanced economy is a taxation system that presses heaviest on those least able to pay. [animation money graphs wealth national revenue large incomes small incomes regressive taxation]

A larger part of a small income is spent on necessities such as food. Sales taxes on such necessities hit the small income harder. [pie charts pie graphs large income small income]

In the days of the salt tax, feudal despotisms were partly sustained by this and other (inaudible). [historical recreations Colonial North America taxation without representation]

A community rates low on an information scale when the press, radio, and other channels of communication are controlled by only a few people and when citizens have to accept what they are told. In communities of this kind, despotism stands a good chance. [uncontrolled media monopolies monopolization oligopolies Time Warner Disney ABC Capital Cities Westinghouse CBS NBC General Electric Fox News Corporation Turner CNN critical evaluation automatic acceptance]

See how a community trains its teachers. “Bear this in mind. Young people cannot be trusted to form their own opinions. This business about open-mindedness is nonsense. It’s a waste of time trying to teach students to think for themselves. It’s our job to tell ’em.” [lecturers mental discipline drill classrooms agreement nodding heads manufacturing consent consensus]

And when teachers put such training into practice, despotism stands a good chance. These children are being taught to accept uncritically whatever they are told. Questions are not encouraged. [students conformity conditioning brainwashing writing learning education]

“How can you ask such a question? Have you got a textbook?” “Yes Ma’am.” “Does it say here that our law courts are always just?” “Yes Ma’am.” “Then how dare you question the fact? Sit down.”

And so we aren’t surprised when – “But it must be true. I saw it in this book right here.”

And if books and newspapers and the radio are efficiently controlled, the people will read and accept exactly what the few in control want them to. Government censorship is one form of control. [Ministry of Propaganda plaques signs doors windows Internal Censorship censors rubber stamps passed by censor deletions blue pencils manuscripts]
A newspaper which breaks a government censorship rule can be suspended. It is also possible for newspapers and other forms of communication to be controlled by private interests. [The Daily Citizen press control proclamations This Newspaper is Suspended editors journalists newspaper offices Advertising Manager Mgr.]

“I thought I told you to kill that story. It’ll cost us a lot of advertising.” “If that story goes out, I quit.” “All right.” [firings]

What sort of community do you live in? Where would you place it on a democracy/despotism scale? To find out, you can rate it on a respect scale and a power scale. And to find out what way it is likely to go in the future, you can rate it on economic distribution and information scales. [cities wipes]

The lower your community rates on economic distribution and information scales, the lower it is likely to rate on respect and power scales and thus to approach despotism.

What happens in a single community is the problem of its own citizens, but it is also the problem of us all because as communities go, so goes the nation. [animation United States]

[Encyclopaedia Britannica Films Inc. Bring the World to the Classroom. end titles]

Politics, Political science, Democracy, Despotism, Dictatorship, Censorship, Newspapers, Rubber stamps, Freedom of the press, Communism, Germany (Nazi) Third Reich, Students, Teachers, Political Indoctrination, Propaganda, Mass communications, Animation Graphic design Cartoons, Animation Scales (sliding), Information (visual), Surrealism, Capitalism, Economics

 

continue reading source: https://archive.org/details/Despotis1946

 


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Harper Party Spies

To hear the Harper Party loyalists talk, you’d think that the Liberal Party of Canada has a problem. Yet another Liberal has spoken words that don’t echo the words of their leader.

And this is a problem?

Let’s set the scene. A woman asked retired General Andrew Leslie about his thoughts regarding the Israeli Palestine situation. The General gave a long answer including the need for Israel to be able to defend herself from terrorists, such as Hamas, but he also blamed the Israeli military for the deaths of civilians in Palestine.

I guess the General didn’t realize that he was talking with a Harper Party spy. Looking to get whatever dirt she could dig up on a noted Liberal contender for the 2015 Election and she hit the mother lode! This guy thinks the Israeli military shouldn’t have killed Palestinian civilians!

What a horrid thought. No mere MP much less a noted advisor to Stephen Harper would say such a thing. No, Stephen’s troops would blindly parrot the talking points issued from the unelected, appointed, not ready for big boy pants crew in the PMO.

Nope, they’d swallow their gumption and say whatever their Leader says they should say. Here are your pompoms and here’s your script: “Israel is good, Palestinians are bad and they all deserve to die.”

Rah Team!

The problem with the Harper Party antics is that General Leslie is right. As a professional soldier, trained in the military, he knows the rules and one of the biggies is that every effort must be undertaken to prevent civilian casualties or “collateral damage” as they like to say today.

What is even more horrid is the tactics that the Harper Team are stooping to in an attempt to try and demonize the Liberal Party.

While the Harper Party complains about the liberal media and “gotcha journalism” they are stepping down several rungs with these Secret Agent X19 tactics. Sneak a recording device in and try and get the enemy to say something that can be used against them. And then try to get the so called incriminating evidence into the public eye.

The Harperistas didn’t send their ill gotten booty to the media, not at first; they tried to hand it over to a prominent Jewish organization who put the kibosh on that plan. They were smart enough to not get involved in petty politics, maybe they can read the writing on the wall or maybe they just don’t like the idea of being used as a dupe for the Harper Party?

So they went with Plan B. Hand the audio over to the Sun News Network, the finest investigative journalists this side of 1972 Pravda. And the Sun News Crew was more than happy to jump all over this.

The Harper People crow about this, they see nothing wrong, they just want people to know what goes on in the opposing camp. What they don’t say is that this is putting a chilling effect on Democracy in Canada.

It is hard enough to get a politician to say anything in public now, they don’t want to annoy the Boss, but in the future, every politician of every stripe is going to be guarded in what they say lest there be a secret agent nearby. And when they’re done with the named politicians, they can start on those who are merely considering running for office.

Seriously, it is hard to get a politician to comment on the weather anymore. What with having to consider if this stretch of warm weather is bad for the farmers and so on it takes them tem minutes to come up with “Yep, nice weather.” It is getting to the point that some politicians cannot scratch their butt without a note from the PMO.

Real boats rock, Steve. Having people within a party who hold differing opinions is not a bad thing, it is part of Democracy. Any Leader, be it in politics or business that surrounds themselves with kowtowing lackies soon finds themselves on the outside looking in.

But your echo boxes are half right. How can Canadians decide on which candidate is best for their riding if we don’t know how they think and what they feel about the issues that we care about? Simply put they can’t.

I am comfortable in voting for someone who has the wits and courage to speak their mind in public. It means that they have the ability to speak up for me in the House and in the Caucus. These are not your people, Steve.

They are mine.

And for what it’s worth, there are an awful lot of people like me who think that the killing and wounding of civilians is wrong. It doesn’t matter which side does it.

I like General Leslie a hell of a lot more that any echo box you have to offer.

Ta ta for now,
BC

#Censorship + #Harper + #Israel vs #Palestine – (#GolanHeights + #Syria) = #cdnpoli #Error404

Chronology of Events leading up to Stephen Harper and the Harper Regime’s hurried trip to Israel

The premise of this investigative chronological summary timeline is based upon the questions and evidence raised after reviewing and following up on an couple of articles recently published, Conservative party launches website to promote Stephen Harper’s first official Middle East trip by Jason Fekete, Published January 14, 2014 and Foreign Affairs website at odds with PMs comments in support of Israel, group says By Lee Berthiaume, Postmedia News January 15, 2014, regarding the current Harper Government’s Foreign Policy vs. the previous Canadian Government’s Foreign Policy as it relates to Israels economy, the Occupied Territories and Golan Heights.

The timing of a couple of hastily, oddly removed and edited, censored information, that were previously accessible and available via the official tax-payer funded Government of Canada’s websites that are currently being redirected to 404 “Page Not Found” error pages. Along with the PMO based Senate Scandal and past Harper Party electoral shenanigans, the timeline of this censorship is suspicious at best. Once combined with couple of new dedicated websites launched by the Harper Party that utilize taxpayer-funded government assets to promote support for Israel while propagandizing it’s foreign policies domestically and abroad, it gets worse considering how the Harper Government treats Canada’s Veterans.

This certainly appears to be a coup d’etat of sorts by Big Oil driven Fracking special interest groups in an apparent effort to capitalize on the chaotic and deadly situation in Syria, that was encouraged and instigated by the Harper Regime, in-order to subversively exploit the occupied Golan Heights while leveraging, manipulating and diverting Asian, Middle Eastern, African political support and financial assets between various taxpayer-funded government missions and groups domestically and abroad.

Questions to Ponder

  • Who is currently dictating and scripting Canada’s Foreign Policy and who is benefiting from this speculative Economic Diplomacy?
  • What are the costs and motivators behind the timeline and sequence of events?
  • When was the recently updated propaganda narrative mandated?
  • Where is the investment funding coming from and where will the profits go?
  • Why is there so much secrecy in the present and censorship of the past?
  • How does this “timing” affect Canada and Canadian interests in the future?

Please review the following trilogy of topics and chronological sequence of articles, archives, caches and snapshots of retrieved pages, paying close attention to the removed text, links and information from the Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada websites:

Canada and the Middle East Peace Process

Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Explanations of vote on United Nations resolutions concerning the Middle East: Canada’s Explanation of Vote: The Syrian Golan


August 2011

Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Date Modified: 03Jun2011
Date Cached: 11Aug2011
Date Retrieved: 15Jan2014
Note that the text and link to the “Explanations of vote on United Nations resolutions concerning the Middle East” is included.

Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Cached 11Aug2011
http://www.international.gc.ca/name-anmo/peace_process-processus_paix/canadian_policy-politique_canadienne.aspx?lang=eng&view=d

March 2012

Syria’s Assad ‘must go,’ Baird warns

Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird condemned the continued violence and aid impasse in Syria as heavy shelling continued in Homs over the weekend, saying that Canada is considering new measures to make clear that Syrian president Bashar Assad “must go.”

By Edmonton Journal March 5, 2012
http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=d4095b41-bb18-4232-902b-37b79fe87982&sponsor=dumpharper


July 2012

Two Sides of the Same Flag: How Israel’s Natural Gas Will Change the World

By Marin Katusa, 17 Jul 2012
https://www.caseyresearch.com/print/two-sides-same-flag-how-israels-natural-gas-will-change-world


August 2012

The Russian gas giant that haunts Europe – and Israel

Visiting Russian leader Valdimir Putin last month reportedly proposed bilateral energy cooperation, but a Haifa University expert warns that partnerships with the state-owned company are not of equals.

By Avi Bar-Eli | Aug. 1, 2012 | 5:20 AM
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:gJhuYxdJ1L0J:http://www.haaretz.com/business/the-russian-gas-giant-that-haunts-europe-and-israel-1.455117


September 2012

Israel and Russia join forces over gas

Lawrence Solomon | September 7, 2012 9:00 PM ET
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:n4RDS1OJsccJ:http://opinion.financialpost.com/2012/09/07/lawrence-solomon-israel-and-russia-join-forces-over-gas/


Syria rebels get tactical help from Toronto IT specialist Behind the scenes, armchair military strategists from U.S., Canada crowdsource a war

CBC News Posted: Sep 26, 2012 9:46 PM ET Last Updated: Sep 26, 2012 9:43 PM ET
http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/syria-rebels-get-tactical-help-from-toronto-it-specialist-1.1149361


Crowdsourcing a War

The National | Sep 26, 2012
http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/TV+Shows/The+National/ID/2284250890/


October 2012

Explanations of vote on United Nations resolutions concerning the Middle East

UN Votes and Statements

Please note that “59th Session: 2004” currently redirects to a 404 “Page Not found” error message.
Date Modified: 01Mar2012
Date Cached: 20Oct2012
Date Retrieved: 15Jan2014

http://www.international.gc.ca/name-anmo/un-onu/index.aspx?lang=eng&view=d
http://www.international.gc.ca/name-anmo/un-onu/index.aspx?lang=eng&view=d

Canada’s Explanation of Vote

The Syrian Golan

Date Modified: 17Jun2009
Date Cached: 20Oct2012
Date Retrieved: 15Jan2014
Please note that “UN Votes and Statements General Assembly 59th Session: 2004” currently redirects to a 404 “Page Not found” error message.

Canada's Explanation of Vote The Syrian Golan: Cached 20Oct2012
http://www.international.gc.ca/name-anmo/un-onu/session_59_2004/explanation-explication_59_33.aspx?lang=eng&view=d

February 2013

Israel approves drilling in contested Golan Heights ahead of Obama visit Provided by The Canadian Press

By Canadian Press | Feb 21, 2013
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:6FNJOoyLhIAJ:http://www.ipolitics.ca/2013/02/21/israel-approves-drilling-in-contested-golan-heights-ahead-of-obama-visit/


Israel grants Golan exploration licence

By John Reed in Jerusalem, February 21, 2013 2:27 pm
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:CBc1yudcUDIJ:http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/471a183a-7c28-11e2-bf52-00144feabdc0.html


Israeli Licence to Cheney-Linked Energy Firm on Golan Heights Raises Eyebrows

By Jim Lobe | WASHINGTON, Feb 23 2013
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Vmn-z7nbwlsJ:http://www.ipsnews.net/2013/02/israeli-licence-to-cheney-linke-energy-firm-on-golan-heights-raises-eyebrows/


April 2013

Canada and the Middle East Peace Process

Date Modified: 26Oct2012
Date Cached: 26Apr2013
Date Retrieved: 15Jan2014
Note that the text and link to the “Explanations of vote on United Nations resolutions concerning the Middle East” is included.

Canada and the Middle East Peace Process: Cached 26Apr2013
http://www.international.gc.ca/name-anmo/peace_process-processus_paix/index.aspx?lang=eng

Israel in gas talks with Russia

Russian companies are examining options of participating in the development of Israeli gas, the Prime Minister’s Office says.

29 October 13 14:48, Amiram Barkat
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:nf8ts1GiJDEJ:http://www.globes.co.il/serveen/globes/docview.asp?did=1000889580


May 2013

Canada and Israel — best friends forever?

Why is Ottawa so extraordinarily supportive of the Jewish state? Has the Harper administration gone too far, and cost itself influence in the Arab world? And would a change of government see an altered stance?

By Raphael Ahren May 19, 2013
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:S11NKe9XBAwJ:http://www.timesofisrael.com/canada-and-israel-best-friends-forever/


September 2013

Shale: A key to Israel’s future

by Neil Goldstein, Guest Columnist Sep 09, 2013
http://thejewishchronicle.net/view/full_story/23570187/article-Shale–A-key-to-Israel-s-future?instance=secondary_stories_right_column


October 2013

Canada and the Middle East Peace Process

Date Modified: 29Apr2013
Date Cached: 05Oct2013
Date Retrieved: 15Jan2014
Note that the text and link to the “Explanations of vote on United Nations resolutions concerning the Middle East” has been removed.

Canada and the Middle East Peace Process: Cached 05Oct2013
http://www.international.gc.ca/name-anmo/peace_process-processus_paix/index.aspx?lang=eng

November 2013

Stephen Harper planning first visit to Israel, will announce details at Jewish National Fund dinner

John Ivison | November 29, 2013 | Last Updated: Nov 29 6:40 PM ET
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:97Lhd0mynMwJ:http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/11/29/stephen-harper-planning-first-visit-to-israel-will-announce-details-at-jewish-national-fund-dinner/


Stephen Harper to be feted for support of Israel at Negev dinner

Bird sanctuary in Israel to be named after Harper

The Canadian Press Posted: Nov 30, 2013 9:09 PM ET Last Updated: Dec 01, 2013 5:55 PM ET
http://www.cbc.ca/m/touch/canada/story/1.2446730


December 2013

Stephen Harper breaks into song after Israel trip announcement

The PM belted out his own rendition of the Who’s “The Seeker” and a string of other classic songs.

The Canadian Press Published on Sun Dec 01 2013
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:b1n42kxHyacJ:http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/12/01/stephen_harper_breaks_into_song_after_israel_trip_announcement.html


Israel Wants Harper’s Advice On Natural Gas: Ambassador

CP | By Mike Blanchfield, The Canadian Press Posted: 12/03/2013 5:03 pm EST | Updated: 12/04/2013 11:23 am EST
http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/12/03/harper-israel-rafi-barak-natural-gas_n_4380127.html?view=print


Israel’s best friend: Stephen Harper

The Prime Minister’s support seems less strategic than a reflection of his deeply held personal beliefs

by Nick Taylor-Vaisey on Wednesday, December 4, 2013 3:05pm
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:IUkP5y_nqc8J:http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/12/04/israels-best-friend-stephen-harper/


Will Egypt Purchase Gas from Israel via Cyprus?

Karen Ayat, December 05th, 2013 12:15am
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:hz2AJRD6mUsJ:http://www.naturalgaseurope.com/will-egypt-purchase-gas-from-israel-via-cyprus-14407


Israel seeks to tap Canada’s expertise in natural gas: new ambassador

David Lazarus, Staff Reporter, Monday, December 23, 2013
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:Anw74gRhUQMJ:http://cjnews.com/privacy-policy?q=node/119772


Putin’s Mediterranean Move

The race is on to exploit off-shore energy around Israel, Syria, Lebanon, and Cyprus — and Moscow is crashing the party.

BY Keith Johnson, DECEMBER 27, 2013
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9q1uBbLU33UJ:http://www.foreignpolicy.com/articles/2013/12/27/putin_s_mediterranean_move


Israel: Gas, Oil and Trouble in the Levant

29.12.2013
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:RK6t-hMdUuQJ:http://english.pravda.ru/world/asia/29-12-2013/126507-israel_gas-0/


January 2014

24 Seven

Jan 2-8, 2014
Transcript: http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/video/34741/transcript

Video: http://www.pm.gc.ca/eng/videos-ctg/34741


Overhaul of Israel’s Economy Offers Lessons for United States

By STEVEN DAVIDOFF, January 7, 2014, 4:54 pm
http://dealbook.nytimes.com/2014/01/07/overhaul-of-israels-economy-offers-lessons-for-united-states/


Canada names a partisan voice as new ambassador to Israel

By David Akin, Parliamentary Bureau Chief First posted: Wednesday, January 08, 2014 02:43 PM EST | Updated: Wednesday, January 08, 2014 04:20 PM EST
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:YPYVmeo3dtYJ:http://www.torontosun.com/2014/01/08/canada-names-a-partisan-voice-as-new-ambassador-to-israel


Baird defends appointment of new pro-Israeli ambassador ahead of Harper trip

by Mike Blanchfield, The Canadian Press on Wednesday, January 8, 2014 5:13pm
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:lo4qIHMtbwwJ:http://www2.macleans.ca/2014/01/08/baird-defends-appointment-of-new-pro-israeli-ambassador-ahead-of-harper-trip/


Toronto lawyer Vivian Bercovici is Canada’s next ambassador to Israel as Harper government ‘affirms unfailing support’ for Jewish state

Stewart Bell | January 8, 2014 | Last Updated: Jan 8 5:51 PM ET
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:NcQRblQW4iYJ:http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/01/08/toronto-lawyer-vivian-bercovici-to-serve-as-canadas-next-ambassador-to-israel-in-latest-sign-of-ottawas-approach-to-middle-east/


Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Date Modified: 26Oct2012
Google Cached: 09Jan2014
Date Retrieved: 15Jan2014
Note that the text and link to the “Explanations of vote on United Nations resolutions concerning the Middle East” has not been removed.

Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Cached 09Jan2014
http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:_n8LTF1AYFkJ:http://www.international.gc.ca/name-anmo/peace_process-processus_paix/canadian_policy-politique_canadienne.aspx%3Flang%3Deng

Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict

Date Modified: 13Jan2014
Date Retrieved: 15Jan2014
Note that the text and link to the “Explanations of vote on United Nations resolutions concerning the Middle East” has been removed.

Canadian Policy on Key Issues in the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Retrieved 15Jan2014
http://www.international.gc.ca/name-anmo/peace_process-processus_paix/canadian_policy-politique_canadienne.aspx?lang=eng&view=d

PM Harper embarks on first trip to the Middle East

January 13,2014
http://www.stephenharper.ca/pm-harper-embarks-on-first-trip-to-the-middle-east/


Conservative party launches website to promote Stephen Harper’s first official Middle East trip

Jason Kenney will join Harper on trip that includes Israel, West Bank and Jordan

By Jason Fekete, Postmedia News January 14, 2014
http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=9386948&sponsor=dumpharper


Foreign Affairs website at odds with PM’s comments in support of Israel, group says

By Lee Berthiaume, Postmedia News January 15, 2014
http://www.canada.com/story_print.html?id=9387318&sponsor=dumpharper


Harper’s Israel Trip Comes Amid Changes Back Home

Althia Raj, Posted: 01/15/2014 11:08 am EST | Updated: 01/15/2014 1:55 pm EST
https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:zpP9PP8KJ8UJ:http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/01/15/stephen-harper-israel-jewish-support_n_4598535.html


Stephen Harper’s deceased father a key influence in PM’s support for Israel

PM has called his father the ‘greatest influence’ on his life

Mark Kennedy, Published: January 15, 2014, 4:10 pm
www.vancouversun.com/story_print.html?id=9392305&sponsor=dumpharper


Explanations of vote on United Nations resolutions concerning the Middle East

Date Modified: 26Jun2013
Date Cached: 03Jul2013
Date Retrieved 15Jan2014
Note that the page “Explanations of vote on United Nations resolutions concerning the Middle East last modified 26Oct2013” now redirects to a 404 “Page Not Found” error message.

Explanations of vote on United Nations resolutions concerning the Middle East: Retrieved 15Jan2014
http://www.international.gc.ca/name-anmo/un-onu/index.aspx?lang=eng&view=d

Canada’s Explanation of Vote The Syrian Golan

Date Modified: 26Jun2013
Date Retrieved 15Jan2014
Note that the page “Canada’s Explanation of Vote The Syrian Golan last modified 26Oct2013” now redirects to a 404 “Page Not Found” error message.

Canada's Explanation of Vote The Syrian Golan: Retrieved 15Jan2014
http://www.international.gc.ca/name-anmo/un-onu/session_59_2004/explanation-explication_59_33.aspx?lang=eng&view=d

Russia Finds Path Into Mediterranean Gas Through Syria

Christopher Coats, Energy Contributor | 1/16/2014 @ 11:47AM
http://www.forbes.com/sites/christophercoats/2014/01/16/russia-finds-path-into-mediterranean-gas-through-syria/


Syrian energy deal puts Russia in gas-rich Med

Jan. 16, 2014 at 3:56 PM
http://www.upi.com/Business_News/Energy-Resources/2014/01/16/Syrian-energy-deal-puts-Russia-in-gas-rich-Med/UPI-32731389905770/


Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper Is One of Israel’s Strongest Backers — But Why?

Conservative Leader Visits Jewish State for First Time

By Ron Csillag Published January 16, 2014
http://forward.com/articles/191070/canadian-prime-minister-stephen-harper-is-one-of-i/


Another Canadian jihadi reported dead in Syria

By Michael Woods, OTTAWA CITIZEN January 16, 2014
http://www.ottawacitizen.com/story_print.html?id=9397373&sponsor=dumpharper



Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

#UpInSmoke: #Harper’s #CPC and #Ford’s #FordNation Ideological Subversion of #cdnpoli #senca

It seems as if “We the People” have found ourselves in quite a predicament and the implications are far reaching. Does the cost of “power” consolidation to an “individual” include servitude to foreign investment schemes that can simply “buy” that one individuals influence? Is Canada simply “closed” for “face to face” business domestically so that it may be politically “sold” to the highest faceless international bidders in a globalized fire sale? Why are the seemingly exponential and expanding connections to organized criminal activity and undue influence within the halls of Government being allowed?

PM Harper’s houses of disrepute By Paul E Kennedy — National Newswatch — Nov 19 2013
“The Prime Minister bears responsibility for having brought the two Houses of Parliament to their knees and turned them into houses of disrepute. This situation could only have come to pass because government MPs and Senators have placed narrow partisan interests and blind loyalty to the leader of the day before their responsibility to the people of Canada and the ideals of justice and democracy.”

The real problem now lies with how the various media conglomerates and social media outlets decide to continue spinning lies to divert our collective eyes from the ultimate prize. Surely another riddle or question to ponder is not the option but another perspective and direction is desperately needed. Somehow we need to force the narrative towards and away from the clown prince of the neo-conservative movement since their ultra-far-right agenda is forging ahead behind this 3 ring circus that they have spent billions of our tax dollars to create. They are collectively proving themselves to be the both sides of the “wars” they have waged in our collective names and successfully downloaded the costs to us. As a refresher, below are the fundamental “sales pitches” of the international ultra-right-wing investor to acquire our tax dollars:

  1. War on Crime
  2. War on Drugs
  3. War on Terror

Now is the time for the collective will of “We the People”, the true majority, to set aside our seemingly petty disagreements and understand our adversaries adversary and their tactics. The fact that the Harper Regime has not tossed Rob Ford under the bus is due to the fact that they desperately need the Ford Nation to pursue their mandate. This will prove to be self-defeating as they have lost all control and need the drunken buffoonery to continue and could care less of the well being of Rob Ford but certainly do NOT care about his wife, children, family or friends. They are proving themselves to be the greedy malcontents that they really are by fueling the criminal side by way of the subversion of the Constitution and Charter to their own needs.

“We the People” need to oxidize their narrative, cut off their funds and smoke ’em outta their caves by simply reviewing and investigating further, in no specific order, a few points that are glaringly missing in the media reporting these days which stifles it’s growth via social media:

  • PMO Scandal(s) – Investigations into Frauds upon the Government, Breach of Trust, Conspiracy, Blackmail, etc.
  • Aboriginal, Indigenous and First Nations – Education, health care, missing women, treaty rights, human rights, land rights, resource development rights, international investor involvement in illegal police state measures.
  • Senate Scandal(s) – In addition to attempts to prevent representative and truly transparent reform, once the Supreme Court Justices began pondering and questioning the future implications of the potential for a potentially undemocratically elected majority caucus to create the conditions for a dictatorship, everyone shut the story down.
  • National Security – Missing millions from border security and community resources, PMO compromised, Rob Ford compromised, Foreign Policy, selective investment in Human Rights at home and abroad.
  • Robocalls Scandal(s) – Puzzling, but hey, due process usually catches up with reality after the next election cycle.
  • CETA – Skimpy draft text presentation is unacceptable at best, not to mention it conflicts with NAFTA and other agreements with the US.
  • TPP – Having to wait for “Anonymous” sources and WikiLeaks for leaked drafts of secret long term “trade” agreements that affect everyone is criminal.
  • Electronic Surveillance – As other Nation and States seem to be taking proactive responses to at least pacify the citizenry, having to wait for “Anonymous” sources and Snowden for details is ridiculous.
  • Crime, Punishment, Immigration and Detention – Selective systems rife with corruption and abuse. Unconstitutional omnibus legislation, horrific conditions within the prison systems, overburdened court systems, under representation of the detained, expanded police powers, out-sourcing and privatizing detention services.
  • Currency Wars and Trade Wars – Setting the pretext and domestic conditions to assure that the “budget plan” gets interrupted by global “economic” conditions. Easily done by way of an over valued dollar that encourages quick short term, low to no interest foreign investment in the housing, financial and resource extraction bubbles at the expense of the tourism and export sectors.
  • Tax Evasion Haven – Been a while since we have explore offshore but this ties into the Economic Extraction Action Plan. More appropriately summarized as the Plan of Action to Extract as much liquidity out of the Canadian economy as possible before the inevitable bursting of the bubbles.
  • Veterans Issues – Lest we forget…

Now, getting back to the familiar and failing narrative, the diversion that is Rob Ford, who actually defines the neo-conservative caucus by way of accurate representation. Just take a peek Stateside and look into the crowds that comprise Koch Nation by way of the ultra-right-wing elements of the neo-conservative Tea Party movement. You’ll notice the same divide between “traditional” conservative values and “ideological” values cloaked within the conservative context.

One may wonder what, or why, or how, any of these issues could converge and/or be interconnected and why the thought is never allowed to cross their minds that “Stephen Harper” may not have the best long term interests in “his” mind for Canada. Now how many times “he” get’s caught up in “his” own lies, his caucus seems blinded to what is occurring before their collective eyes. But then again any good conman, crook or criminal knows that for the most part, the most obvious is always the least obvious. This is where the msm narrative needs to be injected with some facts that they are careful to mention in passing but not fully explore. No matter how hard they try, proper chronological documentation elsewhere will assure that facts will not die.

The fact remains that a small minority of ideological internationalist ultra-neo-conservative loyalists have convinced the majority of  persons with “conservative values” that in order to “win” an election they need the ultra-right-wing Reform/Alliance members led by Stephen Harper. To this end to “win” an election and an eventual majority to govern with authority, they became willingly subservient to the whims of a “leader” without having to admit they have enslaved themselves to a “master” that is controlled by international investors that do not have a vested interest in Canada.

 


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Canada, I Fought For You and You Let Me Down

Just after the seventh anniversary of “the incident,” I write this piece to share with you the ordeal of a veteran trying to get his pension; this is my story:

On September 4, 2006 I, along with 60 other soldiers, was accidently strafed by an American A-10 Warthog during Operation Medusa. During that hazy morning, poor communication with the ground forces and those in the air, improper guidance (the airplane was told to “look for the fire” while the man on the ground was unaware that the Canadian position behind him had just lit a fire), and a trigger-happy pilot changed my life forever. While eating my breakfast, without warning I was tossed into the air like a rag doll, landing face-first on top of a rocky mountain. I lost consciousness immediately. Upon waking, to my horror, my right arm was flopping uncontrollably. “My worst nightmare is coming true,” I thought to myself, “I have lost my right arm. Why else would it be flopping around like a fish out of water?” Fortunately, when I went to grab it, I realized that it was still attached to my body; I checked my other appendages, and when I discovered they were all attached, I let out a huge sigh of relief. That is when the blood began to pour onto my face.

I do not know if I had been bleeding previously while I conducted my extremity check, but I do know this: once I sighed in relief, a fountain of thick, dark, red blood began to run over my face. My initial instinct was to try and catch the blood, save it, if you will. It was only after I had both of my hands overflowing that I realized my folly and I dropped the coagulating blood onto the dusty ground. I can still see the scabbing mess and sand mixing together. I knew I was injured, and though I was unaware of how badly, the sight of all that blood told me to get help. The injury to my head was so severe that I could not lift it, let alone my body, so I dragged myself, my face on the ground scraping against the jagged rocks as I tried to seek medical assistance. When I reached Master Corporal Jeff Rainey I heard him ask people around me how one “treats a penetrating head injury?” He gingerly placed a military issued field dressing over my open wound – although I was unaware, my skull had been blown open and my brain was exposed – and offered me words of support. The good Master Corporal would soon go down from shock due to his own injuries, and my care and life were placed in the hands of Private Greg Bird. As he too offered me words of support, I came to the realization that I was going to die.

In that moment, lying on that mountain in the arms of Private Bird, I made a decision that haunts me to this day. As I lay there bleeding to death, waiting for a military medical evacuation, I gave up. The most precious gift one is given, I turned my back on. I made my peace with God, stopped caring, and began to send telepathic messages to my loved ones back in Canada. It was at this time that two of my friends from Windsor, Ont., Corporals Jerry Day and Mike Farrah, carried me on a stretcher to a casualty collection point. Corporal Day would later tell me that he could see the yellow liquid from my brain pouring out of my ears and head. Literally caked in my blood, both men kissed my face, thinking that it was the last time they would see me alive.

From the collection point, I was airlifted to Camp Nathan Smith in Kandahar where I underwent a first surgery to clean up the damage the 30 mm, electrically charged, explosive, uranium-based bullet had done. Go to YouTube and search the devastation that the A-10 Warthog rains upon its victims. In just one second, 180 rounds – bullets the size of an average man’s forearm – spew death and destruction, and have the capacity to cut through metal like butter. Now imagine what the A-10 can do to humans who get in its way. My injuries from the friendly fire were so severe that when my aunt spoke to the doctor about to perform surgery on me in Afghanistan and asked him my chances of pulling through, he told her my odds of survival were 50:50.

From Kandahar I was flown to Landstuhl, Germany where I had a second surgery; a week after that I was in Sunnybrook Hospital in Toronto. Overall I would have 5% of my brain removed. A piece of uranium, about the size of a water bottle cap, was too deep to retrieve and is still buried in my head. If I could describe the pain of the swelling and the headaches that morphine often could not mask I would, but I fear my writing ability could never give the pain I endured the justice it deserves. To feel your heart beat in your skull, each pulse a staggering blow — some 60 plus times per minute – is something that I would never wish upon even my worst enemies. The injury robbed me of some of the most basic functions, the daily things most of us take for granted: reading, writing, walking, and talking. My speech was slurred, I needed a walker to move ten feet, and I was terrified — “what if they did not come back,” I thought. “I am 22 years old and now I could very well be handicapped.” The only positives I can take from this experience were my will to recover and my family; without these two, I do not know how I could have improved.

Thankfully, through rigorous occupational and physical therapies, I was able to regain these basic life skills; however, there are lingering effects. My short-term memory is all but gone, thus my long-term memory is severely lacking. Conversations are had twice, appointments are forgotten, names are never remembered, bills are not paid, days are lost, and plans are made on top of other plans. I do not remember to take out food to thaw, I leave laundry in the washing machine for days, and reading articles for school is a nightmare. I need to write down lists and put appointments in my phone — if an event is not marked down then forget about me being there. In May, I met 12 new people at one time and it was only after over a week of constant contact that I was able to remember all of their names.

But that is not all of the negative side effects my injury has caused me. I also fatigue when I mentally exert myself, with high levels of concentration akin to running a marathon. If I have to focus for longer than two hours, I need eight to recover. When I get tired I am miserable and useless, the fatigue forcing me to lie down. When I push myself too far, I shut down and cannot focus. I was going to start this letter last night after working for eight hours, but was too tired to even begin. The fatigue really handicaps my ability to push myself, and if I do not take those necessary breaks I become angry and irritable — friends and family don’t want to be around me, they do not understand what it is like to be so tired that falling asleep is the only way for me to be normal again. No amount of coffee, Red Bull, or other pick me ups will help. When I push myself too far I know I have to stop and rest. Reading for hours with no break is like climbing a mountain for me. Climbing a mountain would not be a problem, but reading a book about climbing mountains is another story.

My temper is another point of contention, and was sparked with “the incident” in 2006. The frustration of my injury was hard to cope with and thus I took it out on those around me. I have alienated family, lost relationships, and made enemies out of friends. Learning to cope and seeking help has led to a recent diagnosis of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Having both a head injury and PTSD has been a trial in itself, but coming to terms with it was a journey that I had to take, one that I am glad I do not have to go through again. The two play off each other in a symbiotic relationship: I fatigue, therefore I am angry, and once I am too tired to fight the PTSD, it comes out.

For a soldier, the battle does not end once you leave the warzone. I will be fighting the effects of my injuries from “the incident” for the rest of my life, and that is why I am writing this piece. Over the past seven years I have been fighting another battle, one for a pension that befits the injury and the effects that the terrible day in Afghanistan left me with. I have sought the help of my MP, doctors, the media, the military ombudsmen, and Veterans Affairs, but they have all left me no further ahead than when I started, and with the startling conclusion that 5% of a soldier’s brain is worth a mere $22,000.

After my injury, the paperwork was endless, and I was warned by fellow veterans to stay on top of it, because “you don’t want to fall between the cracks in this system.” At the time, however, I was more worried about recovering — walking and talking — than paperwork surrounding my pension. But as I began to recover and seek the financial compensation I believed I was due, I realized that I was nearing the edge of a crater. In Windsor, Ont., a border town that might as well be a thousand miles outside of Canada, soldiers are forgotten. The desolate outpost that is Windsor Veterans Affairs has been deemed obsolete, and thanks to budget cuts all the veterans that depend on its services will be forced to travel over an hour and a half away to London by 2014. In 2006, I submitted four claims of CF 98s (military forms that soldiers fill out when injured) to Windsor Veterans Affairs for injuries sustained that fateful day. In addition to the head injury and the PTSD, I was also shot in the back and buttocks.

From here they said they wanted to wait until I was “fully recovered” or deemed militarily fit for duty before making a decision on how much to compensate me. Although I had taken the necessary steps and submitted the proper paperwork, the process would have to begin once again when I was medically fit. The more time that went by, the further down the cracks I fell. I then had an appointment to get assessed by a doctor, where he did little better than a physical and saw me for all of five minutes. The months dragged on, and eventually Veterans Affairs came to the decision that I have spent years refuting.

Before I go any further I feel that an explanation about the compensation, appeal, and assessment process is due. According to the “meat chart” of the Canadian Forces, there are pre-determined monetary amounts that the military will pay for the loss of a body part — an arm or a leg will earn the highest amount, an award of $250,000. Unfortunately for me, the brain — arguably the most vital organ in the human body — is not on this “meat chart” and therefore, is not worth anything. Further, Canadian soldiers can request unlimited reassessments of their injuries, but can appeal a decision only once. This information was not made available to me until just recently and I was going to use my only appeal without being told that it would make more sense to get a reassessment. This is one of many examples of the ineptitude of Veteran Affairs Canada.

The pension system is undeniably flawed. In 2002 the Liberal government realized that they could save millions of dollars by doing away with monthly compensation payments and instead giving lump-sum payments to veterans of more recent engagements. However, each injury is assessed at a percentage of the maximum allowable reimbursement: $250,000. My injury remains listed at 10 percent. For some reason, I received $22,000, rather than $25,000, which is 10 percent of $250,000. I don’t understand the math Veterans Affairs uses.

Since the changes made by the Liberal government, the new Conservative government have pointed out that the current pension system is a Liberal mandate for which they are not responsible. However, they have yet to do anything to change this system and have only muddied the waters further by refusing to reform the clearly flawed Veterans organization. Veterans Affairs is headquartered out of the way in Charlottetown, Prince Edward Island, and is in complete shambles. When I got my original settlement in 2008 I was given a cheque — no explanation, no break down, just a cheque. $22,000 was all I got; a slap to the face, 10 percent of the money to retire on. In comparison, there are clerks in the military — those who sit behind a desk doing paperwork — who received 13 percent of the $250,000 for the carpal tunnel syndrome in their wrists.

To say I was angered by the decision of Veterans Affairs is an understatement. Betrayed, hurt, and horrified are even better ways to describe my reaction. I had done everything the Canadian Forces had asked of me. I constantly defended the honour of the Forces while at home, and fought fiercely overseas. And yet, when it came time to repay me for my personal service, I received nothing. I immediately rejected the offer from Veterans Affairs and awaited a reply about what I had to do from there. But as I waited, I continued to fall further down the cracks; my story was no longer newsworthy, and I was forgotten just like all the soldiers had warned me I might be. In 2010 I decided to contact the military ombudsman who told me that there was nothing he could do, and that I should contact Veterans Affairs.

I did just that and again I said that I wanted to appeal my decision. They said that I could choose from a list of military-approved legal representation, but my lawyer would not be covered because they did not want to pay the gas mileage for him to travel to and from London. Furthermore, they said that they would contact me with the date and time for my appeal, but nothing happened. When I called back, Veterans Affairs produced more excuses, saying they had no idea I had wanted an appeal, or that my file was being held because I had not signed a release; in essence, I felt I was getting the run around. It was incompetence on a level of criminal negligence. My aunt says it best: “As a small business owner, if I ran my company like the military I would be in jail.”

From here I contacted my Federal MP, the Honorable Jeff Watson, who, like everyone before him, admitted he knew little or nothing about the quagmire that is Veterans Affairs. He was of little use and the only thing that I took out of the meeting I had with him was that a Canadian soldier only gets to appeal his decision once but a refugee coming into Canada has multiple appeals to delay deportation. He also welcomed the idea of me going to the press, and so I approached the Windsor Star and asked them for help to share my story. Unfortunately, I was unhappy with the Star’s story and felt that its portrayal of me made my situation worse.

I did not think I could feel any lower, and finally it seemed fate would step in. My diagnosis with PTSD brought me to my case-manager Colleen, who put me in contact with Randy, a former Veterans Affairs employee who the Windsor Legion hired to help soldiers get their claims. Finally after six years of going in circles it felt like I was getting somewhere. I was being noticed and I was no longer falling between the cracks. I was then informed that before I appealed I was to ask for a reassessment because I could ask for as many of those as I wanted; I was told I should look at using my only appeal as a last ditch effort. This piece of information had not been made available to me in any way by Veterans Affairs. Throughout this journey they have said that they understand and are trying to help me, but as the seventh anniversary has passed, it does not feel like I am any further ahead than I was when the process began.

After my reassessment I felt better about my chances of being fairly assessed, but in February of 2013 I was informed that my reassessment came back with no change. I could not believe it — after years of trying to tell doctors, neurologists, Veterans Affairs officials, and anyone who would listen of the fatigue, short-term memory loss, and PTSD that plagues me, this was the result.

I was devastated. But it was only on August 12, 2013, that I reached my final level of exasperation. I received a phone call from a woman working on my case asking me about what I was appealing. She explained that Veterans Affairs had classified my injury under Table 20.58 for soldiers suffering from headaches — not penetrating head injuries, but headaches. A soldier afflicted with chronic migraines is in the same category as I am. The woman informed me that I am at the second highest level (a nine) and that she could move my pension up one level (to a thirteen) — which is the highest it can go — and would increase my pension by another 5 percent. Apparently to Veterans Affairs, getting shot in the head in Afghanistan is the same as working in an office and suffering from headaches, a detail they have kept from me over the past seven years. When I explained what I had been through to her, as I have done in this piece — the missing 5 percent of my brain, the surgeries, the lost faculties, the pain and suffering, the memory loss, and the fatigue — she informed me that she would do some research, because there is currently no standard monetary compensation for soldiers with brain injuries.

I am now at my wits’ end and this is what I want: no more Conservative gestures, no more moral outrages from the public that last less than a week, and an end to watching 90-year-old men who fought in Dieppe, Normandy, and Korea suffering through over 60 years of grief. My medals are in a sandwich bag at the bottom of my underwear drawer, and I now tell all prospective military recruits to explore all other options. The big green machine will eat you alive. I write this piece from the Mariana Trench because I have fallen as far between the cracks as one can possibly go. And I am not an isolated case; there are hundreds of soldiers like me. I want my brains in a jar and you can keep the comical pension you offer. I want to remember again, I want to write a little over give pages and not need a nap. I want dramatic changes to the Veterans Affairs office.

There have been shining lights amongst all the bad. My family, friends, Colleen, and Randy have all been there for me and for that I say: I give up. I am waving the white flag, beaten, battered, and heartbroken.

Canada, I fought for you and you let me down. There is nothing more I can do, and now I need to put my focus on the people I love. Lesson learned…hopefully I remember it.

Canada, I Fought For You and You Let Me Down

Bruce Moncur
Former Reservist
Posted: 11/10/2013 10:03 pm
continue reading source: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/bruce-moncur/remembrance-day-veterans_b_4220830.html


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

#UpInSmoke: #Harper’s #senca #SpeedBall’s #cdnpoli 4 #CPC while #Ford’s #onpoli #Freebase’s #topoli 4 #FordNation

So, here were are. “We the People” are posed with yet another riddle for us to ponder. How many right turns does it take to make a left, how many strikes ’til yer out and how many outs ’till ya switch sides? The plausibly deniable answer to all 3 of the previous 3 is deniably plausible to be 3 if you are 1 that subscribes to the squaring of all circles without the benefit of mathematics.

You see friends, if 1 attempts to square all circles without the benefit of math, one cannot notice that each “right” turn that 1 takes, leads “right” into 1 new direction without any perspective of the previous 1 “right” direction that was “left” behind. What’s more troubling is that when that same 1 direction moves even further to the “right” it not only leaves what was “left” behind, it moves even further away from the previous “right” it just “left” behind, which eventually leads “right” back through the “left” from which the “right” began.

Now, things get rather extreme exponentially if the “right” direction is constantly calculated as the only undeniably plausible direction that can be taken to solve a plausibly deniable problem as many other solutions remain “left” out of any actual problems to be solved. As you can see, this summary will be delivered by squaring circles with the power of 3’s for the benefit of those transfixed and entranced by neo-conservative strategists and communications experts propaganda.

Let’s explore 3 turns that can flip this squared narrative on it’s circular axis:

  1. Who, What, When, Where, Why and How has our Federal Government been compromised by the actions of those within Government, has national Security been compromised and if so, what are the collateral costs?
  2. What are the differences between an individual just making an honest mistake as opposed to a conspirator committing criminal acts under the influence or on behalf of others?
  3. What are the difference between an individual just smoking “crack” cocaine while under the influence as opposed to speed-balling or freebasing in addition to being under the influence?

It should be noted in the beginning that this is really about corruption within Government and organized criminal activities by Government officials that is being shrugged off as business as usual. More importantly, how does one square that circle within the confines of a “right” agenda that has designated those that are “left” of the mandate as enemies? Corruption within government is a problem that the entire global community is dealing with and the whole world is watching the subversion of government and manipulation of justice unfolding in real time right here in Canada at the hands of the Harper Government and their strategically placed minority Loyalists.

  1. What will it take for Harper Loyalists and Ford Nation to wake up to the criminality within Government and what are the collateral costs?
  2. What costs are Harper Loyalists and Ford Nation willing to download unto society to maintain their mandate and grip within Government and what are the collateral costs?
  3. What extremes will Harper Loyalists and Ford Nation go to maintain their grip upon Government to further their “right” agenda and what are the collateral costs?

Sound confusing? Well, that’s how both Stephen Harper and Rob Ford manipulate their almost cult like followers, or should we say congregations? The only prob;em is that their sharp turns along with their lack of attention, to the details, have serious and long lasting implications. The other problem is that it really appears as if neither of them actually do any of the governing, someone else does and that someone also writes the scripts, which may explain the lack of public outcry from the upper classes of society. It is almost as if “they” are either dazed and confused or know that neither Harper nor Ford matter at all. Both Ford and Harper know that considering they play the victim of the liberal media cards so often. Oddly, they both seem to give that same liberal media credit for providing them with previously unknown information.

  1. Is the “right” agenda saving or costing taxpayers money by downloading costs unto society and what are the collateral costs? Example: War on Drugs
  2. Is the “right” agenda saving or costing taxpayers money by promoting criminality within society and what are the collateral costs? Example: War on Crime
  3. Is the “right” agenda saving or costing taxpayers money by economically exploiting society and what are the collateral costs? Example: War on Terror

So how does any of this fit into the fable of 3’s above, well let us count the trilogy of ways below by way of a redundant series of 3’s.

  1. “We the People” need to peek behind the curtain that is the “Senate Scandal” and realize what the Harper Regime and Loyalists believe, or at least want the other 70%+ to believe that even though the Prime Ministers Office has been further implicated in Frauds on the Government, Breach of Trust and Conspiracy the suspension of the 3 Senators is justice served and the rest is all Nigel Wrights doing, period.
  2. “We the People” need to rinse, wash and repeat for the sake of Ford Nation in which we simply change the characters and actions.
  3. “We the People” need to tie them together in the most direct way to cause the least amount of confusion.

Turn 1: Conservative Party of Canada

Can the following 3 facts be undeniably plausible to the Conservative Party of Canada base and caucus if Stephen Harper, the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada, proclaims they are plausibly deniable within the “spirit” of the law? If so, what does that say about the “base” and the “right” direction they seek?

  1. The Prime Minister has no Ministerial knowledge regarding the actions of the Ministerial Office and Ministerial Staff to which the Prime Minister adMinisters?

    Isn’t it “crystal clear” that under Stephen Harper, the Prime Ministers Office now simply facilitates scripts along to the Prime Minister so that the Prime Minister may rehearse, study and distribute the scripts to the Prime Ministers appointed Ministers in the House of Commons and the Senate that may encounter media types.

  2. The Prime Minister has no Ministerial responsibilities regarding the actions of his Ministerial Office and Ministerial Staff to which the Prime Minister adMinisters?

    Isn’t it also “crystal clear” that Prime Minister Stephen Harper has consolidated most of the power into Stephen Harper’s Prime Ministers Office to which Prime Minister Stephen Harper does not question.

  3. The Prime Minister has no responsibilities as the Conservative Party of Canada’s leader regarding the actions of the the Conservative Party of Canada with regards to illegal activities being conducted in the Ministerial Office with the Ministerial Staff to which the Prime Minister adMinisters?

    Isn’t it also “crystal clear” that Prime Minister Stephen Harper believes that the RCMP is responsible for ensuring the enforcement of the “spirit of the law” as envisioned by Stephen Harper’s Prime Ministers Office.


Now Twitter us this:

If Stephen Harper’s Prime Ministers Office does not answer to Prime Minister Stephen Harper, and Prime Minister Stephen Harper does not question Stephen Harper’s Prime Ministers Office, why do we need both? Will the real Stephen Harper please stand up or will the real Prime Minister just stand up?


Turn 2: Ford Nation

Can the following 3 facts be undeniably plausible to the Ford Nation base and caucus if Rob Ford, the leader of the Ford Nation, proclaims they are plausibly deniable within the “spirit” of the law? If so, what does that say about the “base” and the “right” direction they seek?

  1. Rob Ford has no knowledge regarding the actions of Rob Ford or Rob Ford to which Rob Ford is responsible?

    Isn’t it “crystal clear” that under Rob Ford, the Mayors Office simply facilitates the scripts to the Mayor so that Rob Ford may rehearse, study and distribute the scripts along to the Mayors Executive Committee and Sub-committees in the City Council that may encounter media types.

  2. Rob Ford has no Mayoral responsibilities regarding the actions of his Mayoral Office and Mayoral Staff to which Rob Ford Mayors?

    Isn’t it also “crystal clear” that Mayor Rob Ford has consolidated most of the power into Mayor Rob Ford’s Office to which Mayor Rob Ford does not question.

  3. Rob Ford has no responsibilities as the Mayor of Canada’s largest city regarding the actions of the the Mayor of Canada’s largest city with regards to illegal activities being conducted by Rob Ford to which Rob Ford is the Mayor?

    Isn’t it also “crystal clear” that Mayor Rob Ford believes that the Toronto Police are responsible for ensuring the enforcement of the “spirit of the law” as envisioned by Rob Ford’s Mayors Office.


Now Twitter us this:

If Rob Ford does not answer to Rob Ford and Rob Ford does not question Rob Ford unless Rob Ford feels the need to question Rob Ford, why do we need both? Will the real Rob Ford please stand up or will the real Mayor just stand up?


Turn 3: Police State

Can the following 3 series of facts be undeniably plausible when the “State” challenges the “Police State” it created to further it’s “right” agenda against those that are “left” behind? Well, this is where the rubber meets the road, or maybe the cuffs meet the wrists, or the batons meets the faces, or the pepper spray fills the eyes, or the tear gas fills the lungs, or the boots meet the heads, as has been said amongst the serfs.

Let’s begin by exploring the 3 facts that we can now presumably conclude:

  1. The RCMP is conducting investigations into Stephen Harper’s Prime Ministers Office. Investigations that Prime Minister Stephen Harper is uninterested in investigating or acknowledging.
  2. The Toronto Police are conducting investigations into Rob Ford’s Mayors Office. Investigations that Mayor Rob Ford is uninterested in investigating or acknowledging.
  3. There are investigations to be completed, indictments to be presented and crimes that will be left unpunished until well after 2014/2015.

In addition to the “right” fascination with law, order and mandatory minimum punishment, we know the following 3 issues regarding the “State” that have been “left” up to the dependent Police State to decide, keeping in mind that the “State” controls the narrative. This is where selective justice conflicts with not only the Constitution and Charter but many International Laws and Agreements regarding Corruption, Fraud and Abuse of Power. But then again the “Police State” has been given the “right” to unlimited power by the “State” to use as it sees fit against the “left” of the political spectrum.


We can expand these facts by examining 3 additional components:

  1. Both investigations have been seemingly hampered by way of omission and deception.
  2. Both Harper and Ford, have been implicated in interfering into these investigations.
  3. Both Harper and Ford seem to be further contaminating these investigations.

We can then delve further by considering the following key decisions:

  1. With regards to any illegal activities within Stephen Harper’s Prime Ministers Office, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has found that Stephen Harper is 100% not responsible. Case closed.
  2. With regards to any illegal activities within Rob Ford’s Mayors Office, Mayor Rob Ford has found that Rob Ford is 100% not responsible. Case closed.
  3. With regards to any illegal activities, by members “in good standing” of the Conservative Party of Canada, in either and/or both of the above mentioned matters regarding Stephen Harper’s Prime Ministers Office and/or Rob Ford’s Mayors Office have been declared closed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and/or Mayor Rob Ford.

We can then derive 3 plausible solutions to the root problems:

  1. With regards to any illegal activities within Stephen Harper’s Prime Ministers Office, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has found that Nigel Wright is 100% responsible. Case closed.
  2. With regards to any illegal activities within Rob Ford’s Mayors Office, Mayor Rob Ford has found that Booze is 100% responsible. Case closed.
  3. With regards to any illegal activities, by members “in good standing” of the Conservative Party of Canada, in either and/or both of the above mentioned matters regarding Stephen Harper’s Prime Ministers Office, Nigel Wright and/or Rob Ford’s Mayors Office and/or Booze have been declared closed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper and/or Mayor Rob Ford.

We can then review 3 scenarios:

  1. Last we checked, Nigel Wright and Booze are both still legal, eh?

    Isn’t it “crystal clear” that, while neither, Harper nor Ford, have the legal authority to be the judge, jury and executioner, they have chosen to do so. Stephen Harper say’s it was Nigel Wright and Rob Ford say’s it was Booze.

  2. Last we checked, involvement and participation in the gangs, drugs and weapons industry and defrauding the government are both still illegal, eh?

    Isn’t it “crystal clear” that, we are we being subjugated towards the “right” narrative from the “left” side as well away from many illegal activities? Well the deeper implications are far to complex for any investor to handle as they have a lot of invested in the Harper and Ford Nation Brands, have a whole lot to lose. Not to mention investors like certainty and many of those investors invested in the compromised Senators and Nigel Wright.

  3. Last we checked, involvement and participation in the spreading of false and misleading propaganda are both still illegal, eh?

    Isn’t it “crystal clear” that, this is where the liberal media lie becomes tragically hilarious? The entire msm machine is following and repeating both narratives as scripted by the PMO and Ford Nation, word for word, but by way of omitting the implicating words and replacing them with alternative buzz words depending on the targeted audience.

Now Twitter us this:

Do “We the People” really deserve to be exploited by those reading scripted narratives that claim they will lead us in the “right” direction by way of distracion?


Squared Right Circles Left

Now we can establish the fundamental narrative flaws that lie within the linear minds behind the left/right divides where two wrongs seem to always take a right turn towards the left.

  1. The Harper Government and Ford Nation both claim to be pulling/pushing Canada towards the “right” agenda. With each turn to the “right” they collectively inch ever closer to the far-right extreme elements who are anti-government.

    Isn’t it “crystal clear” that, this is completely insulting to well over 70%+ of Canadians that do not support and/or did not vote for the Conservative Party of Canada in the past 3 elections.

  2. Eventually, this push in turn mixes with the ant-government far-left extreme. Those who are “left” out to further the “right” agenda are then demonized and categorized as the “left” end of the political spectrum.

    Isn’t it “crystal clear” that it would almost seem as if the “right” investors are writing the scripts that compel the “right” bureaucrats to devise equations that combine socio-economic problems with the “right” investment opportunities?

  3. We can now see how the “right” agenda creates the environmental “problems” based upon their own theoretical linear perspective with their own “substitutions” factored into the “equations” they create. In order to achieve the most profitable “answers” to these theoretical problems, the focus gets shifted to solutions that don’t add up to anything other than more investment in crime creation and prevention.

    Isn’t it “crystal clear” that, by way of taxation without representation, it is rather easy to further the mandate of the “right” agenda by way of controlling the “left” side of any problem that has been rightfully created to be solved in a society built upon the “right” equations that factor in a “left” from a spectrum that may not yet exist?


Now Twitter us this:

Do “We the People” really need Harper Loyalists and/or Ford Nation to lead us in the “right” direction?


Fog of War(s)

Let’s ponder 3 “right” issues worth associating to both Stephen Harper and Rob Ford that have been seemingly “left” out of the equation. Then let’s combine the various criminal investigations into Stephen Harper’s Prime Ministers Office and Rob Ford’s Mayors Office that converge within the very agenda that those conflicting war strategies mandates.

  1. War on Drugs: How does 1 reconcile the allocation of tax dollars to a “war” in which Government compromised officials are actively engaged in supporting the illegal drug industry.
  2. War on Crime: How does 1 reconcile the allocation of tax dollars to a “war” in which compromised Government officials are actively engaged in various organized illegal activities including conspiracy, fraud, extortion, blackmail, intimidation, briber , etc.
  3. War on Terror: How does 1 reconcile the allocation of tax dollars to a “war” in which compromised Government officials are actively engaged and supporting through various organized illegal activities, including the activities of terrorists, gangs, drugs and weapons.

Now Twitter us this:

Is it possible for any 1 “left” to reconcile the above 3 mandates as the “right” agenda and direction “We the People” should be headed? Or does this simply prove that 3 rights do make a left…


Summary Conclusion:

It takes exactly 3 right turns to effectively flip a base into believing that they are headed in the “right” direction that eventually leads towards what they just “left” behind…


Now Twitter us this:

How does the “private sector” deal with anti-social behaviour, drug abuse corruption and mismanagement by executives and management?


Further research:

Please note: This is being published on the day of the Twitter IPO, so we changed our usual Riddle us… tagline in honour of our love/hate relationship with the grand master tweeters. Also note that at the time of publication the hyperlinks were not included with the original txt file. This will be remedied in the future as time permits along with a trove of additional research and reference materials…


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Does #Canada prefer: #Harper #PMO #CPC Sanctions or #RCMP Criminal Convictions? #cdnpoli #senca

Does #Canada prefer: #Harper #PMO #CPC Sanctions or #RCMP Criminal Convictions? #cdnpoli #senca

a) I prefer the “sanctions” mandated by the PMO/Conservative Party of Canada and PM/Leader Stephen Harper.

b) I prefer “convictions” based upon the laws related to Frauds on the Government and Breach of Trust.

c) I dunno, it is rather complicated.

d) other (comment below)

Updated Case for Indictment(s) #CBC #censorship re #Harper #PMO #CPC vs #cdnpoli #senca

Alrighty then, something is really rotten here. This “disabled” comment is the second, of only two, comments we have ever attempted to post on the CBC website, the other can be viewed here. Riddle us this gang… Can anyone spot any potential violations as far as “commenting” moderation is concerned? The copypasta of the text is below, along with an updated hashtag plus the screenshot and the links below…

Another CBC Comment Censored
CBC Comment Censored

Your Submission Guidelines?

Comments on this story are pre-moderated. Before they appear, comments are reviewed by moderators to ensure they meet our submission guidelines. Comments are open and welcome for three days after the story is published. We reserve the right to close comments before then.

Your Published Article?

Power & Politics Ballot Box question: Is the Prime Minister responsible for the actions of his office? by Evan Solomon Posted: October 29, 2013 4:10 PM Last Updated: October 29, 2013 4:12 PM http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/politics/inside-politics-blog/2013/10/power-politics-ballot-box-question-322.html

Our Attempted Offensive Reply?

Content disabled
Operation Harper

This is a simple case for indictments against many individuals, not only the Prime Ministers Office, House of Commons, Conservative Senate Leadership, Conservative Caucus members involved in Senator’s Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin and Patrick Brazeau various issues, but Stephen Harper, the seemingly blind and unaware “sitting” Prime Minister and seemingly blind and unaware “active” CEO of the Conservative Party of Canada and it’s wholly owned subsidiary, the Harper Government.

The undeniable plausibility of guilt based upon unproven facts in the case of “Harper v. Senate” are as preposterous as is the assumption of innocence based upon the plausible deniability of proven facts in the case of the “Harper v. Truth”. As a matter of fact, if due process is circumvented in such a selective fashion based upon the “beliefs” of one person who opaquely conducts his “private sector” CEO business for the “base” with his “public sector” PMO responsibility to those he serves, aka: the other 70%+ of Canadians. This hear-no-evil, see-no-evil, speak-no-evil Ministerial/Executive technique becomes very dangerous when the CEO and PMO both “believe” in “spirits” of laws/rules as opposed to “letters” of written laws and rules. Especially when the ideological spirits evoked are opaquely envisioned within an undefined belief system and contained within one mind. This can quickly accelerate into a National security issue and economic threat as the spirits of the laws can be arbitrarily created and selectively applied through all levels of society very quickly. This delves into criminal when the ideological spirits evoked are opaquely envisioned within an undefined belief system.

btw: Nigel Wright? What ever happened to Pitbull Dean Del Mastro?

continue reading source: http://www.cbc.ca/newsblogs/politics/inside-politics-blog/2013/10/power-politics-ballot-box-question-322.html


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

#HarperGate and the Case for Indictment(s): #Harper #PMO #CPC vs #cdnpoli #senca #hoc

As the masses, in the private sector,. wade through the propaganda and spin with regards to the highly publicized and distracting theatre that surrounds the “Senate Scandal” the “case” being presented is rather important to note. This is a simple case for indictments against many individuals, not only the Prime Ministers Office, House of Commons, Conservative Senate Leadership, Conservative Caucus members involved in Senator’s Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin and Patrick Brazeau various issues, but Stephen Harper, the seemingly blind and unaware “sitting” Prime Minister and seemingly blind and unaware “active” CEO of the Conservative Party of Canada and it’s wholly owned subsidiary, the Harper Government.

The undeniable plausibility of guilt based upon unproven facts in the case of “Harper v. Senate” are as preposterous as is the assumption of innocence based upon the plausible deniability of proven facts in the case of the “Harper v. Truth”. As a matter of fact, if due process is circumvented in such a selective fashion based upon the “beliefs” of one person who opaquely conducts his CEO business for the “base” with his PMO responsibility to those he serves, aka: the other 70%+ of Canadians. This hear-no-evil, see-no-evil, speak-no-evil Ministerial/Executive technique becomes very dangerous when the CEO and PMO both “believe” in “spirits” of laws/rules as opposed to “letters” of written laws and rules. Especially when the ideological spirits evoked are opaquely envisioned within an undefined belief system and contained within one mind. This can quickly accelerate into a National security issue and economic threat as the spirits of the laws can be arbitrarily created and selectively applied through all levels of society very quickly. This delves into criminal when the ideological spirits evoked are opaquely envisioned within an undefined belief system.

btw: Nigel Wright? What ever happened to Pitbull Dean Del Mastro? Oh yea, still getting a pay check and benefits because of something selective due process even though he face mounting charges related to election fraud! Yet, even that investigation seems to be lacking a critical component regards to the relationship of PMO appointed Ministers and Crown Corporations and conspiracies to commit frauds upon the Government.

Below you will find various laws related to corruption, bribery, fraud, etc. that may, or may not, be relevant with regards to the scandals centred within the PMO itself. This is in no way a complete list but snippets from the Criminal Code, International Agreements, RICO and other legal codes that may be referred to. Just reviewing the “text” it would appear as if 1 (one) individual cannot, even if he/she wanted, accept full responsibility for the actions, or lack thereof, of another individual. But hey, we ain’t no lawyers, eh?


INTER-AMERICAN CONVENTION AGAINST CORRUPTION

(Adopted at the third plenary session, held on March 29, 1996)

Article III

Preventive Measures

For the purposes set forth in Article II of this Convention, the States Parties agree to consider the applicability of measures within their own institutional systems to create, maintain and strengthen:

1. Standards of conduct for the correct, honorable, and proper fulfillment of public functions. These standards shall be intended to prevent conflicts of interest and mandate the proper conservation and use of resources entrusted to government officials in the performance of their functions. These standards shall also establish measures and systems requiring government officials to report to appropriate authorities acts of corruption in the performance of public functions. Such measures should help preserve the public’s confidence in the integrity of public servants and government processes.

2. Mechanisms to enforce these standards of conduct.

3. Instruction to government personnel to ensure proper understanding of their responsibilities and the ethical rules governing their activities.

4. Systems for registering the income, assets and liabilities of persons who perform public functions in certain posts as specified by law and, where appropriate, for making such registrations public.

5. Systems of government hiring and procurement of goods and services that assure the openness, equity and efficiency of such systems.

6. Government revenue collection and control systems that deter corruption.

7. Laws that deny favorable tax treatment for any individual or corporation for expenditures made in violation of the anticorruption laws of the States Parties.

8. Systems for protecting public servants and private citizens who, in good faith, report acts of corruption, including protection of their identities, in accordance with their Constitutions and the basic principles of their domestic legal systems.

9. Oversight bodies with a view to implementing modern mechanisms for preventing, detecting, punishing and eradicating corrupt acts.

10. Deterrents to the bribery of domestic and foreign government officials, such as mechanisms to ensure that publicly held companies and other types of associations maintain books and records which, in reasonable detail, accurately reflect the acquisition and disposition of assets, and have sufficient internal accounting controls to enable their officers to detect corrupt acts.
11. Mechanisms to encourage participation by civil society and nongovernmental organizations in efforts to prevent corruption.

12. The study of further preventive measures that take into account the relationship between equitable compensation and probity in public service.

Article VI

Acts of Corruption

1. This Convention is applicable to the following acts of corruption:

a. The solicitation or acceptance, directly or indirectly, by a government official or a person who performs public functions, of any article of monetary value, or other benefit, such as a gift, favor, promise or advantage for himself or for another person or entity, in exchange for any act or omission in the performance of his public functions;

b. The offering or granting, directly or indirectly, to a government official or a person who performs public functions, of any article of monetary value, or other benefit, such as a gift, favor, promise or advantage for himself or for another person or entity, in exchange for any act or omission in the performance of his public functions;

c. Any act or omission in the discharge of his duties by a government official or a person who performs public functions for the purpose of illicitly obtaining benefits for himself or for a third party;

d. The fraudulent use or concealment of property derived from any of the acts referred to in this article; and

e. Participation as a principal, coprincipal, instigator, accomplice or accessory after the fact, or in any other manner, in the commission or attempted commission of, or in any collaboration or conspiracy to commit, any of the acts referred to in this article.

2. This Convention shall also be applicable by mutual agreement between or among two or more States Parties with respect to any other act of corruption not described herein.

continue reading source: http://www.oas.org/juridico/english/Treaties/b-58.html


Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations (RICO)

9-110.100

On October 15, 1970, the Organized Crime Control Act of 1970 became law. Title IX of the Act is the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Statute (18 U.S.C. §§ 1961-1968), commonly referred to as the “RICO” statute. The purpose of the RICO statute is “the elimination of the infiltration of organized crime and racketeering into legitimate organizations operating in interstate commerce.” S.Rep. No. 617, 91st Cong., 1st Sess. 76 (1969). However, the statute is sufficiently broad to encompass illegal activities relating to any enterprise affecting interstate or foreign commerce.

continue reading source: http://www.justice.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/110mcrm.htm

18 USC Chapter 96 – RACKETEER INFLUENCED AND CORRUPT ORGANIZATIONS

18 USC § 201 – Bribery of public officials and witnesses

a) For the purpose of this section—

(1) the term “public official” means Member of Congress, Delegate, or Resident Commissioner, either before or after such official has qualified, or an officer or employee or person acting for or on behalf of the United States, or any department, agency or branch of Government thereof, including the District of Columbia, in any official function, under or by authority of any such department, agency, or branch of Government, or a juror;

(2) the term “person who has been selected to be a public official” means any person who has been nominated or appointed to be a public official, or has been officially informed that such person will be so nominated or appointed; and

(3) the term “official act” means any decision or action on any question, matter, cause, suit, proceeding or controversy, which may at any time be pending, or which may by law be brought before any public official, in such official’s official capacity, or in such official’s place of trust or profit.

(b) Whoever—
(1) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers or promises anything of value to any public official or person who has been selected to be a public official, or offers or promises any public official or any person who has been selected to be a public official to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent—
(A) to influence any official act; or
(B) to influence such public official or person who has been selected to be a public official to commit or aid in committing, or collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on the United States; or
(C) to induce such public official or such person who has been selected to be a public official to do or omit to do any act in violation of the lawful duty of such official or person;

(2) being a public official or person selected to be a public official, directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity, in return for:
(A) being influenced in the performance of any official act;
(B) being influenced to commit or aid in committing, or to collude in, or allow, any fraud, or make opportunity for the commission of any fraud, on the United States; or
(C) being induced to do or omit to do any act in violation of the official duty of such official or person;

(3) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any person, or offers or promises such person to give anything of value to any other person or entity, with intent to influence the testimony under oath or affirmation of such first-mentioned person as a witness upon a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, before any court, any committee of either House or both Houses of Congress, or any agency, commission, or officer authorized by the laws of the United States to hear evidence or take testimony, or with intent to influence such person to absent himself therefrom;

(4) directly or indirectly, corruptly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally or for any other person or entity in return for being influenced in testimony under oath or affirmation as a witness upon any such trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or in return for absenting himself therefrom;
shall be fined under this title or not more than three times the monetary equivalent of the thing of value, whichever is greater, or imprisoned for not more than fifteen years, or both, and may be disqualified from holding any office of honor, trust, or profit under the United States.

(c) Whoever—

(1) otherwise than as provided by law for the proper discharge of official duty—
(A) directly or indirectly gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official, for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official; or
(B) being a public official, former public official, or person selected to be a public official, otherwise than as provided by law for the proper discharge of official duty, directly or indirectly demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally for or because of any official act performed or to be performed by such official or person;

(2) directly or indirectly, gives, offers, or promises anything of value to any person, for or because of the testimony under oath or affirmation given or to be given by such person as a witness upon a trial, hearing, or other proceeding, before any court, any committee of either House or both Houses of Congress, or any agency, commission, or officer authorized by the laws of the United States to hear evidence or take testimony, or for or because of such person’s absence therefrom;

(3) directly or indirectly, demands, seeks, receives, accepts, or agrees to receive or accept anything of value personally for or because of the testimony under oath or affirmation given or to be given by such person as a witness upon any such trial, hearing, or other proceeding, or for or because of such person’s absence therefrom;

shall be fined under this title or imprisoned for not more than two years, or both.

(d) Paragraphs (3) and (4) of subsection (b) and paragraphs (2) and (3) of subsection (c) shall not be construed to prohibit the payment or receipt of witness fees provided by law, or the payment, by the party upon whose behalf a witness is called and receipt by a witness, of the reasonable cost of travel and subsistence incurred and the reasonable value of time lost in attendance at any such trial, hearing, or proceeding, or in the case of expert witnesses, a reasonable fee for time spent in the preparation of such opinion, and in appearing and testifying.

(e) The offenses and penalties prescribed in this section are separate from and in addition to those prescribed in sections 1503, 1504, and 1505 of this title.

continue reading source: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/part-I/chapter-96


Criminal Code (R.S.C., 1985, c. C-46)

Corruption and Disobedience

Bribery of judicial officers, etc.

119. (1) Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years who

(a) being the holder of a judicial office, or being a member of Parliament or of the legislature of a province, directly or indirectly, corruptly accepts, obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain, for themselves or another person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment in respect of anything done or omitted or to be done or omitted by them in their official capacity, or

(b) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives or offers to a person mentioned in paragraph (a), or to anyone for the benefit of that person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment in respect of anything done or omitted or to be done or omitted by that person in their official capacity.

Consent of Attorney General

(2) No proceedings against a person who holds a judicial office shall be instituted under this section without the consent in writing of the Attorney General of Canada.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 119;
2007, c. 13, s. 3.

Bribery of officers

120. Every one is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years who

(a) being a justice, police commissioner, peace officer, public officer or officer of a juvenile court, or being employed in the administration of criminal law, directly or indirectly, corruptly accepts, obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain, for themselves or another person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment with intent

(i) to interfere with the administration of justice,

(ii) to procure or facilitate the commission of an offence, or

(iii) to protect from detection or punishment a person who has committed or who intends to commit an offence; or

(b) directly or indirectly, corruptly gives or offers to a person mentioned in paragraph (a), or to anyone for the benefit of that person, any money, valuable consideration, office, place or employment with intent that the person should do anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(i), (ii) or (iii).

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 120;
2007, c. 13, s. 4.

Frauds on the government

121.
(1) Every one commits an offence who

(a) directly or indirectly

(i) gives, offers or agrees to give or offer to an official or to any member of his family, or to any one for the benefit of an official, or

(ii) being an official, demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from any person for himself or another person,

a loan, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with

(iii) the transaction of business with or any matter of business relating to the government, or

(iv) a claim against Her Majesty or any benefit that Her Majesty is authorized or is entitled to bestow,

whether or not, in fact, the official is able to cooperate, render assistance, exercise influence or do or omit to do what is proposed, as the case may be;

(b) having dealings of any kind with the government, directly or indirectly pays a commission or reward to or confers an advantage or benefit of any kind on an employee or official of the government with which the dealings take place, or to any member of the employee’s or official’s family, or to anyone for the benefit of the employee or official, with respect to those dealings, unless the person has the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government with which the dealings take place;

(c) being an official or employee of the government, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from a person who has dealings with the government a commission, reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person, unless they have the consent in writing of the head of the branch of government that employs them or of which they are an official;

(d) having or pretending to have influence with the government or with a minister of the government or an official, directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept, for themselves or another person, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence or an act or omission in connection with

(i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or

(ii) the appointment of any person, including themselves, to an office;

(e) directly or indirectly gives or offers, or agrees to give or offer, to a minister of the government or an official, or to anyone for the benefit of a minister or an official, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance, exercise of influence, or an act or omission, by that minister or official, in connection with

(i) anything mentioned in subparagraph (a)(iii) or (iv), or

(ii) the appointment of any person, including themselves, to an office; or

(f) having made a tender to obtain a contract with the government,

(i) directly or indirectly gives or offers, or agrees to give or offer, to another person who has made a tender, to a member of that person’s family or to another person for the benefit of that person, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for the withdrawal of the tender of that person, or

(ii) directly or indirectly demands, accepts or offers or agrees to accept from another person who has made a tender a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind for themselves or another person as consideration for the withdrawal of their own tender.

Contractor subscribing to election fund

(2) Every one commits an offence who, in order to obtain or retain a contract with the government, or as a term of any such contract, whether express or implied, directly or indirectly subscribes or gives, or agrees to subscribe or give, to any person any valuable consideration

(a) for the purpose of promoting the election of a candidate or a class or party of candidates to Parliament or the legislature of a province; or

(b) with intent to influence or affect in any way the result of an election conducted for the purpose of electing persons to serve in Parliament or the legislature of a province.
Punishment

(3) Every one who commits an offence under this section is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 121;
2007, c. 13, s. 5.

Breach of trust by public officer

122. Every official who, in connection with the duties of his office, commits fraud or a breach of trust is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, whether or not the fraud or breach of trust would be an offence if it were committed in relation to a private person.

R.S., c. C-34, s. 111.

Selling or purchasing office

124. Every one who

(a) purports to sell or agrees to sell an appointment to or a resignation from an office, or a consent to any such appointment or resignation, or receives or agrees to receive a reward or profit from the purported sale thereof, or

(b) purports to purchase or gives a reward or profit for the purported purchase of any such appointment, resignation or consent, or agrees or promises to do so,

is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

R.S., c. C-34, s. 113.

Influencing or negotiating appointments or dealing in offices

125. Every one who

(a) receives, agrees to receive, gives or procures to be given, directly or indirectly, a reward, advantage or benefit of any kind as consideration for cooperation, assistance or exercise of influence to secure the appointment of any person to an office,

(b) solicits, recommends or negotiates in any manner with respect to an appointment to or resignation from an office, in expectation of a direct or indirect reward, advantage or benefit, or

(c) keeps without lawful authority, the proof of which lies on him, a place for transacting or negotiating any business relating to

(i) the filling of vacancies in offices,

(ii) the sale or purchase of offices, or

(iii) appointments to or resignations from offices,

is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

R.S., c. C-34, s. 114.

Disobeying a statute

126.
(1) Every one who, without lawful excuse, contravenes an Act of Parliament by wilfully doing anything that it forbids or by wilfully omitting to do anything that it requires to be done is, unless a punishment is expressly provided by law, guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.
Attorney General of Canada may act

(2) Any proceedings in respect of a contravention of or conspiracy to contravene an Act mentioned in subsection (1), other than this Act, may be instituted at the instance of the Government of Canada and conducted by or on behalf of that Government.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 126;
R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 185(F).

Misleading Justice

Perjury

131.
(1) Subject to subsection (3), every one commits perjury who, with intent to mislead, makes before a person who is authorized by law to permit it to be made before him a false statement under oath or solemn affirmation, by affidavit, solemn declaration or deposition or orally, knowing that the statement is false.
Video links, etc.

(1.1) Subject to subsection (3), every person who gives evidence under subsection 46(2) of the Canada Evidence Act, or gives evidence or a statement pursuant to an order made under section 22.2 of the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act, commits perjury who, with intent to mislead, makes a false statement knowing that it is false, whether or not the false statement was made under oath or solemn affirmation in accordance with subsection (1), so long as the false statement was made in accordance with any formalities required by the law of the place outside Canada in which the person is virtually present or heard.
Idem

(2) Subsection (1) applies, whether or not a statement referred to in that subsection is made in a judicial proceeding.
Application

(3) Subsections (1) and (1.1) do not apply to a statement referred to in either of those subsections that is made by a person who is not specially permitted, authorized or required by law to make that statement.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 131;
R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 17;
1999, c. 18, s. 92.

Punishment

132. Every one who commits perjury is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 132;
R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 17;
1998, c. 35, s. 119.

Corroboration

133. No person shall be convicted of an offence under section 132 on the evidence of only one witness unless the evidence of that witness is corroborated in a material particular by evidence that implicates the accused.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 133;
R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 17.

Idem

134.
(1) Subject to subsection (2), every one who, not being specially permitted, authorized or required by law to make a statement under oath or solemn affirmation, makes such a statement, by affidavit, solemn declaration or deposition or orally before a person who is authorized by law to permit it to be made before him, knowing that the statement is false, is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.
Application

(2) Subsection (1) does not apply to a statement referred to in that subsection that is made in the course of a criminal investigation.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 134;
R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 17.

Witness giving contradictory evidence

136.
(1) Every one who, being a witness in a judicial proceeding, gives evidence with respect to any matter of fact or knowledge and who subsequently, in a judicial proceeding, gives evidence that is contrary to his previous evidence is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years, whether or not the prior or later evidence or either is true, but no person shall be convicted under this section unless the court, judge or provincial court judge, as the case may be, is satisfied beyond a reasonable doubt that the accused, in giving evidence in either of the judicial proceedings, intended to mislead.
Marginal note:Evidence in specific cases

(1.1) Evidence given under section 714.1, 714.2, 714.3 or 714.4 or under subsection 46(2) of the Canada Evidence Act or evidence or a statement given pursuant to an order made under section 22.2 of the Mutual Legal Assistance in Criminal Matters Act is deemed to be evidence given by a witness in a judicial proceeding for the purposes of subsection (1).

Definition of “evidence”

(2) Notwithstanding the definition “evidence” in section 118, “evidence”, for the purposes of this section, does not include evidence that is not material.

Proof of former trial

(2.1) Where a person is charged with an offence under this section, a certificate specifying with reasonable particularity the proceeding in which that person is alleged to have given the evidence in respect of which the offence is charged, is evidence that it was given in a judicial proceeding, without proof of the signature or official character of the person by whom the certificate purports to be signed if it purports to be signed by the clerk of the court or other official having the custody of the record of that proceeding or by his lawful deputy.

Consent required

(3) No proceedings shall be instituted under this section without the consent of the Attorney General.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 136; R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), ss. 18, 203; 1999, c. 18, s. 93.

Fabricating evidence

137. Every one who, with intent to mislead, fabricates anything with intent that it shall be used as evidence in a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed, by any means other than perjury or incitement to perjury is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.
R.S., c. C-34, s. 125.

Offences relating to affidavits

138. Every one who
(a) signs a writing that purports to be an affidavit or statutory declaration and to have been sworn or declared before him when the writing was not so sworn or declared or when he knows that he has no authority to administer the oath or declaration,
(b) uses or offers for use any writing purporting to be an affidavit or statutory declaration that he knows was not sworn or declared, as the case may be, by the affiant or declarant or before a person authorized in that behalf, or
(c) signs as affiant or declarant a writing that purports to be an affidavit or statutory declaration and to have been sworn or declared by him, as the case may be, when the writing was not so sworn or declared,

is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.

R.S., c. C-34, s. 126.

Obstructing justice

139.
(1) Every one who wilfully attempts in any manner to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice in a judicial proceeding,

(a) by indemnifying or agreeing to indemnify a surety, in any way and either in whole or in part, or

(b) where he is a surety, by accepting or agreeing to accept a fee or any form of indemnity whether in whole or in part from or in respect of a person who is released or is to be released from custody,

is guilty of

(c) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years, or

(d) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Idem

(2) Every one who wilfully attempts in any manner other than a manner described in subsection (1) to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years.
Idem

(3) Without restricting the generality of subsection (2), every one shall be deemed wilfully to attempt to obstruct, pervert or defeat the course of justice who in a judicial proceeding, existing or proposed,

(a) dissuades or attempts to dissuade a person by threats, bribes or other corrupt means from giving evidence;

(b) influences or attempts to influence by threats, bribes or other corrupt means a person in his conduct as a juror; or

(c) accepts or obtains, agrees to accept or attempts to obtain a bribe or other corrupt consideration to abstain from giving evidence, or to do or to refrain from doing anything as a juror.

R.S., c. C-34, s. 127;
R.S., c. 2(2nd Supp.), s. 3;
1972, c. 13, s. 8.

Compounding indictable offence

141.
(1) Every one who asks for or obtains or agrees to receive or obtain any valuable consideration for himself or any other person by agreeing to compound or conceal an indictable offence is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years.
Exception for diversion agreements

(2) No offence is committed under subsection (1) where valuable consideration is received or obtained or is to be received or obtained under an agreement for compensation or restitution or personal services that is

(a) entered into with the consent of the Attorney General; or

(b) made as part of a program, approved by the Attorney General, to divert persons charged with indictable offences from criminal proceedings.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 141;
R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 19.

Exploitation

279.04
(1) For the purposes of sections 279.01 to 279.03, a person exploits another person if they cause them to provide, or offer to provide, labour or a service by engaging in conduct that, in all the circumstances, could reasonably be expected to cause the other person to believe that their safety or the safety of a person known to them would be threatened if they failed to provide, or offer to provide, the labour or service.
Factors

(2) In determining whether an accused exploits another person under subsection (1), the Court may consider, among other factors, whether the accused
(a) used or threatened to use force or another form of coercion;
(b) used deception; or
(c) abused a position of trust, power or authority.
2005, c. 43, s. 3; 2012, c. 15, s. 2.

PART XIII
ATTEMPTS — CONSPIRACIES — ACCESSORIES

Attempts, accessories

463. Except where otherwise expressly provided by law, the following provisions apply in respect of persons who attempt to commit or are accessories after the fact to the commission of offences:

(a) every one who attempts to commit or is an accessory after the fact to the commission of an indictable offence for which, on conviction, an accused is liable to be sentenced to imprisonment for life is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years;

(b) every one who attempts to commit or is an accessory after the fact to the commission of an indictable offence for which, on conviction, an accused is liable to imprisonment for fourteen years or less is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term that is one-half of the longest term to which a person who is guilty of that offence is liable;

(c) every one who attempts to commit or is an accessory after the fact to the commission of an offence punishable on summary conviction is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction; and

(d) every one who attempts to commit or is an accessory after the fact to the commission of an offence for which the offender may be prosecuted by indictment or for which he is punishable on summary conviction

(i) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding a term that is one-half of the longest term to which a person who is guilty of that offence is liable, or

(ii) is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 463;
R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 59;
1998, c. 35, s. 120.

Counselling offence that is not committed

464. Except where otherwise expressly provided by law, the following provisions apply in respect of persons who counsel other persons to commit offences, namely,

(a) every one who counsels another person to commit an indictable offence is, if the offence is not committed, guilty of an indictable offence and liable to the same punishment to which a person who attempts to commit that offence is liable; and

(b) every one who counsels another person to commit an offence punishable on summary conviction is, if the offence is not committed, guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 464;
R.S., 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 60.

Conspiracy

465.
(1) Except where otherwise expressly provided by law, the following provisions apply in respect of conspiracy:

(a) every one who conspires with any one to commit murder or to cause another person to be murdered, whether in Canada or not, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to a maximum term of imprisonment for life;

(b) every one who conspires with any one to prosecute a person for an alleged offence, knowing that he did not commit that offence, is guilty of an indictable offence and liable

(i) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding ten years, if the alleged offence is one for which, on conviction, that person would be liable to be sentenced to imprisonment for life or for a term not exceeding fourteen years, or

(ii) to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years, if the alleged offence is one for which, on conviction, that person would be liable to imprisonment for less than fourteen years;

(c) every one who conspires with any one to commit an indictable offence not provided for in paragraph (a) or (b) is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to the same punishment as that to which an accused who is guilty of that offence would, on conviction, be liable; and

(d) every one who conspires with any one to commit an offence punishable on summary conviction is guilty of an offence punishable on summary conviction.

(2) [Repealed, 1985, c. 27 (1st Supp.), s. 61]

Conspiracy to commit offences

(3) Every one who, while in Canada, conspires with any one to do anything referred to in subsection (1) in a place outside Canada that is an offence under the laws of that place shall be deemed to have conspired to do that thing in Canada.
Marginal note:Idem

(4) Every one who, while in a place outside Canada, conspires with any one to do anything referred to in subsection (1) in Canada shall be deemed to have conspired in Canada to do that thing.
Marginal note:Jurisdiction

(5) Where a person is alleged to have conspired to do anything that is an offence by virtue of subsection (3) or (4), proceedings in respect of that offence may, whether or not that person is in Canada, be commenced in any territorial division in Canada, and the accused may be tried and punished in respect of that offence in the same manner as if the offence had been committed in that territorial division.

Appearance of accused at trial

(6) For greater certainty, the provisions of this Act relating to

(a) requirements that an accused appear at and be present during proceedings, and

(b) the exceptions to those requirements,

apply to proceedings commenced in any territorial division pursuant to subsection (5).

Definitions

467.1 (1) The following definitions apply in this Act.

“criminal organization”

« organisation criminelle »

“criminal organization” means a group, however organized, that

(a) is composed of three or more persons in or outside Canada; and

(b) has as one of its main purposes or main activities the facilitation or commission of one or more serious offences that, if committed, would likely result in the direct or indirect receipt of a material benefit, including a financial benefit, by the group or by any of the persons who constitute the group.

It does not include a group of persons that forms randomly for the immediate commission of a single offence.

“serious offence”

« infraction grave »

“serious offence” means an indictable offence under this or any other Act of Parliament for which the maximum punishment is imprisonment for five years or more, or another offence that is prescribed by regulation.

Facilitation

(2) For the purposes of this section and section 467.11, facilitation of an offence does not require knowledge of a particular offence the commission of which is facilitated, or that an offence actually be committed.
Marginal note:Commission of offence

(3) In this section and in sections 467.11 to 467.13, committing an offence means being a party to it or counselling any person to be a party to it.
Marginal note:Regulations

(4) The Governor in Council may make regulations prescribing offences that are included in the definition “serious offence” in subsection (1).

1997, c. 23, s. 11;
2001, c. 32, s. 27.

Participation in activities of criminal organization

467.11 (1) Every person who, for the purpose of enhancing the ability of a criminal organization to facilitate or commit an indictable offence under this or any other Act of Parliament, knowingly, by act or omission, participates in or contributes to any activity of the criminal organization is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.
Marginal note:Prosecution

(2) In a prosecution for an offence under subsection (1), it is not necessary for the prosecutor to prove that

(a) the criminal organization actually facilitated or committed an indictable offence;

(b) the participation or contribution of the accused actually enhanced the ability of the criminal organization to facilitate or commit an indictable offence;

(c) the accused knew the specific nature of any indictable offence that may have been facilitated or committed by the criminal organization; or

(d) the accused knew the identity of any of the persons who constitute the criminal organization.
Marginal note:Factors

(3) In determining whether an accused participates in or contributes to any activity of a criminal organization, the Court may consider, among other factors, whether the accused

(a) uses a name, word, symbol or other representation that identifies, or is associated with, the criminal organization;

(b) frequently associates with any of the persons who constitute the criminal organization;

(c) receives any benefit from the criminal organization; or

(d) repeatedly engages in activities at the instruction of any of the persons who constitute the criminal organization.

2001, c. 32, s. 27.

Commission of offence for criminal organization

467.12 (1) Every person who commits an indictable offence under this or any other Act of Parliament for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with, a criminal organization is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding fourteen years.
Marginal note:Prosecution

(2) In a prosecution for an offence under subsection (1), it is not necessary for the prosecutor to prove that the accused knew the identity of any of the persons who constitute the criminal organization.

2001, c. 32, s. 27.

Instructing commission of offence for criminal organization

467.13 (1) Every person who is one of the persons who constitute a criminal organization and who knowingly instructs, directly or indirectly, any person to commit an offence under this or any other Act of Parliament for the benefit of, at the direction of, or in association with, the criminal organization is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for life.
Marginal note:Prosecution

(2) In a prosecution for an offence under subsection (1), it is not necessary for the prosecutor to prove that

(a) an offence other than the offence under subsection (1) was actually committed;

(b) the accused instructed a particular person to commit an offence; or

(c) the accused knew the identity of all of the persons who constitute the criminal organization.

2001, c. 32, s. 27.

Sentences to be served consecutively

467.14 A sentence imposed on a person for an offence under section 467.11, 467.12 or 467.13 shall be served consecutively to any other punishment imposed on the person for an offence arising out of the same event or series of events and to any other sentence to which the person is subject at the time the sentence is imposed on the person for an offence under any of those sections.

2001, c. 32, s. 27.

Powers of the Attorney General of Canada

467.2 (1) Notwithstanding the definition of “Attorney General” in section 2, the Attorney General of Canada may conduct proceedings in respect of

(a) an offence under section 467.11; or

(b) another criminal organization offence where the alleged offence arises out of conduct that in whole or in part is in relation to an alleged contravention of an Act of Parliament or a regulation made under such an Act, other than this Act or a regulation made under this Act.

For those purposes, the Attorney General of Canada may exercise all the powers and perform all the duties and functions assigned to the Attorney General by or under this Act.
Marginal note:Powers of the Attorney General of a province

(2) Subsection (1) does not affect the authority of the Attorney General of a province to conduct proceedings in respect of an offence referred to in section 467.11, 467.12 or 467.13 or to exercise any of the powers or perform any of the duties and functions assigned to the Attorney General by or under this Act.

1997, c. 23, s. 11;
2001, c. 32, s. 28.

continue reading source: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/C-46/index.html
read the full text here: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/c-46/FullText.html


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

#HarperGate: The Life and Death of the #Harper #CPC – Scene: #cdnpoli, Act: Final #DuffyBookTitle

Friends, Humans, Canadians, lend us your ears;
We come to Dump Harper, not to praise him.
The evil that men do lives after them;
The good is oft interred with their bones;
So let it be with Harper. The noble Nigel Wright
Hath told you Harper was ambitious:
If it were so, it was a grievous fault,
And grievously hath Harper answer’d it.
Here, under leave of Nigel Wright and the rest –
For Nigel Wright is an honourable man;
So are they all, all honourable men –
Come we to speak in Harper’s demise.
He was our friend, faithful and just to us:
But Nigel Wright says he was ambitious;
And Nigel Wright is an honourable man.
He hath brought many captives home to Ottawa
Whose ransoms did the general coffers fill:
Did this in Harper seem ambitious?
When that the poor have cried, Harper hath wept:
Ambition should be made of sterner stuff:
Yet Nigel Wright says he was ambitious;
And Nigel Wright is an honourable man.
You all did see that on the Throne Speech
We thrice presented him a kingly crown,
Which he did thrice abuse: was this ambition?
Yet Nigel Wright says he was ambitious;
And, sure, he is an honourable man.
We speak not to disprove what Nigel Wright spoke,
But here we are to speak what we do know.
You all did love him once, not without cause:
What cause withholds you then, to mourn for him?
O judgment! thou art fled to brutish beasts,
And men have lost their reason. Bear with us;
Our hearts are in the coffin there with Harper,
And we must pause till it come back to us.

But yesterday the word of Harper might
Have stood against the world; now lies he there.
And none so poor to do him reverence.
O masters, if we were disposed to stir
Your hearts and minds to mutiny and rage,
We should do Nigel Wright wrong, and the House of Commons wrong,
and the Senate Chamber wrong,
Who, you all know, are honourable humans:
We will not do them wrong; We rather choose
To wrong the dead, to wrong ourselves and you,
Than we will wrong such honourable humans.
But here’s a parchment with the seal of Harper;
We found it in his closet, ’tis his will:
Let but the commons hear this testament–
Which, pardon us, we do not mean to read–
And they would go and kiss dead Harper’s wounds
And dip their napkins in his sacred blood,
Yea, beg a hair of him for memory,
And, dying, mention it within their wills,
Bequeathing it as a rich legacy
Unto their issue.

Have patience, gentle friends, We must not read it;
It is not meet you know how Harper loved you.
You are not wood, you are not stones, but humans;
And, being humans, bearing the will of Harper,
It will inflame you, it will make you mad:
‘Tis good you know not that you are his heirs;
For, if you should, O, what would come of it!

Will you be patient? will you stay awhile?
We have o’ershot ourselves to tell you of it:
We fear we wrong the honourable men
Whose daggers have stabb’d Harper; We do fear it.

You will compel us, then, to read the will?
Then make a ring about the corpse of Harper,
And let us show you him that made the will.
Shall we descend? and will you give us leave?

Nay, press not so upon us; stand far off.

If you have tears, prepare to shed them now.
You all do know this mantle: We remember
The first time ever Harper put it on;
‘Twas on a summer’s evening, in his reformed caucus,
That day he overcame the Indiginous, Aboriginal and First Nations Peoples:
Look, in this place ran Tom Flanagans’ dagger through:
See what a rent the envious Mike Duffy made:
Through this the well-beloved Nigel Wright stabb’d;
And as he pluck’d his cursed steel away,
Mark how the blood of Harper follow’d it,
As rushing out of doors, to be resolved
If Nigel Wright so unkindly knock’d, or no;
For Nigel Wright, as you know, was Harper’s angel:
Judge, O you gods, how dearly Harper loved him!
This was the most unkindest cut of all;
For when the noble Harper saw him stab,
Ingratitude, more strong than traitors’ arms,
Quite vanquish’d him: then burst his mighty heart;
And, in his mantle muffling up his face,
Even at the base of the Conservative Party,
Which all the while ran blood, great Harper fell.
O, what a fall was there, our fellow humans!
Then we, and you, and all of us fell down,
Whilst bloody treason flourish’d over us.
O, now you weep; and, we perceive, you feel
The dint of pity: these are gracious drops.
Kind souls, what, weep you when you but behold
Our Harper’s vesture wounded? Look you here,
Here is himself, marr’d, as you see, with traitors.

~ Anonymous 2013 ~

Is Canadian Democracy Just School Yard Stuff?

I thought the Boss said we were some kind of a beacon of Democracy or something to that effect?

Dear Steve Harper:

Many of us thought that the hallmarks of Democracy were openness and transparency, but you’ve shown us how silly we are Steve, committees disappearing behind closed doors for in camera meetings, omnibus bills that have grown so large that we really only need to have you folk in Ottawa for a couple of weeks to vote on it then take the rest of the session off.

Does that sound familiar? It should, it’s pretty much what you had to say after a Liberal omnibus bill a few years ago. It seems you want everyone else to be transparent but not when it comes to government. Or at least Your government…

Every time people try to find out what’s going on with Canada there are brick walls thrown up in their faces. The treatment of detainees in Afghanistan, the cost of the F 35 jets that may or may not ever come to fruition, the list goes on, and on, and on…

Certainly not open or transparent by any stretch of the imagination.

But I guess the real irony is when you send your MPs to far off places to ensure they have open and fair elections, but when someone takes your people to task over Robocalls and voter suppression, well they clam up, drag their feet, and generally make asses of themselves.

From what I gather, no one in the Party speaks without clearance from the PMO. Funny thing, we don’t get to vote on who is in the PMO do we?

And no one gets to ask questions without clearance from the PMO either?

It certainly looks like that. You can correct me if I’m mistaken, but I heard that the Press Pool decided to give up one of their valued questions to a foreign correspondent from China, a fellow named Li Xue Jiang. When Mr. Li stepped up to ask his question, your staff pulled the microphone away from him and when he had the temerity to try and grab the microphone back he was promptly wrestled away by four of your security detail.

Thoughtfully, the Globe and Mail has the video here.

Way to show those commies how the leader of an open and democratic society handles inconvenient questions. That’s sarcasm; I know it doesn’t always carry well in writing.

You want us to believe that you are in the “big leagues” internationally, but you’re not. This is just school yard stuff being played out by someone who should know better. Don’t like the question? Don’t let the Chinese guy ask it. (And have your minions drag him away) Too hot in Ottawa? Just yell “Prorogue”! That’s the parliamentary equivalent of picking up the ball and running away isn’t it?

We’re used to it here. We’ve seen how you have acted for the last seven years. Now you’ve gone and shown the world your management skills.

By the way Steve, yelling “Prorogue” from Whitehorse, in the middle of the summer break is pretty much like yelling “I’m telling my mom” and running away.

School yard stuff, and the saddest part is how many people don’t care.

Laters, BC

#opTeaKettle asks: @SunNewsNetwork @ezralevant vs #White #Canada vs #cdnpoli?

Well, as we journey throughout the interwebz we sometimes see the simmering threats that will soon emerge into another “War on…” Ponzi Scheme. Thanks to our good friends at @SunNewsNetwork, especially @ezralevant and his EXCELLENT investigative journalism, we know what to be on the look out for! Whew, that is a relief and should save us a lot of time to mount a counter-offensive before we lose our beloved Canada at the hands of benevolent dictators. Continue reading #opTeaKettle asks: @SunNewsNetwork @ezralevant vs #White #Canada vs #cdnpoli?

ATTN: @pmharper + #CPC re: #FirstNations + #Aboriginals + #ReconciliationActionPlan = #cdnpoli #NurembergSolution

Before this gets outta hand it may be time to begin the act of reconciliation in Canada NOW, as opposed to delivering empty apologies. Here is what may be a simple initial solution that may, possible, potentially, maybe, kinda, sorta acceptable, if you are lucky. while that simmers a bit, we utilized a hashtagged tweetable title to remind ya when we share this article around the interwebs, so be sure to have Harper’s Kiddies lots o’ RedBull and other keep awake and alert remedies. Continue reading ATTN: @pmharper + #CPC re: #FirstNations + #Aboriginals + #ReconciliationActionPlan = #cdnpoli #NurembergSolution

#PMO #Harper’s #CPC #EnemyList vs #Canada = #EpicFail 4 #cdnpoli and #Freedom

#PMO #Harper’s #CPC #EnemyList vs #Canada = #EpicFail 4 #cdnpoli and #Freedom


“There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can’t take part; you can’t even passively take part, and you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you’ve got to make it stop. And you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you’re free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!”
~ Mario Savio – The Machine Speech – Sproul Hall Steps – Dec 2 1964
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_C3yoxTSEk

Richard Nixon, Watergate cited as anger erupts over Stephen Harper government’s ‘enemy’ list By Lee Berthiaume, Postmedia News July 16, 2013

OTTAWA — Comparisons with the Nixon administration and Watergate are being raised following revelations the Harper government ordered “enemy” lists compiled in advance of this week’s cabinet shuffle.

The Prime Minister’s Office sent an email to Conservative ministerial aides on July 4 asking to develop lists of troublesome bureaucrats as well as “friend and enemy stakeholders” for incoming ministers and their staff.

The PMO has refused to comment on the controversy, which erupted after emails outlining the order were leaked to media outlets in Ottawa by an unidentified source on Monday, the same day as the federal cabinet shuffle.

Postmedia News has confirmed through several sources that the emails are authentic, although it was unclear whether the lists were actually created and distributed to new ministers after the shuffle.

The order was considered controversial from the beginning, one insider said, prompting an immediate pushback from some corners and contributing to the decision not to compile a list of “bureaucrats that can’t take no (or yes) for an answer.”

Some also reportedly questioned the wisdom of putting the order down in writing for fear it could be leaked and prompt the type of controversy that has, in fact, erupted.

Former environment minister Peter Kent, who is now a Conservative backbencher, said in an interview with Postmedia News that he had not seen nor was aware of any such request from the PMO.

He added it makes perfect sense for an incoming minister to be briefed on those organizations and interest groups he or she can expect to interact with on the new file.

But Kent said “friend and enemy” language is not only “juvenile,” but harkens to former U.S. president Richard Nixon’s so-called “Enemies List,” the existence of which was revealed during the Watergate scandal.

“That was the nomenclature used by Nixon,” he said. “His political horizon was divided very starkly into friends and enemies. The use of the word ‘enemies list,’ for those of us of a certain generation, it evokes nothing less than thoughts of Nixon and Watergate.”

Independent MP Brent Rathgeber, who resigned from the Conservative caucus in June, described the existence of such lists as “inappropriate” and contributing to the “dysfunctional workplace” that Ottawa has become.

However, he said he was not surprised the order was issued given the “very young, very hyper-partisan individuals” in the PMO “who see the world in black and white.”

continue reading: http://www.montrealgazette.com/news/national/Richard+Nixon+Watergate+cited+anger+erupts+over+Stephen/8668035/story.html

Ministerial staff asked to develop blacklists in lead-up to shuffle: source
By Amy Minsky and Tom Clark | Global News July 15, 2013 11:26 pm

OTTAWA – In the lead-up to Monday’s cabinet shuffle, ministerial staffers were asked to develop lists of troublesome bureaucrats and “enemy” stakeholders, Global News has learned.

Global National’s Jacques Bourbeau and chief political correspondent Tom Clark react to the changes made during the cabinet shuffle. [Video]

The information was to be included in a transition binder traditionally prepared for incoming ministers.

Global News has obtained a July 4 email written by Erica Furtado, an executive assistant with issues management in the Prime Minister’s Office, with the subject line “Transition Binder Check List”.

In the e-mail, Furtado lists 10 items that need to be addressed in the transition binders. See a scan of the actual email below. [View this document on Scribd]
A source provided the internal email to Global News, saying Furtado sent it following a meeting of the issues management team in the Prime Minister’s Office.

Essentially, ministerial staff was asked to develop a “blacklist” of public servants and stakeholders, the source said.

When the source and some others in their office protested putting such lists together, the group was labelled “political unreliable” and cut off from further communications on the matter, the source said.

Later on July 4, Furtado sent a follow-up email noting that item six on the checklist – fingering troublesome bureaucrats – was “no longer required.”

Examples for the stakeholder “enemies” included environmental groups, non-profits, and civic and industry associations with views that don’t run parallel to the Conservative agenda, the source explained.

The source said the PMO also made a verbal request that ministerial staff come up with a list of “enemy reporters,” but the request was subsequently withdrawn.

A spokesman from the prime minister’s office denied they ever requested a list of enemy reporters, but said the rest of the checklist is normal procedure for staff to assist in the transition of a new minister.

© Shaw Media, 2013

continue reading: http://globalnews.ca/news/718943/ministerial-staff-asked-to-develop-blacklists-in-lead-up-to-shuffle-source/

Stephen Harper’s new ministers were given ‘enemy’ lists
Ishmael N. Daro on July 15, 2013

Every now and then, this federal government does something weird and creepy to confirm everyone’s worst suspicions about Stephen Harper and his inner circle.

Monday’s cabinet shuffle was one of the most significant renewals of the government’s front benches since the Conservatives first took office in 2006, and all those new ministers needed some pointers on how their new ministries work. So it was awfully nice that introductory binders included “enemy” lists.

continue reading: http://www.thealbatross.ca/26922/stephen-harper-ministers-enemy-list

Cabinet shuffle 2013: new ministers given “enemy” lists
By: Susan Delacourt Parliament Hill, Bruce Campion-Smith Parliament Hill Published on Mon Jul 15 2013

Ministers in Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s newly shuffled cabinet are being armed with “enemy” lists of people and bureaucratic interests to avoid, according to a PMO email obtained by the Star.

OTTAWA—Ministers in Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s newly shuffled cabinet are being armed with “enemy” lists of people and bureaucratic interests to avoid, according to a PMO email obtained by the Star.

The July 4 email, from Erica Furtado in the PMO’s issues-management department, directs government staffers on what to include in the transition booklets that are given to new ministers.

continue reading: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/07/15/cabinet_shuffle_2013_new_ministers_given_enemy_lists.html

Tories facing heat for compiling ‘enemies’ lists for new ministers
STEVEN CHASE OTTAWA — The Globe and Mail Published Tuesday, Jul. 16 2013, 12:58 AM EDT Last updated Tuesday, Jul. 16 2013, 8:30 AM EDT

The Harper government is facing questions about whether Conservative staffers were compiling enemies lists as part of transition plans for Monday’s cabinet shuffle.

A July 4 email obtained by Global News shows a Prime Minister’s Office official asking staff working for cabinet ministers across the government to draw up lists of pesky bureaucrats and “enemy stakeholders.”

continue reading: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/harper-tories-facing-heat-for-compiling-enemies-lists-for-new-ministers/article13240082/

Stephen Harper requested list of enemy lobby groups, bureaucrats and reporters, documents show
Mike De Souza Published: July 15, 2013, 6:51 pm Updated: 2 hours ago (16Jul2013)

OTTAWA – Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s office asked Conservative political staffers to develop lists of “enemy” lobby groups, as well as troublesome bureaucrats and reporters to avoid as part of preparations for incoming ministers named in Monday’s cabinet shuffle, according to leaked documents sent to Postmedia News by an unidentified source.

The leaked documents, also sent to other media outlets, appeared to provide a “check list” for outgoing political staffers to provide as part of a briefing package for new ministers.

The list proposed 10 categories required for each portfolio, including immediate and long-term issues, as well as warnings about “pet bureaucratic projects” and a list of “who to avoid: bureaucrats that can’t take no (or yes) for an answer.”

continue reading: http://o.canada.com/2013/07/15/stephen-harper-requested-list-of-enemy-lobby-groups-bureaucrats-and-reporters-documents-show/

Backgounders: Harper’s Hitlists and Enemies

2013

Harper Government Spends Millions Monitoring Press Of Own MPs
Althia Raj huffingtonpost.com Posted: 05/08/2013 7:54 pm EDT | Updated: 05/09/2013 10:18 am EDT

OTTAWA — The Harper government has spent more than $23 million over the last two years on media monitoring — including more than $2.4 million tracking some of its own backbench MPs in television interviews, radio and print, according to documents tabled in the House of Commons earlier this week.

The names of 65 Conservative backbench MPs — or just about 64 per cent of all Tory MPs who have no ministerial or any parliamentary secretary duties — are included in a list of search terms the federal government paid third-party contractors to monitor in news media from April, 2011 to December, 2012, although some of the terms were also monitored in early 2013.

MPs and staff in every office The Huffington Post Canada contacted Wednesday were bewildered to learn who was named on a list of politicians the Privy Council Office (PCO) tracks. (The PCO is the prime minister’s department).

Conservative government found spying on aboriginal advocate: Tim Harper
Well-known advocate for aboriginal children Cindy Blackstock knew all along her government was spying on her and Tuesday the country’s privacy commissioner agreed.
By: Tim Harper National Affairs, Published on Wed May 29 2013

OTTAWA—Cindy Blackstock knew all along her government was spying on her and Tuesday the country’s privacy commissioner agreed.

Now the well-known advocate for aboriginal children wants to know how many other Canadians may have official Ottawa poking around in their personal affairs — and not even know it.

On a day when most of Ottawa was justly riveted on the Tom Mulcair-Stephen Harper Senate spending showdown, a chilling report by Privacy Commissioner Jennifer Stoddart was buried in the news cycle, but it was confirmation of a story Blackstock has been telling since 2011 and an indictment of the way in which the Conservative government is dealing with aboriginal injustice.

Blackstock had become, in essence, an enemy of the state.

In 2007, her organization, the First Nations Child and Family Caring Society of Canada, filed a human rights complaint against Ottawa, alleging discrimination was behind a policy that has Ottawa providing 22 per cent less than the provinces for aboriginal child welfare services.

As the case lumbered through the judicial system, Blackstock first found herself shunned by official Ottawa, then, she alleges, the government began to stalk her in retaliation for her court action, monitoring her personal Facebook page, appearing at her public appearances and repeatedly accessing her Indian status report without reason.

continue reading: http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2013/05/29/conservative_government_found_spying_on_aboriginal_advocate_tim_harper.html

Toronto artist Franke James says Harper government monitored her climate change artwork
By Mike De Souza, Postmedia News May 24, 2013

OTTAWA – More than two dozen senior officials and diplomats in Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s Conservative government monitored information about a Toronto artist over her criticism of the oil and gas industry’s environmental performance.

This behind the scenes reaction was described in passages from more than 2,000 internal federal emails and other records, featured in a new book – Banned on the Hill – released this month by the artist and environmental activist, Franke James.

“This is a small fraction of all the people who’ve been monitoring my file and this is ridiculous,” said James in an interview.

“It’s simply by disagreeing with them that I made it on to their list.”

James has gained a strong Internet fan base through her work, producing animated visual essays and illustrated books that promote sustainable development.

Her first book from 2009 – Bothered by my Green Conscience – described her efforts to reduce her environmental footprint by selling her SUV and a battle with municipal bureaucrats for the right to replace her interlocking brick driveway with a permeable green driveway.

But she found herself on the federal government’s radar in the spring of 2011 after some diplomats agreed to offer a $5,000 grant in support of a European art tour featuring James’s artwork, only to see it revoked a few days later by a senior director of the Foreign Affairs Department’s climate change division who felt the funding would “run counter to Canada’s interests.”

continue reading:

When science goes silent
With the muzzling of scientists, Harper’s obsession with controlling the message verges on the Orwellian
by Jonathon Gatehouse on Friday, May 3, 2013 5:00am – 0 Comments

As far as the government scientist was concerned, it was a bit of fluff: an early morning interview about great white sharks last summer with Canada AM, the kind of innocuous and totally apolitical media commentary the man used to deliver 30 times or more each year as the resident shark expert in the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO). So he sent an email off to Ottawa notifying department flaks about the request, and when no response had been received by the next morning, just went ahead and did it.

After all, in the past such initiative was rewarded. His superiors were happy to have him grab some limelight for the department and its research, so much so they once gave him an award as the DFO’s spokesperson of the year. But as he found out, things have changed under Stephen Harper’s Conservatives. Soon after arriving at his offices, the scientist was called before his regional director and given a formal verbal reprimand: talk to the media again without the explicit permission of the minister’s office, he was warned, and there would be serious consequences—like a suspension without pay, or even dismissal.

“He can’t understand it. The interview was of no consequence and had absolutely no relevance to government policy,” says Gary Corbett, president of the Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada (PIPSC), the union that represents 30,000 government researchers, technicians and science support workers. “It really burst his bubble. They’ve taken away the impetus to educate the public.” Corbett shared details of the incident for the first time with Maclean’s but not the scientist’s identity, for fear he might face further sanction. It’s just one of many such stories of muzzled federal scientists and suppressed research that are being brought to the union’s attention, he says. All against the backdrop of sweeping cuts to water, air and wildlife monitoring programs, a total restructuring of federal environmental reviews, and the downloading of responsibility for lakes and rivers to the provinces. “It’s almost like this government doesn’t want any of this stuff to be open to public discussion,” says the union leader. “What we’re seeing is a total lockdown.”

Since taking power in 2006, Stephen Harper’s government has rarely been caught on the wrong foot. Disciplined on the hustings, in the House, and above all with the media, Tory ministers and MPs have largely avoided the gaffes and unvarnished opinions that used to plague the conservative movement. But to many of its critics, Ottawa’s obsession with controlling the message has become so all-encompassing that it now threatens both the health of Canada’s democracy and the country’s reputation abroad.

http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/05/03/when-science-goes-silent/

Allan Gregg Speech To Alberta Federation Of Labour Slams Harper Government (VIDEO)
The Huffington Post Alberta | Posted: 05/01/2013 12:12 pm EDT | Updated: 05/01/2013 12:18 pm EDT

In a bold move on Alberta soil, Canadian pundit and former Progressive Conservative pollster Allan Gregg delivered a speech to the Alberta Federation of Labour in Edmonton last weekend, criticizing the “assault on reason” by the current federal government.

The former Edmontonian returned to his hometown to deliver a speech, titled “1984 in 2013: The Assault on Reason,” to more than 500 trade unionists attending the annual convention.

“I came here to talk to you about a troubling trend, an assault on reason that doesn’t look like much different than the one described by George Orwell in his dystopian novel 1984…,” Gregg begins.

“It seems as though our government’s use of evidence and facts as the basis of policy is declining, and in their place, dogma, whim and political expediency are on the rise.”

“Even more troubling, especially from the perspective of a public opinion researcher, is that Canadians seem to be, if not buying it, certainly accepting it,” he continued.

Gregg rhymes off programs cut by the government in order to save money, including the long-form census.

“Why would anyone forsake these valuable insights and the chance to make good public policy, rather than bad public policy, under the pretense that rights were being violated when no one ever voiced concern? Was this a crazy one-off move … or was there something larger going on?” he asks.

Watch the full speech in the video below. Story continues after the video

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2013/05/01/allan-gregg-alberta-speech-harper-government_n_3193458.html

9th Conservative MP speaks out against being muzzled
Jennifer Ditchburn, The Canadian Press Published Tuesday, April 16, 2013 7:23PM EDT

OTTAWA — Another Conservative caucus meeting is expected to be dominated Wednesday by the divisive subject of an MP’s freedom to speak in Parliament without being silenced by the party leader.

There is every sign that a number of Conservative MPs refuse to allow the issue to subside three weeks after MPs vented in front of Prime Minister Stephen Harper about their right to speak their minds in the Commons.

Harper will not be in the room to quell any caucus disturbance. He is in London for the funeral of former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher.

On Tuesday, BC MP Russ Hiebert became the ninth Conservative MP to stand in the Commons and defend the right of MPs to speak freely without prior consent of the party whip.

continue reading: http://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/9th-conservative-mp-speaks-out-against-being-muzzled-1.1241039

Canada’s environmental activists seen as ‘threat to national security’
Police and security agencies describe green groups’ protests and petitions as ‘forms of attack’, documents reveal
Stephen Leahy in Uxbridge, Canada guardian.co.uk, Thursday 14 February 2013 17.41 GMT

Monitoring of environmental activists in Canada by the country’s police and security agencies has become the “new normal”, according to a researcher who has analysed security documents released under freedom of information laws.

Security and police agencies have been increasingly conflating terrorism and extremism with peaceful citizens exercising their democratic rights to organise petitions, protest and question government policies, said Jeffrey Monaghan of the Surveillance Studies Centre at Queen’s University in Kingston, Ontario.

The RCMP, Canada’s national police force, and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS) view activist activities such as blocking access to roads or buildings as “forms of attack” and depict those involved as national security threats, according to the documents.

Protests and opposition to Canada’s resource-based economy, especially oil and gas production, are now viewed as threats to national security, Monaghan said. In 2011 a Montreal, Quebec man who wrote letters opposing shale gas fracking was charged under Canada’s Anti-Terrorism Act. Documents released in January show the RCMP has been monitoring Quebec residents who oppose fracking.

“Any Canadians going to protest the Keystone XL pipeline in Washington DC on Sunday had better take precautions,” Monaghan said.

In a Canadian Senate committee on national security and defence meeting Monday Feb 11 Richard Fadden, the director of CSIS said they are more worried about domestic terrorism, acknowledging that the vast majority of its spying is done within Canada. Fadden said they are “following a number of cases where we think people might be inclined to acts of terrorism”.

Canada is at very low risk from foreign terrorists but like the US it has built a large security apparatus following 9/11. The resources and costs are wildly out of proportion to the risk said Monaghan.

“It’s the new normal now for Canada’s security agencies to watch the activities of environmental organisations,” he said.

Surveillance and infiltration of environmental protest movement has been routine in the UK for some time. In 2011 a Guardian investigation revealed that a Met police officer had been living undercover for seven years infiltrating dozens of protest groups.

Canadian security forces seem to have a “fixation” with Greenpeace, continually describing them as “potentially violent” in threat assessment documents, said Monaghan.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2013/feb/14/canada-environmental-activism-threat

2012

Stephen Harper government builds stone wall around information: Public editor
Canada has avoided the plague of quote approval but governments control the flow of information in other ways.
By: Kathy English Public Editor, Published on Fri Oct 19 2012

“I was appalled, but perhaps not really surprised, to learn of the quote approval practice you reveal,” reader Frances Smith told me in an email this week in response to my last column about the increasingly common practice of U.S. journalists allowing politicians to vet their quotes before publication.

“How politely you put it: ‘quote approval,’ ” Smith wrote. “There’s another not-so-polite word for it — Censorship.

“This is so ‘1984’ it’s creepy. The Ministry of Truth, or Minitrue, is upon us.”

As I wrote last week, it is a very good thing that Canadian journalists who cover politics, government and public affairs are not facing the same pressures as their American counterparts to agree to demands to allow politicians and public officials to vet, edit or approve their own words before publication as a condition of being interviewed.

But that doesn’t mean everything is tickety-boo here. Indeed, some alarming aspects of George Orwell’s “Ministry of Truth” as described in his classic novel, Nineteen Eighty-Four, are the all-too-real truth for Canadian journalists whose role it is to hold the Stephen Harper government to account.

It is no secret that the Harper government has gone to extraordinary lengths to seek to control the agenda and thwart journalists’ dual purpose of holding politicians to account and making government more transparent to citizens.

http://www.thestar.com/opinion/public_editor/2012/10/19/stephen_harper_government_builds_stone_wall_around_information_public_editor.html

Allan Gregg Speech Slams Tories’ Orwellian ‘Assault On Reason’
The Huffington Post Canada | Posted: 09/10/2012 3:50 pm EDT | Updated: 09/10/2012 4:16 pm EDT

Well-known Canadian pundit and former Progressive Conservative pollster Allan Gregg delivered a scathing critique of the the Conservative government under Stephen Harper in a speech at Carleton University last week in Ottawa.

Titled “1984 in 2012 – The Assault on Reason,” the speech was given at an event to celebrate the move of Carleton’s Faculty of Public Affairs into a new building.

In the address, Gregg draws parallels between the “nightmarish future” envisioned by George Orwell in his famous novel “1984” and the attitude displayed by the Conservatives in the present toward scientists, environmentalists and public servants.

The speech quickly went viral on social networks, accumulating thousands of shares.

Gregg is perhaps best known as a former regular on CBC’s political At Issue panel on “The National.” His resume, however, goes on and on.

He is chairman of the polling firm Harris Decima and served as a pollster and advisor to the PCs under Brian Mulroney and Kim Campbell. He was also a founding shareholder of the TV network YTV and has served as Chairman of the Toronto International Film Festival. He even founded a record label, The Song Corp., and has worked with the Tragically Hip, The Watchmen and Big Wreck.

You can read the complete text of Gregg’s speech below the slideshow.

continue reading: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/09/10/allan-gregg-speech-assault-on-reason_n_1871658.html

Stephen Harper government turns environmentalists into public enemies
By: Linda McQuaig Columnist, Published on Mon Jun 04 2012

Prime Minister uses the resources of the state to intimidate and silence critics.

Nicole Eaton may be Canada’s Mitt Romney.

The Republican presidential candidate comes across as a wealthy patrician with little sense of how tough the world can be for people who don’t have tens of millions of dollars at their disposal.

That tendency also seems to afflict Eaton, a wealthy Conservative fundraiser appointed to the Senate by Stephen Harper. She’s a leading figure in the Harper government’s campaign to aggressively go after environmental activist groups by threatening their charitable status.

“I don’t understand their fear of a chill,” Eaton told the Globe and Mail last week. Eaton, who was born wealthy and married into the Canadian department store fortune, has probably never experienced the kind of fear that the Harper government seems bent on instilling in environmental activists who dare to challenge its agenda.

In fact, creating a chill among environmental activists seems to be precisely the aim of the Harper team, as it gears up for a new stage in its battle to sideline anyone raising questions about the relentless growth of Alberta’s oilsands.

continue reading: http://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorialopinion/2012/06/04/stephen_harper_government_turns_environmentalists_into_public_enemies.html

Are Canadian Women Also Radical Enemies of the State?
Tia Everitt Wednesday, May 2nd, 2012

In an orgy of axe swinging and program bludgeoning last week, the federal government set their sights on taking a clean shot at the health and well-being of Canadian women. With all of the vitriol and paternalistic reining in recently, one can’t help but wonder if the government has lumped people with two X chromosomes in with the other “radical” enemies of the state, like Dr. David Suzuki or people who like whales. The latest casualties? 6 federally funded women’s health programs, which fall under the umbrella of the Women’s Health Contribution Program.

continue reading: http://politicsrespun.org/2012/05/are-canadian-women-also-radical-enemies-of-the-state/

Canadian government muzzles librarians and archivists, creates snitch line to report those who speak online or in public without permission
Cory Doctorow at 11:12 am Tue, Mar 19, 2013

Canada’s Conservative government has issued new regulations to librarians and archvists governing their free speech in public forums and online media. According to the Harper government, public servants owe a “duty of loyalty” to the “duly elected government” and must get permission from their political officers managers before making any public utterance — or even a private utterance in an online forum that may eventually leak to the public, to prevent “conflicts” or “risks” their departments.

The Tories have also rolled out a snitch-line where those loyal to the party line can report on their co-workers for failing to maintain ideological purity.

http://boingboing.net/2013/03/19/canadian-government-muzzles-li.html

Harper wages ‘wars’
By: Frances Russell Posted: 03/14/2012 1:00 AM | Comments: 0 | Last Modified: 03/16/2012 4:52 PM

Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s hostility toward Elections Canada is long-standing and visceral. As Elections Canada starts its investigation into harassing and misleading phone calls in the 2011 election, it’s uncertain how confident Canadians can be the Conservatives will co-operate or that Elections Canada can proceed without consequence.

As head of the right-wing National Citizens’ Coalition, Harper fought Elections Canada all the way to the Supreme Court over the ban on unlimited third-party election advertising and lost. From today’s vantage point, that court case has an eerie if not prophetic title — Harper vs. Elections Canada.

In 2001, Harper penned a fundraising letter to his members claiming “the Elections Canada jackasses are out of control” for charging a private citizen who transmitted election results in real time.

Harper has had two more bouts with the agency since becoming prime minister, accusing it of staging a partisan witch hunt and of being in bed with Liberals and the media. He attacked it for prosecuting the Conservatives for the “in and out” affair, illegally transferring money to 67 local candidates who then transferred it back to be spent on national ads, thus exceeding campaign spending limits. He also attacked it for upholding the law allowing veiled voting.

continue reading: http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/opinion/columnists/harper-wages-wars-142592086.html

Stephen Harper wages war on environmental activists opposing Northern Gateway Pipeline Project
Why won’t the prime minister shut up and allow the regulator to do its job?
by Matthew Kalkman on Feb 15, 2012 at 2:52 pm

Sometimes I feel like I am in a terrible nightmare and I can’t wake up. I had that feeling again when I read the story about fellow citizens being labelled by a Prime Minister’s Office official as “enemies of the government of Canada” solely for the issues they had with our government’s environmental policy. This nightmare only continued with the release of secret memos branding aboriginal communities as “adversaries” in the Enbridge pipeline debate, and took on global proportions when the attacks persisted during Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s trip to China. I gave myself a pinch, and yet still found I was in a country that was more and more difficult to recognize as the progressive Canada we all felt we inhabited. We now see Harper’s attack machine—which mastered its tactics against former Liberal leaders like Michael Ignatieff and Stéphane Dion—being pointed at Canadian citizens who care about having an honest discussion on our environment. This has become all too Orwellian.

The federal government empowered a Joint Review Panel under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act and the National Energy Board Act to rule on the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline Project. Enbridge hopes to build two 1,177-kilometre pipelines between Alberta and Kitimat to facilitate the export of oil to Asia.

The PMO’s criticism of environmental groups that are intervenors in the regulatory process of the pipeline hinders the integrity of the process itself. It also calls into question the ability of charitable foundations, which fund intervenors, to have views that differ from the Harper government. This is failed leadership.

http://www.straight.com/news/stephen-harper-wages-war-environmental-activists-opposing-northern-gateway-pipeline-project

Government labels environmentalists “terrorist threat” in new report
Canada’s new counter-terrorism strategy lists environmentalism next to white supremacy as an “issue-based” terrorist threat. Is eco-terrorism really a danger to Canadians?
Alexis Stoymenoff Posted: Feb 10th, 2012

This article can now be found in Extract: The Pipeline Wars Vol. 1 Enbridge. Extract contains a year of the Vancouver Observer’s powerful reporting on the proposed Enbridge pipeline. Get your copy here

Praise for Extract: The Pipeline Wars Vol. 1 Enbridge

“This is one of the greatest stories underway on the planet—the effort to wrest vast quantities of the dirtiest energy on earth from beneath Canada’s boreal forests, and the even greater and far more beautiful effort to stop them. The stakes—the health of the planet’s climate—simply couldn’t be higher.

Read this book. Extract does a great job of giving voice to some of the people on the front lines and giving you the information you need to engage in the debate.”

— Bill McKibben, climate activist and 350.org founder

Extract: The Pipeline Wars is a terrifying tour-de-force that opens a grim window on the future: this is not just about British Columbia, but about the world. As the fossil fuel industry taps dirtier and dirtier sources of energy to maintain their supremacy, as more regions of the world are despoiled in the process, the downhill run to ultimate destruction lies plainly before us…unless it can be stopped. Extract: The Pipeline Wars tells us why, and how, this must happen. Excellent, important work.

— William Pitt, Truthout editor and New York Times bestselling author.

We need information and hard facts to make thoughtful, forward-thinking decisions that reverberate long into the future. Here’s a book that cuts through the self-interested rhetoric of climate deniers and the fossil fuel industry.

— David Suzuki, environmentalist and David Suzuki Foundation founder

continue reading: http://www.vancouverobserver.com/sustainability/government-labels-environmentalists-terrorist-threat-new-report

ForestEthics: Affidavit Accuses Prime Minister’s Office Of Threatening Environmental Charity
Bob Weber, The Canadian Press First Posted: 01/24/2012 4:44 pm Updated: 01/26/2012 11:15 am

A former employee of an environmental group critical of a proposed oilsands pipeline says the Prime Minister’s Office threatened a funding agency if it didn’t pull its support for the group.

A spokesman for Prime Minister Stephen Harper denies the allegations.

In a sworn affidavit released Tuesday to The Canadian Press, Andrew Frank says he was told by his supervisor at ForestEthics that a PMO official had referred to their organization as an “enemy of the state.” The affidavit describes how staff were told their jobs were at risk after the official told Tides Canada, which supports the work of ForestEthics, that the government would “take down” all of the agency’s projects unless it cut ForestEthics loose.

Tides gets most of its money from private foundations and assists a wide array of social and environmental charities in Canada — from Big Brothers and Big Sisters to the World Wildlife Fund. It also partners with major corporations and governments, including federal government agencies.

Frank says he was fired from his job as communications adviser at ForestEthics on Monday over his plans to go public.

His affidavit details a series of conversations allegedly held in early January between ForestEthics and Tides staff.

continue reading: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/01/24/forestethics-pmo-stephen-harper_n_1229175.html

“Scary time” for Canada
Critics say they’re “dismayed” by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s anti-democratic and “McCarthy-esque” tactics, regarding regulatory hearings for the Northern Gateway oil sands pipeline.
Alexis Stoymenoff Posted: Jan 25th, 2012

ForestEthics whistleblower Andrew Frank claims that Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s office is resorting to threats to quell environmental opposition against the Northern Gateway pipeline. There have been conflicting reports on what actually happened at Frank’s organization, but for others in the environmental community his serious allegations come as no surprise.

In an open letter and signed affidavit, the former ForestEthics communications manager recounted how representatives from the Prime Minister’s Office attempted to silence pipeline critics, alleging that they blacklisted the environmental group as an “enemy of the Government of Canada”. Frank claimed that the PMO threatened the charitable status of the prominent Tides Canada Foundation, unless they agreed to pull funding from ForestEthics.

Tides CEO Ross McMillan would not comment on Frank’s allegations, saying his depiction of interactions with the Prime Minister’s Office was “inaccurate”. PMO press secretary Andrew MacDougall has denied that the office made any of the statements reported in the affidavit, and Frank has since been fired from his position.

Regardless of whether or not the Prime Minister’s Office named the organization an “enemy” of the state, the feeling of tension amongst environmental groups on the pipeline issue is hard to ignore. For John Bennett, Executive Director of Sierra Club Canada, Frank’s claims are simply another sign of the Harper government’s aggressive tactics.

“I can’t really comment on what was said there, but I can tell you that I have personally been yelled at by John Baird when he was the environment minister,” said Bennett.

“So I’m not surprised that someone in the Prime Minister’s Office might say something like that. It certainly rings true with how they talk to us whenever we do get a chance to talk to anyone.”

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/sustainability/2012/01/25/scary-time-canada

Harper’s Former Schoolmate Now on His Enemies List
‘Radical foreign’ oil sands foe Bill McKibben attended Toronto elementary school with Stephen Harper.
By Andrew MacLeod, 19 Jan 2012, TheTyee.ca

One of the “radical foreign” environmentalists the Canadian government has targetted in recent weeks appears to have gone to elementary school with Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

“I didn’t know him, but it does sound like we overlapped,” said Bill McKibben in an email to The Tyee.

McKibben founded the global climate campaign 350.org and his books include The End of Nature, which his website says was the first book on climate change for a general audience when it came out in 1989.

In early January when Harper’s Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver criticized “radical” foreign environmentalists who oppose the proposed Gateway pipeline that would take oil from Alberta’s oil sands across northern British Columbia to the Pacific Ocean, McKibben felt targetted.

“I think he’s talking about people like me,” he wrote in a Vancouver Sun column. “I’ve spent much of the last year helping rally opposition to the Keystone XL pipeline from the oil sands to the Gulf of Mexico. I was arrested outside the White House in August, and emceed the demonstration that brought thousands of people to circle the White House in November.”

The campaign McKibben led against the Keystone XL pipeline has so far succeeded, by the way, with United States President Barack Obama announcing Jan. 18 he’s rejected TransCanada Corp.’s application for a building permit, though the company is welcome to reapply after making a small route change.

Once were neighbours

http://thetyee.ca/News/2012/01/19/Harper-McKibben-Schoolmates/

2011

Stephen Harper’s hit list, organizations whose funding has been cut or ended
Dennis Gruending March 25, 2011

The Conservative government, or the Harper government as it insists upon being called, has either fallen or engineered its own defeat and the election is upon us. This is perhaps a good time to take stock of who the Harperites have spent their time attacking in the past several years. (They have also lavished favour on their own, appointing them to be judges, to the Immigration Review Board, the CRTC or other federal agencies). The list of organizations that have been shut down and cut back, and the individuals bullied, is a long one and we can expect it to grow if, as seems likely, the Conservatives are reelected. I have written extensively about some of these actions, including the government’s attack on the ecumenical group KAIROS and the shameful treatment of the Rights and Democracy organization, but the following list, culled from on line sources, is more comprehensive.

continue reading: http://www.dennisgruending.ca/2011/03/stephen-harpers-hit-list/

Research Further: Harper’s Hitlists and Enemies

  • Hit List Voices-Voix Coalition – The hit list documents more than 80 cases of individuals, organizations and public service institutions that have been muzzled, defunded, shut down or subjected to vilification. A further dozen are currently in development. The evidence shows a pattern of silencing people, shutting out knowledge and narrowing the democratic space for those who engage in advocacy and dissent in Canada.The hit list allows you to filter your search by profile type (e.g. individuals), by type of target (e.g. women or environmental organizations), or by silencing tactics (e.g. defunding).
    http://voices-voix.ca/hit-list
  • “Enemies of the State” United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, Washington, D.C. – Although Jews were the main target of Nazi hatred, they were not the only group persecuted. Other individuals and groups were considered “undesirable” and “enemies of the state.” Once the voices of political opponents were silenced, the Nazis stepped up their terror against other “outsiders.”
    http://www.ushmm.org/outreach/en/article.php?ModuleId=10007727
  • First they came… WikipediA – “First they came…” is a famous statement and provocative poem attributed to pastor Martin Niemöller (1892–1984) about the sloth of German intellectuals following the Nazis’ rise to power and the subsequent purging of their chosen targets, group after group. There is some disagreement over the exact wording of the quotation and when it was created; the content of the quotation may have been presented differently by Niemöller on different occasions.
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_they_came…
  • Mario Savio The Machine Speech via Sproul Hall Steps Dec 2 1964 LiveWord? Canada via YouTube – “There is a time when the operation of the machine becomes so odious, makes you so sick at heart, that you can’t take part; you can’t even passively take part, and you’ve got to put your bodies upon the gears and upon the wheels, upon the levers, upon all the apparatus, and you’ve got to make it stop. And you’ve got to indicate to the people who run it, to the people who own it, that unless you’re free, the machine will be prevented from working at all!”
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_C3yoxTSEk

Hat tip to D and Occupy Canada for providing some of the details!


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

#Harper #CPC #NeoCons #Commies #Censorship and #Twitter…

Do birds of a feather really flock together?

During this troubling time of natural and man-induced disaster, something very dark and strange is lurking in the shadows. But Who? But Why? This will be a relatively short introduction to a rather strange couple of days, but we know now that something is rotten to the core.

What could have caught the attention of a lowly Tweeter (@opHarper) with a couple dozen followers?

Your account is suspended and is not permitted to send Tweets.
09Jul2013

Amongst a swirl of scandals plaguing the Harper Conservative Government and during the rail and flood crisis’ chaos our account was suspended and was not permitted to send Tweets.

What could have caused such controversy and intrigue?

This leaves us in a pickle since we have seemed to notice that the CPC, along with Postmedia News, CTV News, Sun News Network and Ezra Levant seemed to be pushing an agenda, either in anticipation of or hoping to instigate violence.

What does this mean for “”Democracy”?

The connections that may have been most troubling to “them” was the stark comparison their actual policies are more akin to Communism and they seem to fit the profile of the radical-right-wing supporters, provocateurs and antagonists with their rhetoric and propaganda.

What is wrong with this picture?

Since we are unsure and still processing some data and compiling some stats, we though you could help us figure out what the problem could be. Sadly, we were unable to grab much more than the text of our last adventure before the page blanked. Gladly, we were able to acquire the text and have provided it below. Since all of the info-graphics were dumped along with the account we will assemble a gallery later, so be sure to check back…

“#NorthDakota’s #Oil Rush: If the #Boom Goes #Bust http://live.wsj.com/video/north-dakota-oil-rush-if-the-boom-goes-bust/7CBC6A33-3803-4AD7-8377-9497B1FC4A3B.html#!7CBC6A33-3803-4AD7-8377-9497B1FC4A3B

Dump Harper is brought to you by CAHR, Canadians Against the Harper Regime Collaboration https://dumpharper.wordpress.com

Canuckistan · dumpharper.wordpress.com

687 Tweets
2 Following
25 Followers

Edit profile
Tweets
2 new Tweets

Jason Kenney Jason Kenney ‏@kenneyjason 8 Jul

Best wishes to my friend and colleague @ToewsVic as he leaves public life after thirteen years of service.
Expand
Kara Ardan Kara Ardan ‏@KaraArdan 1h

@kenneyjason declaring allegiance to his buddy #Toews in the #Cons circle says a lot about #Kenney ‘s warped ideology doesn’t it! #cdnpoli
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 57m

@KaraArdan @kenneyjason Highly Dedicated at securing $3.1 billion, Job Complete, Anchors away @VicToews #cdnpoli #CPC pic.twitter.com/vUha28RPK0
Hide photo
Reply
Delete
Favorite
Embedded image permalink
9:56 AM – 9 Jul 13 (GMT-07:00) · Details
Tweet text
Reply to @KaraArdan @kenneyjason @VicToews

Image will appear as a link
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 1h

@SunNewsNetwork @sunlorrie 3 years after #Dilbit #PipeLine #OilSpill, slow recovery haunts #KalamazooRiver: http://www.freep.com/article/20130623/NEWS06/306230059/Kalamazoo-River-oil-spill … #cdnpoli
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 1h

@ohcanadian Hmm, #MMA #Rail is a small fish like #XLFoods that also suffered a lax-regulatory “incident” –> http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/story/2013/01/09/calgary-xl-jbs-purchase.html … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 1h

@SunNewsNetwork COVER UP! @ezralevant already said #Rockefellers were responsible! #cdnpoli #PetCoke #Harper #Bush pic.twitter.com/QgUcyyg7kb
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 1h

@BrianStorsethMP Highly Dedicated to secure a $3.1 billion secret, Job Complete, Anchors away for @VicToews #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/bie0zCEFSZ
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 1h

@ohcanadian @Hepworks –> @ezralevant #Harper #CPC waste real #energy opposing alternative energy & promoting dirty energy #Commies #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 2h

Some claim #Harper and his #CPC to be #Fascist but oddly enough their agenda seems more akin to the #Commies #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/0cJb6s00AZ
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 2h

@tersestuff @BCLaraby @canadiancynic @Ggulo Mission Accomplished, $3.1 billion offshore, Anchors Away! #cdnpoli #CPC pic.twitter.com/9VFlPciBLp
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 3h

ALERT “Boomerang Routes” Canadian internet traffic is often routed through #US NOT #Canada http://ixmaps.ca/sovereignty #NSA #cdnpoli #sovereignty
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 3h

@ArawakWarrior @globepolitics Well, since #Harper and the #CPC are stuck in the 1800’s rewriting history http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/hangmen.html #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 3h

@tersestuff @PatOndabak This #MKULTRA “phenomenon” primarly affects 1950’s thinking #NeoCons by design. http://www.levity.com/aciddreams/samples/xrated.html … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 3h

@rob_bieber @jeanpetr She won’t arrive until after Postmedia scrubs this story, someone may ask questions http://www.theprovince.com/news/Prime+minister+wife+sells+entire+stock+portfolio/7806612/story.html … #cdnpoli
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 3h

@BroadbentInst Hmmm, under #Harper’s #CPC it is more like we are really witnessing “the end of #Canadians” in the workplace, eh? #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 4h

@Beari8it Indeed! Yet we can only hope that there’s a pending #RCMP investigation considering $$$ “may effectively be joint assets” #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 4h

@ClimateNow Hmmm, Record-setting algal bloom in #LakeErie caused by agricultural and meteorological trends http://www.pnas.org/content/110/16/6448.full … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 4h

The #Harper scandal you were not supposed to know about –> #liquidated #portfolio #stockmarket #investments http://www.theprovince.com/news/Prime+minister+wife+sells+entire+stock+portfolio/7806612/story.html … #cdnpoli
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 4h

@calg_kiaguy @AGg320hb @mattmchau –> PostMedia scrubbed 4 sites so far attempting to disappear this story http://www.theprovince.com/news/Prime+minister+wife+sells+entire+stock+portfolio/7806612/story.html … #cdnpoli
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 4h

@CanuckCommander Just the #UK dumping off second-hand military junk on #Canada –> #Harper #CPC PORKurements http://ca.news.yahoo.com/blogs/dailybrew/british-mp-says-canada-daft-buy-problem-plagued-145547609.html … #cdnpoli
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 4h

Record-setting algal bloom in #LakeErie caused by agricultural and meteorological trends http://www.pnas.org/content/110/16/6448.full … #cdnpoli #MuzzledScientists
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 4h

@PatOndabak #MonsantoProtectionAct #Bill933 #FarmerAssuranceProvision #SuperPollinators #SuperBees #RoboBees http://storify.com/fjrouselane/super-bees-and-robo-pollinators-if-monsanto-contin … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 5h

@Proud_Canadian1 @ezralevant claimed the #Rockefellers are financing #EcoTerrorists #cdnpoli #PetCoke #Harper #Bush pic.twitter.com/EBDvDev0jw
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 5h

@LizzyM_TO The Empire burns as the no work and all play Hollywood Monarchy has record royalties to pissaway http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2349433/Queen-5-pay-rise-Monarchs-income-hit-38-million-year.html … #cdnpoli
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 5h

FYI: “Boomerang Routes” –> Canadian internet traffic is often routed through #US NOT #Canada! http://ixmaps.ca/sovereignty #cdnpoli #sovereignty
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 5h

@wjoates Consider the connections –> “Effective wildfire mitigation might sharply reduce property values.” http://csbj.com/2012/07/20/wildfire-warnings-have-gone-ignored-since-1990s/ … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 5h

#Harper’s #FreeTrade with #China = #SupplySide #Economics 101: Let’s check our investments https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7JA7PXXCJo … #cdnpoli #BigOil #Commies
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 5h

@BCLaraby The Truth About the Useless #F35 & #F22: #USDoD, #USAF, #RAAF, #RANDCorp data shows it’s “double-inferior” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27qdB1D0s9M
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 5h

@_Confessor @ezralevant claimed the #Rockefellers are financing the #EcoTerrorists! #cdnpoli #PetCoke #Harper #Bush pic.twitter.com/3Wk92vkoBp
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6h

Fear not @SunNewsNetwork @ToewsVic’s job is complete and anchors away with $3.1billion secrets #cdnpoli #CPC #Commies pic.twitter.com/QLZiMb9Vxe
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6h

The #DumpHarper Daily updated twice daily on the 7’s ▸ Top stories via @cheena1 @northernck @stubbenkammer ▸ http://paper.li/opHarper/1330339678 … #cdnpoli
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6h

@4got –> It may be potentially leaked that in 2011 #Harper arrested #EcoTerrorist #Noah under the offence of Flood Predicting #cdnpoli #CPC
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6h

@RosieBarton #Neanderthal #Harper and the cowardly #CPC #Commies do NOT want women to care about #cdnpoli, period. #HeManWomanHatersClub
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6h

#Harper #Tory MP @KerryLynneFindl lobbied @MinRonaAmbrose on constituent’s behalf http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/parliamentary-secretary-lobbied-ambrose-on-constituent-s-behalf-1.1357651 … #cdnpoli #StatusQuo #CPC #Commies
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6h

$3.1billion @ToewsVic responds to interference allegations: “I’m responsible for the #RCMP” http://globalnews.ca/news/517183/im-responsible-for-the-rcmp-vic-toews-responds-to-interference-allegations/ … #cdnpoli #CPC #Harper
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6h

Hmmm, $3.1 billion missing –> #RCMP To serve and protect @ToewsVic from surprises? http://www2.macleans.ca/2013/04/29/to-serve-and-protect-vic-toews-from-surprises/ … #cdnpoli #CPC #Harper #Commies
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7h

@TheCurrentCBC Not as long as #Harper’s #CPC continue to ignore and instigate the radical-right! http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/08/dhs/all/ … #cdnpoli #StatusQuo
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 10h

Why I am a #Conservative By Senator Mike #Duffy #Cavendish #PEI –> “#Harper got it exactly right” http://www.mikeduffy.ca/Conserv-Heritage-Essay.pdf … #cdnpoli #Commies
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 11h

@__AngryCat –> So, the #Commies sent the #Harper #Ghestapo, eh? #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 13h

Maybe #Harper’s “#ReFoundingParty of #Canada” can use 1800’s regs to figure out effective #Rail safety https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Railroad_Safety_Appliance_Act … #cdnpoli #CPC
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 13h

@Stevergillis @tcote This is the #UK pawning off more second-hand military junk and gives #Harper’s #CPC another PORKurement deal #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 13h

#AskaSillyQuestion –> What’s safer –> Sending #TarSands #Dilbit through #Pilelines or #Fracking #Oil by #Rail? #cdnpoli #cpc #ndp #lpc
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 13h

@jimbobbysez Wiki info about the #Bakken formation in #NorthDakota where the #Oil came from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bakken_formation … #LacMegantic #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 14h

Meet the #NorthDakota #Oil Boomtown that crossed paths with #LacMegantic http://www.businessinsider.com/youve-never-seen-anything-like-the-williston-oil-boom-2012-3?op=1http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2013-02-06/north-dakotas-bakken-oil-finally-hits-the-east-coast … #Bakken #cdnpoli
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 14h

Breaking News! It may be potentially leaked that in 2011 #Harper arrested #EcoTerrorist #Noah under the offence of Flood Predicting #cdnpoli
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 14h

@PatOndabak Well, something says #TellVicEverything will be just fine going back to what he luvs most #C30 #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/DFxYtwAqUP
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 15h

Job Complete… Anchors Away! ~ @ToewsVic 2013 #TellVicEverything #HideYourBabySitters #CPC #C30 #Torture #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/xLOK9Ig0sc
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 15h

Sadly @FMPsportsguy, most were not aware they bought a home in flood plains, others assUmed or could not get coverage #PonziScheme #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 15h

@Calculator60 @pmharper’s inexperience and lack of knowledge of the global context, keeps him mentally stuck in the Colonial 1800’s #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 16h

@Eric0Lawton More than likely #Harper’s #CPC is facilitating the #UK dumping their used second-hand miltary surplus upon us AGAIN! #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 16h

@UrquhartMP Problem for #Harper is that #Kissinger survived to protect #Nixon but #CPC version #TomFlanagan did not #cdnpoli #CPC #Commies
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 16h

@kjmccauley Same reason as why politicians who dare simply to disagree with goofy righty views are deemed ‘polarizing’. #StatusQuo #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 16h

@RougeMenace Oddly, @pmharper #CPC said similar thing about “figuring out root causes” exploiting #Boston? http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/04/17/trudeaus-response-to-boston-marathon-bombing-was-unacceptable-made-excuses-for-terrorists-harper-says/ … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 16h

#RCMP should QUESTION @SunNewsNetwork and @ezralevant about #EzraLevant and #CPC #Commies promoting political violence in #Canada! #cdnpoli
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 16h

Hey @ToewsVic, b4 you go, Surrender YOUR passport Open YOUR books Tell the #RCMP where OUR $3.1 billion is! #TellVicEverything #CPC #cdnpoli
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 16h

Job Complete… Anchors Away! ~ @ToewsVic 2013 #TellVicEverything #HideYourBabySitters #CPC #C30 #Torture #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/P5Zf5Ur4KQ
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 17h

@NeilJEdmondson Hmmm, maybe @GRenouf should QUESTION @ezralevant about Ezra Levant promoting political violence in Canada! #cdnpoli #Commies
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 19h

@LakeBass @cdn2010 If deliberate stats show the most likely culprits R ignored right-wing extremists http://www.wired.com/dangerroom/2012/08/dhs/all/ … #cdnpoli @PnPCBC
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 20h

Mr Owl, How many licks does it take to get to the rotten core of #Harper’s #CPC? http://speeches.empireclub.org/62912/data #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/mMEtn4ZsDU
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 21h

@Calculator60 I can appreciate that exercise of #FreeTrade, but isnt that more akin to #TradebyBarter? http://oll.libertyfund.org/title/2088/158912 … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@NeilJEdmondson In other words, #TomFlanagan bailed so #Harper’s #PMO and #CPC need to wait for #Koch #Kissinger #Bush for scripts #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@TuxcedoCat lot’s o’ questions re: #Boeing777 technology “Patent US5531402 – Wireless flight control system” http://www.google.com/patents/US5531402 … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Thanks @billyandrsn! #Harper #CPC propaganda claims to be #Canada’s Founding Party, so we updated the errors #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/KzIY9gqHMr
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Sorry, @billyandrsn Nov 5 1873 Canada’s first PM, #Tory Sir John A Macdonald, resigned due to election fraud http://faculty.marianopolis.edu/c.belanger/quebechistory/encyclopedia/CanadianPacificScandal.htm … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

#Corporatism #FossilFuel #Subsidies #PublicPrivatePartnerships #VentureCapital #Investments #Harper #Commies #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/JhdRozq05a
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@muddywolfking –> @ezralevant claimed yesterday the #Rockefellers are responsible #cdnpoli #PetCoke #Harper #Bush pic.twitter.com/78c1AULl45
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@ezralevant @CreeClayton Here’s Yuri Bezmenov explaining how the #KGB created #Nixon #Kissinger #NeoCons https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cnf0I2dQ0i0 … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@NeilJEdmondson They are you and you are them. Placing Party above Country is a problem only #Commies enjoy https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cnf0I2dQ0i0 … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@unsilenced_majo @JimWatsonOttawa @pmharper Heather and Paul McCartney Lead Global Plea to #Boycott #Canada: http://www.boycott-canada.co.uk/news/2006archive/mccartney2.htm … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

The Truth About Useless Double Inferior #F35 and #F22 by #USDoD, #USAF, #RAAF, and #RAND –> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=27qdB1D0s9M&list=PLC876B627F7FC29A3&index=4 … #cdnpoli #CPC #Harper
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@evdelen @goingprorogue Tesla had this all figured out 100 years ago #Morgan #Rockefeller hijacked it for #DebtSlavery #War profits #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@etobian Let the Looting Begin! Here is the #Bush playbook that @pmharper and the #Harper #CPC are utilizing http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2005/092005/cray.html … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Twice blessed, eh @pmharper? –> #CPC Disaster Profiteering and #Comrade Contracting: Let the Looting Begin! http://multinationalmonitor.org/mm2005/092005/cray.html … #cdnpoli
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@Calculator60 Well put! Let’s explore results #Harper’s #FreeTrade with #China = #SupplySide #Economics 101 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7JA7PXXCJo … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@RachelDecoste @pmharper Because #War is Big Government’s Best Friend and #Harper and #CPC are #Commies –> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN3EryUG0EA … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Look out #Harper, just like 1903, “someone” has sights locked on #Tories and it’s gonna be rough 4 the #CPC #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/7sGNzEkliL
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@notsteveharper @LessGovMoreFun @ezralevant Fear not #CPC, your right-wing terrorists are safe, for now… http://www.salon.com/2012/08/15/dhss_right_wing_terror_blind_spot/ … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@PatOndabak Part of a global “trend” amongst the #GateKeepers –> #Turkey’s media: Caught in the wheels of power? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twb8MrATiv4
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@TUSKS71 Where facts converge and materialize #Harper’s #FreeTrade with #China = #SupplySide #Economics 101 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7JA7PXXCJo … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@ugottabekiddin @NotMyCanada_ This “issue” is a distraction using #Pipelines vs #RailRoads with the #BigOil #CPC driving both sides #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@NotMyCanada_ @ugottabekiddin Follow the #Dilbit from #Alberta 2 #Detroit 2 #NovaScotia http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/business/huge-petroleum-coke-pile-making-way-back-to-canada.html … #cdnpoli #PetCoke #TarSands
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@NotMyCanada_ @ugottabekiddin #ven better question is how many of these are hidden in plain sight? #PetCoke #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/pYDfAii36l
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@OhToFreeCanada @ezralevant claimed the #Rockefellers are financing the #terrorists! #cdnpoli #PetCoke #Harper #Bush pic.twitter.com/QzISZgXA13
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@KKineshanko @ohcanadian @NeilJEdmondsonIt Why do so many #Harper #CPC #Trolls feel the need to seek “protection”? pic.twitter.com/Icg5nhewGS
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@KKineshanko @ohcanadian @NeilJEdmondson #Harper’s #FreeTrade with #China = #SupplySide #Economics 101 Let’s explore https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7JA7PXXCJo
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@Belgraves @Pennyvane10 #Harper’s #FreeTrade with #China = #SupplySide #Economics 101: Let’s explore “our” investment http://youtube.com/watch?v=Q7JA7PXXCJo
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

A few hours ago @ezralevant claimed the #Rockefellers are financing the #terrorists! #cdnpoli #PetCoke #Harper #Bush pic.twitter.com/PNS4c8SJwT
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@NeilJEdmondson –> @ezralevant claims the #Rockefellers are financing #terrorists! #cdnpoli #PetCoke #Harper #Bush pic.twitter.com/IWyYCfQ4wH
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@lurch5877 It is hard to break a system, that was created in the 1800’s to dispel the notion that anything trumps globalization #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@_AngryCat -> @ezralevant of @SunNewsNetwork claims the #Rockefellers are responsible #cdnpoli #PetCoke #Harper #Bush pic.twitter.com/m4g493b8mP
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@lurch5877 Like religions, parties are never as they appear and are partitioned into 3 parts, extreme-left – middle – extreme-right #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@etobian #Harper’s #FreeTrade with #China = #SupplySide #Economics 101: Let’s explore return on investment https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7JA7PXXCJo … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@lurch5877 it’s not so much which “party” controls CTV as they are actors, it’s which special “interests” control the propaganda. #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@tersestuff That’s the beauty of being #Commies. The more $$$ you have, the more self-serving “State” you can create for #Comrades #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@tersestuff Indeed, but what makes this interesting is how many #Harper #CPC trolls “protect” their tweets when exposed as #Commies #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@tersestuff @ezralevant claims the #Rockefellers are financing these anti- #oil #railway #pipeline blockades #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/8citwxY4N0
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@NeilJEdmondson If, nearly half of #Canada’s millionaires are immigrants. Then, how many can and cannot vote http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/nearly-half-of-our-millionaires-are-immigrants-new-canadians-1.1324413 … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@akingsmith Yup, the #Tories: #Canada’s Founding Party #NeoCon-ning #Canucks since 1867 or 1812 #CPC #Harper #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/cSQDevnG9z
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@aaronpaquette This is when the whole #PonziScheme implodes in realtime as the #GateKeepers emerge, converge, devour #cdnpoli #CPC #NDP #LPC
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@quiet888 #Harper vs #Alberta and the #AusterityStampede Come Hell or High Water… Let the Looting Proceed! https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/2013/07/01/harper-vs-alberta-and-the-austeritystampede/ … #cdnpoli
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@bigpicguy Beware –> The #Harper #CPC Economic Extraction Action Plan 2013 is headed your way! #PetCoke http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/business/huge-petroleum-coke-pile-making-way-back-to-canada.html … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Keep up with the latest trending topics regarding the shenanigans of the #Harper Regime and the #CPC Machine http://paper.li/opHarper/1330339678 … #cdnpoli
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

#Harper’s #FreeTrade with #China = #SupplySide #Economics 101: The “investments” become transparent https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7JA7PXXCJo … #TPP #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

#FreeTrade with #China: http://youtu.be/Q7JA7PXXCJo?a via @YouTube
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Does Attacking Neoconservatism Reflect Racism or Reality? Why many conservatives are afraid of this debate. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fp2Tksg1O0M … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

#Neoconservatism: An Obituary for an Idea https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Oh6DmjQaho … Thompson charges that #NeoCons are a species of anti-Americans. #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Pre-civil war South slave cost equivalent of $40,000. Today, a throw-away slave can be had for $50 or so. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qfCiQJE_sBg … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@CometsMum Yuri Bezmenov, a trained subverter tells about the influence of the #KGB on the Western Press https://youtube.com/watch?v=Cnf0I2dQ0i0 … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@CometsMum Due 2 recent revelations about past #KGB ties 2 the #Harper branded #CPC, the #Commies propping the #PMO are scrambling. #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

FYI: How to spot the #Commies leader –> #Harper’s #CPC orders #RCMP to block media from questioning him. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2hlpNe6sXFc … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

@JoshLambier @CdnHeritage Wow, #CPC must have a lot of history to recreate, photos of #Harper to display and #cdnpoli archives to torch!
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Flashback: #Harper copies #Australian PM #JohnHoward’s post 9/11 #Iraq speech scripted by #Kissinger #Bush https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kMot7gyS2bo … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

FYI: The #Lies That Lead To #War: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL36C16C984A7DFDB9 … #CPC #Harper #cdnpoli #Iraq
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

FYI: #God and #Gold: #Britain, #America, and the Making of the Modern World. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PMESKhOHCC4 …, #CFR #Kissinger #Harper #CPC #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Bonus Round of our “out” the Home Grown #Commies and #Terrorists Event is “Exposed #NeoCon”. Let’s play… #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/pWs58r22K5
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Round 3 of our “out” the Home Grown #Commies and #Terrorists Event is “#NeoCon Sabotage Spin”. Let’s play… #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/c7FTllDbrm
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Round 2 of our “out” the Home Grown #Commies and #Terrorists Event is “Accusatory #NeoCon”. Let’s play… #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/eW6tG50zBr
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

Hmmm, Seems like a good time to host an “out” the Home Grown #Commies and #Terrorists Event. Let’s play… #cdnpoli pic.twitter.com/YmHewjHf7M
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

How to expose #Harper and the #CPC = #Terrorists Watch @ezralevant censor replies that connect the Extreme-Left 2 the Extreme-Right #cdnpoli
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 7 Jul

How to expose #Harper and the #CPC = #Commies. Watch @ezralevant censor replies that #Nixon + #Kissinger = #KGB –> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cnf0I2dQ0i0
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@riseupforcanada Answer: Due to the quick exit by #TomFlanagan, we are still awaiting scripts from #Kissinger. Please Stand By #cdnpoli #CPC
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@ezralevant WTF? A #NeoCon admits that #Rockefeller, #Bush and #Koch fund the Extreme-Left AND Extreme-Right? #cdnpoli #Harper #CPC #Commies
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

What Exactly is in #Dilbit? It is a Secret. Hints –> #Bitumen #TarSands #PetCoke #Harper #CPC #Exxon #Pipelines http://www.dailykos.com/story/2013/04/08/1200002/-What-Exactly-is-in-Dilbit-It-is-a-Secret
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@OutlawTory @ezralevant The #CPC terrorists also sabotaged #Detroit and are headed to #NovaScotia! http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/business/huge-petroleum-coke-pile-making-way-back-to-canada.html … #cdnpoli #PetCoke
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@ezralevant #CPC R #Commies! @CreeClayton Here’s Yuri Bezmenov explaining how the #KGB created #Nixon and #NeoCons https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cnf0I2dQ0i0
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

Tip @ezralevant: #Harper’s #PMO has been busy organizing the right-wing extremists to push the #CPC Economic Extraction Action Plan #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

It only get’s better for the Hollywood Monarchy, no work and all play with record royalties to pissaway http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2349433/Queen-5-pay-rise-Monarchs-income-hit-38-million-year.html … #cdnpoli
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@gunsandlaws That’s what happens when blindly accepting propaganda #Harper and the #CPC spreads They sell #Freedom provide #Tyranny #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@aaronpaquette Postmedia forgot to remove http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/prime+minister+wife+sells+entire+stock+portfolio/7802376/story.html … & #Harper’s wife was asked why she sold off entire stock portfolio #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

The #FreeTrade Charade (Trans-Pacific Partnership) http://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/transatlantic-and-transpacific-free-trade-trouble-by-joseph-e–stiglitz … #WTO #TPP #cdnpoli #Harper #CPC #Sovereignty #PoliceState #uspoli
Expand
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

You, Me, and the #SPP: Trading #Democracy for #CorporateRule https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lBBCeWoPi74 … #TILMA #cdnpoli #Harper #PoliceState #uspoli #FreeTrade
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

#Global #Mining and The #UglyCanadian: #Harper’s #CPC actively interferes in the affairs of other countries https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gx85CDGxZeE … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@OhToFreeCanada @aaronpaquette #Pipelines enhance offshore investors, the others generate jobs + massive spin-off + tax-revenue #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@OhToFreeCanada @aaronpaquette …What emerges is a stark difference in employment PLUS the scope, reach and effects of a spill/accident…
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

Well @OhToFreeCanada, do some real math by adding your comment to @aaronpaquette’s then factor ALL benefits vs costs for true analysis…
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@goingprorogue That is mighty sad propaganda spin about #Egypt @anthonyfurey Dip back to 1882 (Anglo-Egyptian War) and start again #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@deepgreendesign @DeSmogBlog Spin factory Update: No #Oil found yet from #Athabasca #TarSands #OilSpill http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/edmonton/Province+searches+possible+slick+Athabasca+River/8626040/story.html … #cdnpoli
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@jbierm02 @RCIisLeaking @Min_Reyes #Harper made it perfectly clear exploiting #Boston “this is no time to look for root problems” #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@SunNewsNetwork @anthonyfurey That is mighty sad propaganda spin about #Egypt Dip back to 1882 – Anglo-Egyptian War and start again #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

FYI: b4 #Harper’s #CPC rewrites to much history into the narrative –> #Ottawapiskat #Blowback #ShagTheDog https://ottawapiskat.wordpress.com/shagthedog/harper-cpc-blowback/blowback-timelines/ … #cdnpoli
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@OutIawTory –> @pmharper told a different story of his trusting nature and picked up where they left off http://speeches.empireclub.org/62912/data #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

#War: Big Government’s Best Friend https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BN3EryUG0EA … #Iraq #Libya #Syria #Afghanistan #Egypt #TarSands #Harper #Bush #CPC #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

American Drug War: The Last White Hope https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6CyuBuT_7I4 … #WaronDrugs #Afghanistan #Nixon #Harper #Bush #CPC #PoliceState #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

The #Oil Factor: Behind the #WaronTerror https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGakDrosLuA … #Iraq #Libya #Afghanistan #TarSands #PetCoke #Harper #Bush #CPC #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@OutlawTory @MuskokaMoneybag @WButler2011 @Wetaskijen @FletJan #NeoCon deficits can be attributed to this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGakDrosLuA … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

Well @PacoLebel, @notsteveharper pretty much sums it all up. If the left are all tied to the #Mafia, Then the #CPC must be tied to #AlQaeda
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@DarlaSaintMary No worries, just a 100+yr old ponzi scheme cooked up by #Capitalists aka: #Commies #Fascists #Socialists #Marxists #Nazis
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@HuffPostCanada Solution: #Harper’s boss should be #TarSands and feathered and sent to #NovaScotia through #Detroit! http://www.nytimes.com/2013/06/07/business/huge-petroleum-coke-pile-making-way-back-to-canada.html?_r=0
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@JustinTrudeau Look at #Egypt, ponder, why has a interim govt not been formed and mobilized b4 #Harper’s #CPC does more damage? #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@feralfrank The #CPC will keep #Duffy media-bias fever alive as they await directions and scripts from #Harper’s offshore overlords #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@PatOndabak Just a top-down, post ipo, #BigBrother data-mining operation to breach accounts, identify, monitor and “kettle” certain users.
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@jasonkeays Piling up, storing and transporting #TarSands by-product #PetCoke faces NO regulatory anything. Bonus, it’s cheaper than #Coal!
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@Prairiepiper It only get’s better for the Hollywood Monarchy, no work and all play with record royalties to pissaway http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2349433/Queen-5-pay-rise-Monarchs-income-hit-38-million-year.html
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@PatOndabak Plus –> How will Postmedia disappear (censor) articles that have been paid for, on behalf of #Harper and the #CPC? #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@L0cutux @canadiancynic @Badger_Janzen 1st #Tories Founding Party by Electoral Fraud #PacificScandal, #CPC = Founding Party by #Robocalls
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@Bergg69 #Harper’s wife knew something last fall –> Prime minister’s wife sells off entire stock portfolio http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/prime+minister+wife+sells+entire+stock+portfolio/7802376/story.html … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

Was this orchestrated by CSIS and the RCMP to instil fear into the minds of Canadians or divert from #PMO? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkOy61TihlA … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@Urban_Su Same script + players = creeping death: #Tobacco + #Piplines + #Petcoke = Koch Bros http://www.desmogblog.com/2013/02/11/study-confirms-tea-party-was-created-big-tobacco-and-billionaires … #Harper #CPC #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@Urban_Su ‘To quarterback behind the scenes, third-party efforts’: the #tobacco industry and the #TeaParty http://tobaccocontrol.bmj.com/content/early/2013/02/20/tobaccocontrol-2012-050815.full … #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@pqpolitics @SultanAlQassemi Hmmm, coup d’état? Flashback July 19, 2010 “Is #Egypt on the brink?” http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/egypt/100717/mohamed-elbaradei-ayman-nour-elections … #ElBaradei #cdnpoli
View conversation
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@SunNewsNetwork Well, it seems to me as if the #PacificScandal “almost” stacks up to = #CPC + #Robocalls https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Twb8MrATiv4 … #cdnpoli
View media
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@Belgraves @Urban_Su Well @jjmstark, polls/ surveys can be bought, but facts and actions create #Blowback https://ottawapiskat.wordpress.com/shagthedog/harper-cpc-blowback/ … #cdnpoli
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@WilsonES13 Reports either say “crude oil” or “petroleum products” headed Stateside. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887323899704578589460837041312.html … #cdnpoli #LacMegantic #Quebec
View summary
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@globeandmail @globepolitics –> Bahaha! It is an Independent Republic… #cdnpoli #Gatekeepers #EpicFail pic.twitter.com/npXDdERds8
View photo
DumpHarper DumpHarper ‏@opHarper 6 Jul

@Banks_Todd @HedyFry @CTVNews @CBCNews Who knew what last fall? The media should dig deeper into this –> http://www.edmontonjournal.com/news/prime+minister+wife+sells+entire+stock+portfolio/7802376/story.html … #cdnpoli
View conversation

Loading seems to be taking a while.

Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.

ezra_accuses_rockefellers

ezra_blockade_broad

ezra_blockade_narrow

ezra_blockade_open

ezra_blockade_protected

harper_commies

harper_founded_canada

harper_quote_1997

harper_quote_1997_harpergate

harper_quote_2003

harper_quote_2005

toews_anchors_away

troll_blockade

 

UPDATE:

We sent a request to Twitter to see what the problem was and here was the reply, btw: @opHarper is back alive!

@opHarper
@opHarper

 

 


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Bill C-304: Hate Speech Clause’s Repeal Gives White Supremacists Rare Moment Of Glee

Bill C-304: hate speech Clause’s Repeal Gives White Supremacists Rare Moment Of Glee

The Huffington Post Canada | By

Posted: 06/08/2012 1:32 pm Updated: 06/08/2012 1:32 pm

Bill C304 Hate Speech Canada

A Conservative private members’ bill that repeals part of Canada’s hate speech laws has passed the House of Commons with scant media attention, and even less commentary. But it’s being cheered by many Canadian conservatives as a victory for freedom of speech. And it’s being cheered most vocally by another group: White supremacists.

Bill C-304, introduced by Conservative backbencher Brian Storseth, repeals Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which bans hate speech transmitted over the Internet or by telephone. It passed third reading in the House of Commons on Thursday and is now headed to the Senate.

This is a huge victory for freedom in Canada,” a poster calling him or herself “CanadaFirst” posted on the website of StormFront, a notorious white supremacist group. “However, we still have other unjust Zionist ‘hate’ laws that need to go.”

“Way to go, Harper. I know we can’t get everything we want, but I stand a little taller today as a Canuck,” wrote “OneMan.”

The new law doesn’t make hate speech legal on the web or by phone — hate speech remains illegal under the Criminal Code. But by removing it from the Canadian Human Rights Act, it takes away the authority of the country’s human rights commissions to investigate online hate speech and request that violating websites be taken down.

That has alarmed the Canadian Bar Association, which said in a recent report it’s concerned that the law may be the start of a campaign by the Conservatives to weaken Canada’s human rights laws.

“The debate surrounding the expediency of section 13 has become the proxy for an open assault on the very existence of an administrative framework to protect human rights in this country,” the CBA stated.

“Over the years, human rights commissions have remained at the vanguard of eliminating discrimination based on race, religion, gender, disability, sexual orientation, and other grounds, and advancing equality,” the CBA added.

Other supporters of the commissions say taking away their authority over hate speech will embolden racists and lead to more racial violence.

But human rights commissions have become bogeymen to many Canadian conservatives, and some others, who have campaigned for years to eliminate them altogether, painting them as bureaucratic tools of censorship.

In one famous case, conservative media icon Ezra Levant was hauled in front of an Alberta tribunal to explain his decision to run controversial cartoons of the Prophet Mohamed in the magazine he ran at the time, the Western Standard.

Levant became a cause celebre for opponents of the commissions, and his decision to republish the cartoons online on the day of his human rights hearing was hailed as heroic by many conservatives.

But all the opposition parties voted against the private members’ bill in Parliament Thursday, with NDP public safety critic Randall Garrison arguing that it would now be much harder to prevent hate speech online.

We do have a serious problem,” Garrison told the National Post. “If you take away the power to take (websites) down, it’s not clear they have any mandate to even to talk to people about it and educate them about it.”

Garrison argued that the Tories are being dishonest by having these laws be introduced as private members’ bills, rather than government bills, noting that the Conservative Party of Canada made repealing human rights commissions’ ability to regulate hate speech a part of their platform.

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews defended the bill, tweeting on Thursday that the new law will “end arbitrary censorship powers of human rights commissions.”

Public opinion on human rights commissions is split. An unscientific poll on the CBC website shows a bare majority of people supporting the Tories’ move.

Quick Poll

Do you support the Conservatives’ move to take hate speech out of the Canadian Human Rights Act?

continue reading: http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/06/08/bill-c-304-hate-speech-tories_n_1581437.html


Please feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media or mail us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond “fair use,” you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/

Harper’s dangerous game of sectarian division

Harper's dangerous game of sectarian division

How Harper has 'gone to questionable lengths' in using Israel to turn Jews away from the Liberals

By Donald Barry

20 October 2010 – Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper came to power in 2006 with little experience in foreign affairs but with a well developed plan to transform his minority Conservative administration into a majority government replacing the Liberals as Canada's "natural governing party."[1]

Because his party's core of Anglo-Protestant supporters was not large enough to achieve this goal, Harper appealed to non- traditional Conservatives, including Jews, on the basis of shared social values. His efforts were matched by those of Jewish leaders and the government of Israel to win the backing of the government and its followers in the face of declining domestic support for Israel and the rise of militant Islamic fundamentalism.

These factors accelerated a change in Canada's Middle East policy that began under Prime Minister Paul Martin, from a carefully balanced stance to one that overwhelmingly favors Israel. Harper's "pro-Israel politics," Michelle Collins observes, has "won the respect—and support—of a large segment of Canada's organized Jewish community."[2] However, it has isolated Canada from significant shifts in Middle East diplomacy and marginalized its ability to play a constructive role in the region.

Harper and the Jewish Vote

When he became leader of the Canadian Alliance party, which merged with the Progressive Conservatives to form the Conservative Party of Canada in 2004, Tom Flanagan says that Harper realized "The traditional Conservative base of Anglophone Protestants [was] too narrow to win modern Canadian elections."[3] In a speech to the conservative organization Civitas, in 2003, Harper argued that the only way to achieve power was to focus not on the tired wish list of economic conservatives or "neo-cons," as they'd become known, but on what he called "theo-cons"—those social conservatives who care passionately about hot-button issues that turn on family, crime, and defense. even foreign policy had become a theo-con issue, he pointed out, driven by moral and religious convictions. "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, he cautioned that it also had to choose its battlefronts with care. "the social-conservative issues we choose should not be denominational," he said, "but should unite social conservatives of different denominations and even different faiths."4

In the 2006 election, the victorious Conservatives elected 124 members of parliament (MPs) to the 308 seat House of Commons, subsequently adding three more members.5

The party maintained its stranglehold on western Canada, increased its representation in Ontario and made a breakthrough in Quebec. It swept cities in Alberta but fared less well in other urban centers where the largest multicultural populations reside. Increasing support among Quebeckers and minority voters is critical to Harper's goal of forming a majority government. As Flanagan puts it, "The suburbs of Toronto, Vancouver, and to a lesser extent of other cities are now filling up with people who, based on their social values and capitalist work ethic, should be natural Conservative voters, but who are still emotionally tied to the Liberal Party."6 The main targets are the Chinese, Korean, Hindu, Jewish, Persian, Italian, and Vietnamese communities.7

Flanagan claims Harper "has done all he can" to win their support, "starting with his anti-same-sex-marriage advertising campaign of early 2005. He insisted that the 2005-06 [election] platform contain specific measures, such as an apology for the Chinese head tax, lower landing fees for immigrants, and better recognition of their credentials; and he has worked hard to fulfill these promises as quickly as possible after forming government."8 After taking power, Harper created an "ethnic outreach team" directed by the Prime Minister's Office (PMO) and Jason Kenney, currently Minister of Citizenship, Immigration and Multiculturalism, to wage a "focused direct voter campaign to build support" for the Conservatives in order to "replace the Liberals as the primary voice of new Canadians and ethnic minorities." The PMO is in charge of statements in parliament concerning ethnic communities and of securing the attendance of the prime minister or senior ministers at "major ethnic events." Kenney and designated MPs liaise with minority leaders and communities.9

Although only 371,000 strong, Canadian Jews are an established part of the country's economic and political landscape. Most also "have a strong affinity for and identification with Israel."10 Concentrated primarily in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver and Winnipeg, they are an important focus of Harper's attention. In a 2007 briefing paper, the ethnic outreach team used the Toronto area constituency of Thornhill, the most Jewish riding in the country, to show how the recruitment strategy works. Comprising 37 percent of the electorate, Jews were a key target in the effort to secure the 5,000 additional votes the Conservatives estimated they would need to unseat the Liberal incumbent. The approach included maintaining an up-to-date database of Jewish and other ethnic group electors, championing the party's positions on issues that concern the community, targeted mailings, and individual contact at various events. Harper also assigned a PMO official to keep in touch with Jewish groups.11

Conservative strategists estimate that 20 percent of minority voters are not "accessible" to the party. This figure appears to include Arab Canadians, although the Conservatives have begun to make overtures to carefully chosen Muslim groups. Arab Canadians are almost twice as numerous as their Jewish counterparts, but they are not as well established and are more reluctant to engage in politics. The community, moreover, is "divided along national, regional and religious lines, which has actively prevented it from presenting a united front to policy makers."12

The Conservative party's interest in the Middle East is relatively recent. The Reform Party of Canada, which was established in 1987 and became the Canadian Alliance thirteen years later, paid little attention. But under Stockwell Day, an evangelical Christian who was the first leader of the Alliance, the party began taking strong stands on issues affecting Israel. After taking over the leadership in 2002, Harper, who had no record of speaking out on the Middle East, made it clear that the party would remain firmly in Israel's corner. Reportedly, his thinking was influenced by neoconservatives in the United States, including expatriate Canadians David Frum, then a speechwriter in President George W. Bush's White House, and Charles Krauthammer, a syndicated columnist for the Washington Post.13 Accusing the Liberals of "moral neutrality" in world affairs, Harper said an Alliance government would adopt a "value-oriented foreign policy" with "a stronger sense of Canada as a member of an alliance, a member of a family of western democratic nations that share certain political values—and our determination to work with those countries to achieve these things. We have a view of Israel…as an ally and part of our western democratic family."14 Lloyd Mackey credits Day with building ties to the conservative Jewish community when he was Harper's foreign affairs critic. Mackey identifies Charles McVety, president of Canada Christian College, and Frank Dimant, executive vice-president of B'nai Brith Canada, as key contacts. "The tradeoff is that B'nai Brith provides social conservatives with access to the conservative Jewish community, while McVety encourages the 'bonding' of Christians and Jews as an alternative to Christians proselytizing Jews."15

According to Mackey, "the evangelical Christian viewpoint," embraced by many members of the dominant Alliance wing of the Conservative party "has always tended to be quite pro-Israel."16 Pollster Conrad Winn agrees, citing surveys indicating that "churchgoers and Christians show the most support for the religious rights of Jews in Canada and also the strongest support for Israel."17 The Conservative caucus contains up to seventy MPs who can be called evangelical Christians.18 This has enhanced the party's appeal to Jewish voters and helped to blunt criticism that the adoption of positions favoring Israel is not simply a response to pressures from the Jewish lobby and the Israeli government.

The Jewish Lobby and Israeli Government

For their part, Canada's Jewish leaders were alarmed that Canadian support for Israel was falling at a time when threats to that country were on the rise. "In particular," says Harold Waller, "there was concern that Israel's position in both public opinion in general and in elite opinion was deteriorating, that the media was not treating Israel fairly, and that government policy, especially at the United Nations, had tilted away from Israel."19 Underlying these trends, Waller claims, was "the growing clout of Muslim voters (especially in some key areas), an entrenched foreign affairs bureaucracy that tilted toward the Arabs, and declining enthusiasm for Israel among party elites as Israel struggled to combat Palestinian terrorism through the use of techniques that were controversial in some circles."20

In 2002, an ad hoc group, consisting "mainly of wealthy Jewish businesspeople," reviewed the community's lobbying efforts.21 Calling itself the "Israel Emergency Cabinet," it engaged GPC International, a public affairs firm, to devise a strategy to improve Jewish advocacy. This led to the creation of the Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy (CIJA), which "oversees and coordinates the advocacy work" of five agencies: the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Canada-Israel Committee, the Quebec-Israel Committee, National Jewish Campus Life, and the University Outreach Committee. The right-leaning B'nai Brith has remained outside the arrangement.22

A study of Canadian attitudes toward Israel and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, commissioned by the CIJA in the fall of 2004, offered a sobering assessment. Of those who considered themselves knowledgeable, 32 percent supported the Palestinians while 26 percent backed Israel. Overall, 89 percent held Israelis and Palestinians equally responsible for ongoing violence; 57 percent thought the conflict involved the human rights of Palestinians rather than the protection of Israelis from terrorism. Eighty-three percent did not want Canada to take sides, and 50 percent thought it should not play a role in settling the conflict. Unlike Jewish Canadians, only 11 percent thought the media viewed Israel unfavorably, while 33 percent saw the media as biased against Palestinians.23

The fact that conservative Christians are most supportive of Israel would make Harper's party a target for Jewish lobbying efforts. The CIJA adopted a two-fold strategy, "to underscore the shared values of an enlightened democracy between Canadians and Israelis and to downplay the significance of whatever the Palestinians were or were not doing."24 B'nai Brith was also active in strengthening ties to evangelical Christians.25

In the meantime, building on a strategy begun by Prime Minister Menachem Begin in the 1970s, the Israeli government began encouraging visits by Christian evangelical groups to build support for Israel and to increase tourist income. In 2003, paralleling similar visits by their US counterparts, twenty prominent Canadian evangelical clergymen, commentators and educators went to Israel at the invitation of the country's chief rabbi to strengthen ties between Christians and Jews. The group was led by Charles McVety, who, in addition to leading Canada Christian College, represented the US-based John Hagee Ministries in Canada. Hagee, a prominent figure in the Christian Zionist movement, heads Christians United for Israel, which lobbies on behalf of Israel in the United States. The goal of this and subsequent visits was to rally support within Canada's estimated 2.5 million member evangelical community.26

In 2007, the Israeli Knesset established the Christian Allies Caucus to expand Christian support for Israel. The Canadian Israel Allies Caucus was launched in February 2007, with Harper in attendance.27 An executive assistant at Israel's embassy in Ottawa is the Jewish representative of the Christian Allies Caucus in Canada. The caucus also has a Canadian Christian representative based in Ottawa. Activities have included speaking tours of major Canadian cities to encourage evangelical Christians to back Israel. According to a caucus representative, support within the evangelical community continues to grow.28

The Liberals and Jewish Voters

Historically Canadian Jews backed the Liberal Party because of its support for Israel and its progressive social policies. By the 1970s Jewish support for the Liberals was 20 percent above the national average.29 Joe Clark's Progressive Conservative Party attempted to sway Jewish voters in the 1979 election by promising to move Canada's embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau had resisted pressure from Menachem Begin to do so, but Clark succumbed to the urgings of party candidates in closely contested Toronto ridings with a substantial Jewish vote. The Conservatives won four of those seats to the Liberals' two, although party organizers said the embassy pledge was marginal to the outcomes. Clark tried to implement the plan after he became prime minister. However, he retreated in the face of strong opposition, including the threat of sanctions from Arab states, concern among Canadian businesses, adverse public opinion, and the reaction of the Jewish community, which did not want to become embroiled in the controversy.30

The issue helped to defeat the Conservatives in the 1980 election, which returned Trudeau's Liberals to power. According to Charles Flicker, it also had a long-term impact on Canada's Middle East policy, "which shifted from a pro-Israel bias to a more even-handed treatment…. Canada established relations with the PLO, its voting record at the United Nations was more balanced, and it strongly criticized the invasion of Lebanon in 1982."31 Still, Canadian Jewry, which "flourished" under Trudeau's policy of multiculturalism that sought to promote social cohesion by recognizing the equality of Canada's ethnic populations, remained loyal to the Liberals. "Jews were not only well represented in virtually all sectors of Canadian society," says David Goldberg, "they also held leadership positions in, and were making important contributions to, many of these sectors."32 The connection remained strong during the 1984-93 period when Prime Minister Brian Mulroney's Progressive Conservative government held power, although its policies were not substantially different from those of its predecessor.33

However, the "increasingly controversial nature of Israeli foreign and domestic politics" soon ushered in a new era in Canada's relations with Israel.34 Prime Minister Jean Chrétien's Liberal government, in office from 1993 until 2003, supported Israel's right to exist within secure borders and the establishment of a Palestinian state. It opposed Jewish settlements in the Palestinian territories and Israel's security fence inside the West Bank and East Jerusalem, and condemned Palestinian terrorism and excessive retaliation by Israel. At the United Nations, Canada parted company with the United States and Australia, and joined the dominant European and developing country majority in supporting or abstaining on resolutions sponsored by Arab states criticizing Israel's occupation of the territories, its attacks against civilians, and its nuclear weapons program.

"Although these votes were clearly biased against Israel," columnist John Ibbitson observes, Canada saw them "as one of the few forums through which the Palestinian people [could] make their voices heard."35 At home, Jewish voters, who showed greater willingness "to openly express competing perspectives on Israel," continued to vote for the Liberals at a rate 8 to 10 percent above the national average.36

Canadian policy began to shift under Chrétien's successor, Paul Martin. According to the Jewish Independent, "pro-Israel" parliamentarians gained "significantly more strength" in government, with six members of the recently formed "Liberals for Israel" caucus receiving cabinet appointments.37 Cabinet and caucus supporters "pushed hard" for a change in Canada's votes at the UN, as did Jewish organizations, including the Canada-Israel Committee, which lobbied the government to adopt criteria to assess resolutions it considered biased against Israel.38 "One of the most powerful voices" says Ibbitson, was that of Gerald Schwartz, a close advisor to Martin and a key fundraiser for his party leadership campaign. Liberal MPs with large Arab Canadian populations and foreign affairs officials warned that a change in policy would not be welcomed by Arab states.39 But the views of Israel's supporters prevailed.

The shift began in the summer of 2004 when Canada abstained on a heavily supported resolution that took note of a finding by the International Court of Justice that Israel's security barrier contravened international law. It continued during the General Assembly's annual fall debate when Canada joined the United States and a few other countries in voting against resolutions condemning Israeli violence against Palestinians and the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza on which it had abstained in the past. The government argued that it could not support unbalanced measures condemning Israeli attacks against Palestinians while ignoring Palestinian assaults on Israelis. But Ottawa reversed earlier abstentions in supporting another resolution aimed at Israel, which called for a nuclear-free Middle East.40 The change in Canada's voting record was confirmed in November 2005 when Ottawa opposed three more resolutions on the basis that they were one-sided and hindered peace negotiations.41 But by then Martin's government had been defeated in parliament forcing an election that would bring Stephen Harper to power as head of a minority Conservative government.

Harper Comes to Power

During the election campaign Harper assured the CIJA that the Jewish community had "a good friend in the Conservative Party." Describing Israel as "the only fully fledged, developed democracy in that part of the world," he said "We share a unique relationship…that we believe all freedom oriented, democratic countries should share in." A Harper government would "not support resolutions at the UN that are aimed specifically at Israel or designed to create a bias in the resolution of the Middle East conflict." Harper's comments drew praise from Shimon Fogel, CEO of the Canada-Israel Committee, who expected Canada would be more active in "encouraging the kind of reforms that would allow the UN to fulfill the objectives it was initially designed to address," including an end to "the annual cycle of Israel-bashing."42

Dealing with Hamas

While the Canadian campaign was under way Palestinians were in the midst of an election of their own to choose a new Palestinian Legislative Assembly. It was apparent that Hamas, running on an anti-corruption platform, would defeat the ruling Fatah, confronting Canada and its allies with the challenge of how to deal with a democratically elected party espousing terrorism, and whether to continue their aid programs to the Palestinian Authority.43 In a conference call with Marc Gold, chairman of the Canada-Israel Committee, and Ed Morgan and Victor Goldbloom, the president and national executive chairman of the Canadian Jewish Congress, Harper credited his party with forcing Chrétien's government to declare Hamas a terrorist organization in 2002. He added, "if institutions committed to terrorism are playing a role in the Palestinian state, whether elected or not, that is an indication to me that the road to democracy has not been travelled very far." The representatives seemed pleased. "I think you have answered fully," Gold replied.44

On February 14, after speaking with President Mahmoud Abbas, Prime Minister Harper indicated that future Canadian aid to the Palestinian Authority would depend upon the new Hamas government's commitment to non-violence, recognition of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements, including the "road map," sponsored by the United States, the European Union, Russia and the UN, which called for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.45 Confusion over the government's stand arose when foreign affairs minister Peter MacKay met with his Russian counterpart, who claimed Hamas had agreed to a "monitoring mechanism" to assure that aid would not be used for military purposes. Appearing to abandon his government's conditions, MacKay said the mechanism would ensure that aid reached civilians and that Canada would continue to provide some assistance. But he backtracked after receiving "a flurry of phone calls from pro-Israeli groups."46

Knowing that the United States and the European Union would soon suspend their aid programs to the Palestinian Authority, Harper decided that Canada would be the first country after Israel to do so. MacKay declared that Canada would have no contact with the Hamas government and would withhold aid until Harper's conditions had been met. The action would reduce by a third Canada's annual $25 million assistance package to the West Bank and Gaza. Another $10 million would continue to go to the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestinian Refugees in the Near East via the Canadian International Development Agency. "We cannot send any direct aid to an organization that refuses to renounce terrorist activities," said MacKay. "There will be no contact and no funds period."47

The announcement was praised by pro-Israel organizations and condemned by Arab and Muslim groups. "Canada has stood true to its principles by refusing to do business with a terrorist entity whose avowed aim continues to be the destruction of the Jewish state," said B'nai Brith. "A resounding slap in the face to Canadian values," charged the Canadian Islamic Congress, which accused Harper's government of "blindly following the lead of Washington and of the influential pro-Jewish lobby in both [the United States and Canada]."48 Opposition parties in parliament urged the government to concentrate on humanitarian assistance to Palestinian civilians.

Close observers of Middle East politics were also skeptical. Norman Spector, a former Canadian ambassador to Israel, applauded Ottawa's decision to cut funding to the Palestinian Authority but criticized its refusal to deal with Hamas. "I think we should be finding some way to explain to Hamas what it is going to take to become an accepted and respected member of the international community, and even if there is just a one percent chance of success, we should take that chance," said Spector. "We cannot foreclose any possible avenue to trying to resolve this conflict, and as good as it feels to say we have to cut off all contact with them, it won't work."49 However, Harper put more distance between his government and Hamas, telling a Holocaust Memorial Day ceremony that Hamas posed a threat to Israel similar to that of Nazi Germany.50

Evangelical Christians applauded Harper. Promoting his Christians United for Israel lobby group before an audience of 2,000 Canadian evangelical leaders and Jewish representatives, including Israel's ambassador, Alan Baker, and Major General Aharon Zeevi Farkash, chief of that country's military intelligence, at Charles McVety's Canada Christian College in Toronto, John Hagee praised the prime minister for denouncing Hamas. McVety established Christians United for Israel-Canada as an affiliate of Hagee's group.51

Meanwhile, Canada joined the United States in opposing a non-binding resolution in the UN Economic and Social Council calling on Israel to allow Palestinian refugee women and children displaced in the 1948 Arab-Israeli war to return to their homes. Ottawa had abstained on the same vote a year earlier. Harper reportedly made the decision "quickly and with little consultation."52 MacKay denied that the vote marked a shift in Canadian policy. But the Canada-Israel Committee's Shimon Fogel left little doubt that this was the case, saying "This government is showing some really meaningful resolve in continuing and expanding on what the previous government had begun to do."53

War in Lebanon

Events in the Middle East took an unexpected turn on July 12, 2006, when Hezbollah militants fired rockets into northern Israel and attacked a military patrol, killing three soldiers and abducting two others in an attempt to force Israel to return Lebanese prisoners. Calling the attack "an act of war," Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, ordered a massive artillery, air and ground offensive to break Hezbollah's grip on southern Lebanon. By the time the conflict ended 34 days later more than a thousand Lebanese civilians had been killed, almost a million had been displaced, and much of the country's infrastructure lay in ruins. Forty-three Israelis perished as a result of Hezbollah rocket attacks. An Israeli government sponsored commission would later call the operation a "serious failure."54

When hostilities broke out Harper was en route to Europe for meetings with Prime Minister Tony Blair in London, G8 colleagues in St. Petersburg, and President Jacques Chirac in Paris. Although up to 50,000 Canadians were stranded in Lebanon, Harper agreed with President George W. Bush that Israel had "the right to defend itself," describing its response as "measured."55 He also supported Blair's call for a return to the road map approach to the Israel-Palestine conflict but saw no evidence that Hamas agreed.56

The crisis in Lebanon dominated discussion among the G8 leaders. The United States, the United Kingdom and Canada opposed an immediate end to the fighting, in effect giving Israel a green light "to destroy as much of Hezbollah as it could." France, Germany and Russia agreed that Hezbollah had started the conflict but condemned "Israel's disproportionate response and insisted on an immediate cease-fire."57 The communiqué tried to bridge the gap. It expressed concern about the rising death toll, destruction of infrastructure, and the impact on Lebanon's government, and called for the return of captured Israeli soldiers, an end to rocket attacks on Israel, cessation of Israel's military operations and early removal of its forces in Gaza, and the release of arrested Palestinian politicians. Harper backed the statement, which Canadian officials insisted was consistent with his earlier comments.58

However, the declaration was overshadowed by the bombing deaths of eight members of a Montreal family in southern Lebanon, which accelerated Ottawa's plans to evacuate Canadian citizens from the country. Harper expressed sympathy to the relatives of the victims but moderated his earlier views only slightly. "We are not going to give in to the temptation of some to single out Israel, which was the victim of the initial attack," he said. "The onus remains on the parties that caused the conflict," although "We urge Israel and others to minimize civilian damage." Asked whether he would still describe Israel's response as "measured," he replied, "I think our evaluation of the situation has been accurate. Obviously there has been an ongoing escalation and, frankly, ongoing escalation is inevitable once conflict begins."59

Harper joined Bush in opposing Chirac's call for an immediate cease-fire, which, he argued, was not "the first thing" or "the only thing" called for in the G8's statement.60 But with domestic criticism growing, the prime minister, accompanied by a photographer, press aides and his security detail, diverted his aircraft to Cyprus to return the first of 15,000 Canadians rescued from Lebanon. The government would also provide a $1 million aid package for Lebanon, which would grow to $30.5 million by the time the conflict ended.61

An opinion poll suggested that most Canadians supported the government's handling of the evacuation, with 66 percent approving and 34 percent calling it inadequate. Criticism was strongest in Quebec, where most of the country's 150,000 Lebanese Canadians reside.62 Only 45 percent agreed that Harper's position on the conflict was "fair and balanced" versus 44 percent who thought it "decidedly too pro-Israel." Again, opposition was highest in Quebec, where 62 percent were dissatisfied with the government's stand.63

Apparently believing that the controversy would not damage its electoral prospects, the government stuck to its position. It participated in peace talks in Rome in late July, which failed to produce an agreement on ending the war. Canada joined the United States and the UK in insisting that a durable settlement had to precede a cease-fire, while moderate European and Arab states maintained that the fighting had to end first. Harper said Canada would not participate in a possible peacekeeping force, adding that its purpose should be to drive out terrorists, a task best performed by soldiers from nearby states.64 He would ask Israel and the UN for an explanation after Israeli forces bombed a UN observer post in southern Lebanon, killing a Canadian officer and three other soldiers serving with the United Nations Truce Supervision Organization. But Harper appeared to blame the UN for putting the soldiers at risk. A Canadian Forces board of inquiry later held Israel's military responsible for the deaths, which it called "tragic and preventable."65

Canadian supporters lined up behind Israel's war effort. In late July, 8000 attended a "Stand with Israel" rally in Toronto organized by Jewish groups. The event's master of ceremonies, film producer Robert Lantos, thanked Harper for his "unequivocal support," and announced that he was giving up his membership in the Liberal party. Another participant, Israel's consul general in Toronto, called the gathering a significant endorsement.66 Charles McVety, who had been the principal speaker representing the Christian right at the rally, called on Christians "to stand shoulder to shoulder with our Jewish friends in their hour of need."67 In his capacity as chair of Christians United for Israel-Canada, he joined B'nai Brith's Frank Dimant and Ambassador Baker in designating August 20 as a "National Day of Prayer for Israel and the Peace of Jerusalem."68

Conservative party officials sought to capitalize on Harper's stand, asking supporters for "a special contribution of $150 or $75" in order "to keep the focus on principle and character and Canada's return to its place in the world." The Liberal and New Democratic Party opposition denounced the government for seeking to profit from the crisis. Arab Canadian groups were also outraged. But Jewish groups were not opposed. "The Liberal party has been a great beneficiary of Jewish largesse," said Dimant. "Harper has taken a principled stand and I think that, in the next election, Canadians will respond accordingly."69

Exploiting Liberal Divisions

Harper's stance put pressure on the Liberal Party, then in the midst of a campaign to choose a successor to former leader Paul Martin, to declare its position. With members split between those supporting Israel and those favoring Canada's traditional peacekeeping role in the region, interim leader Bill Graham tried to steer a middle course. Reiterating the party's friendship with Israel, he argued that the government needed to maintain its capacity "to act as an appropriate intermediary," for only in this way could it "truly help our friends."70

The public, too, believed the government had abandoned Canada's traditional approach. A new poll reported that 45 percent of Canadians, including 61 percent in Quebec, disagreed with Harper's support for Israel's actions, while only 32 percent agreed. Seventy-seven percent wanted Canada to take a neutral position.71 Saying he was "not concerned with opinion polls," Harper refused "to be drawn into a moral equivalence between a pyromaniac and a fireman." Ambassador Baker weighed in calling Ottawa's stand "completely consistent with Canada's values of supporting the right of a sovereign state to act in self-defense against a terrorist organization that is part of the world Islamic jihadist attempt to destroy the state of Israel." Setting diplomatic propriety aside, he called Graham's statement "a continuation of the non-committal and un-useful position that was held by the previous Canadian government, which neither helped advance peace or prevented terrorism." Jewish groups also applauded Harper. "We are enormously appreciative of the support that the government has extended to Israel," said Shimon Fogel of the Canada-Israel Committee. This, he added, could help pry Jewish votes from the Liberals in the next election.72

The Conservatives received another boost during their national caucus meeting in Cornwall, Ontario in early August. Gerald Schwartz, Heather Reisman and six other prominent members of the Jewish community, several of whom had been active in the Liberal party, took out an advertisement in a local newspaper praising Harper for "standing by" Israel.73 Frank Dimant called it a "very loud wake-up call" for the Liberals. "If Mr. Harper stays the course…I think this will end up being a long-term commitment [to the Conservatives] by these people." Reisman, a life-long Liberal, joined the party shortly thereafter.74

Dismissing the complaints of protesters outside the meeting as "very predictable," Harper said "There are a lot of long-term strategic interests of this country and of the world at stake here and that's why we're taking the positions that we're taking." However, he took a softer line in remarks in French directed at Quebeckers, most of whom remained opposed, saying, "We have a completely different situation from three weeks ago…. We have a full-blown conflict, almost a war, and it's hard to say whether a response is proportional to another."75 Still, Lebanese Canadian groups in sensitive electoral battlegrounds in Quebec and Ontario vowed to campaign against the Conservatives in the next election.76

On August 8, two days after 15,000 demonstrated against his government's policy in Montreal, Harper tried to assuage the dissenters, taking the unusual step of appointing Wajid Khan, a Liberal MP for the Toronto area riding of Mississauga- Streetsville and a native of Pakistan, as his special advisor on South Asia and the Middle East. Khan's assignment was to visit the Middle East and report on Canada's policy involvement.77 The Conservatives had tried to persuade other ethnic Liberal MPs to join the party, but Khan would not have to do so. Jason Kenney, then Harper's parliamentary secretary responsible for ethnic outreach, called the initiative an attempt to "to reach out past partisan concerns."78

Khan would not say where he stood on Middle East matters, claiming he had an open mind. He also denied that he would become a Conservative, insisting his appointment was "a supra-partisan issue."79 But Arab Canadian groups were skeptical. Mazen Chouaib, executive director of the National Council on Canada-Arab Relations (NCCAR), said "We don't want to see this [becoming] another public relations stunt. The government has to deal with real issues and substantive issues."80

Khan's appointment aggravated the split within Liberal ranks. Fellow MPs forced Khan to resign as assistant defense critic and to withdraw from caucus. The divisions deepened when Senator Jerry Grafstein called on the party to put its support firmly behind Israel. MP Borys Wrzesnewskyj, who had been a member of a parliamentary delegation invited to visit Lebanon by NCCAR, suggested Canada find a way to communicate with Hezbollah. Seizing the opportunity to exploit the Liberals' differences, Kenney declared there should be no discussions with Hezbollah, which he likened to the Nazis. Bill Graham affirmed the party considered Hezbollah a terrorist group "that should be treated as such under all applicable Canadian laws," but MPs were entitled to their views. Still, Wrzesnewskyj was forced to resign his associate defense critic post.81

Controversy continued to follow the hapless Liberals. Leadership candidate Michael Ignatieff, who had said he was "not losing sleep" over an Israeli bomb attack that killed 29 Lebanese civilians in the village of Qana, reversed himself. In an interview on a popular Quebec television talk show in early October, he described the attack as a "war crime." Widely seen as an attempt to regain lost support in Quebec, his comment was sharply criticized by Jewish organizations.82 Harper also pounced on the gaffe, accusing "virtually all" of the leadership contenders of harboring "anti-Israeli" views. B'nai Brith and other Jewish groups urged Graham to denounce Ignatieff's remark and to ensure that "anti-Israeli rhetoric" did not become part of the leadership contest. But they were silent on the prime minister's characterization of the Liberal candidates.83

The Toronto Globe and Mail editorialized that the comment was "illustrative of an unbecoming hyper-partisanship that Mr. Harper carries around like a chip on his shoulder." But columnist John Ivison pointed out that Harper hoped to gain a "tactical advantage" with his attack. "The Conservatives are becoming the logical political option for many in the influential Jewish community because of Harper's steadfast support for Israel," he observed. In mid-October the prime minister would speak at B'nai Brith's annual dinner with sponsorship packages available for $1 million "and, by all accounts, people are lining up to offer him their thanks."84

Confirming Ivison's judgment, Frank Dimant said, "I don't predict an ovation. I predict several ovations…. There is certainly a groundswell of support today in the Jewish community for the Conservative Party."85 Harper did not disappoint. Fresh from preventing passage of a resolution acknowledging only Lebanese suffering in the Lebanon war at a meeting of la Francophonie, he made no apologies for his stand. "When it comes to dealing with a war between Israel and a terrorist organization, this country and this government cannot, and will not be neutral," Harper said, "those who seek to destroy the Jews, will, for the same reason, ultimately seek to destroy us all."86 The reaction was all he could have hoped for. "Every Shabbat, every Saturday, we recite [a] prayer for you, Mr. Prime Minister," said Dimant. "I believe that the Almighty has answered our prayers.87

Some observers believed that opposition to Harper's foreign policy, especially among Quebeckers, contributed to his party's failure to improve its popularity. A new survey put the Conservatives in a virtual tie with the leaderless Liberals and pointed to a steady decline in support in Quebec. Another poll reported that although more Canadians approved than disapproved of the evacuation of Canadians from Lebanon, 40 percent disagreed with the government's approach to the war, while only 29 percent agreed. Fifty-five percent of francophones disapproved of Ottawa's handling of the issue.88

Canada's pro-Israel tilt at the UN became more pronounced when the government abstained on three more General Assembly resolutions dealing with Palestinian peoples' right to self-determination, nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, and Israel's exploitation of natural resources on "occupied Arab lands," which its predecessor had supported.89 Harper admitted that diplomacy was the only way to achieve peace, but his government would not deal with Hamas or Hezbollah "whose objectives are ultimately genocidal." Despite this, Ottawa could serve as an interlocutor. "My own assessment of Canada's role in the Middle East in the past decade or so is we have been completely absent," he asserted. "I don't see any evidence we were playing any role." The government was looking for ways to encourage dialogue with the Palestinian Authority through President Abbas.90

Searching for a Role?

In January 2007, Peter MacKay visited the Middle East seeking to build on Ottawa's role as chair of the Refugee Working Group of the Middle East Peace Process, to "find a niche where Canada can make a contribution."91 MacKay met with Abbas, who encouraged Canada to help resolve the future of Palestinian refugees in Jordan, Syria, and Lebanon. But a senior aide to the president charged that the decision to cut aid to the Palestinian Authority and refusal to meet with Hamas officials had diminished Canada's influence in the region. MacKay also met with Tzipi Livni, Israel's foreign minister, whose view of a two-state solution would not give refugees the right to return. MacKay appeared to agree, although his officials said Canada's policy was that the issue should be settled by negotiation.92

MacKay was mildly critical of Israel's security fence but reaffirmed that Canada stood "shoulder-to-shoulder" with Israel. Israel's foreign ministry praised Harper's government for maintaining "particularly warm relations," and noted that "bilateral and diplomatic ties are currently at their peak."93 However, as columnist James Travers saw it, MacKay's visit confirmed that the Palestinians were "losing interest in what this country has to say," and that the Israelis had "heard everything they need to know."94

Meanwhile, to no one's surprise, Harper's Middle East advisor, Wajid Khan, left the Liberals and became a Conservative. Harper blamed the party's new leader, Stéphane Dion, for forcing Khan to choose between his roles as a Liberal MP and prime ministerial advisor. But Harper had facilitated Khan's move by appointing his Conservative opponent in the 2006 election to a citizenship court position.95 Harper hailed the defection as a sign that minority voters were becoming more receptive to the Conservatives. "There's a place for everyone within the new Conservative Party of Canada," he boasted. "The news is getting out and the party is continuing to grow."96

However, the government refused to release Khan's report as Khan undertook to do when he was appointed. Its claim that Khan's advice would become less valuable if it were made public led to speculation that the document did not exist or that it ran counter to government policy.97 The rebuff increased Arab and Muslim Canadian skepticism about Ottawa's intentions. "We are now suspicious that this whole thing was a charade," said Khaled Mouammar, president of the Canadian Arab Federation. "Wajid Khan is not a professor of political science," the Canadian Islamic Congress's Mohamed Elmasry asserted, "and his knowledge of the Middle East is very limited. He's a member of Parliament and he so happens to be a Muslim, and he does not represent the Muslim viewpoint." The Canadian Muslim Forum and the Muslim Canadian Congress also called on the government to produce the report.98

In June, Hamas fighters attacked Fatah security forces and took control of Gaza, leading President Abbas to appoint an emergency government from which Hamas was excluded. Israel responded by imposing an escalating blockade of Gaza. King Abdullah of Jordan visited Ottawa the following month to encourage support for the new government and a renewed Arab league peace initiative. Harper said the government was committed to peace. But it was only after the United States and the European Union resumed their aid that Harper agreed to do so. The Canada-Israel Committee, which had opposed restoration of the funding, said the action would not "undercut the appreciation the pro-Israel community has for the Harper government."99

More evidence of Harper's attempts to strengthen ties to Jewish voters surfaced in the fall of 2007 when Canada's privacy commissioner began a "preliminary enquiry" into reports that the Conservatives had compiled a mailing list of Jewish voters. It followed complaints from some recipients of personalized Rosh Hashanah greeting cards from the prime minister. Jason Kenney defended the initiative as part of the government's commitment to multiculturalism. B'nai Brith and the Canadian Jewish Congress approved. Calling it a first, Frank Dimant hoped "it's a tradition that prime ministers down the line will carry on."100

More of the Same

In November, the United States launched another Middle East peace initiative at a conference attended by forty countries, including Canada. The meeting failed to produce agreement on the so-called "core issues" of borders, settlements, the status of Jerusalem, and the Palestinian right of return. But Israel and the Palestinian Authority made a best-efforts commitment to reach a deal by the end of 2008. Responding to Prime Minister Olmert's request, Harper agreed to contribute $300 million over five years to further Palestinian security, governance and development. But the aid would be contingent on "demonstrable progress in negotiations by both sides, as well as progress in Palestinian democratic reforms." Ottawa would ensure that it did not go to "Hamas or other terrorist groups."101

In January 2008, during a follow-up visit to the Middle East by Maxime Bernier, the new foreign affairs minister, Olmert's government announced the expansion of existing settlements in East Jerusalem. Although Canada opposed "any new growth of settlements," Bernier did not say whether this included expansion of existing ones. His officials called the expansion "extremely unhelpful" but added that individual settlements would be dealt with in negotiations over the final status of territories held by Israel, leading observers to speculate that Ottawa had shifted its position.102

In March, Bernier expressed concern over an Israeli military assault on Gaza, which killed 120 Palestinians, in retaliation for rocket attacks on cities in Israel by Hamas militants. Bernier's comments were criticized by Israel's vocal ambassador, Alan Baker, and the Canada-Israel Committee. However, Canada was the only member of the UN Human Rights Council to oppose a resolution accusing Israel of war crimes in its attack on Gaza.103 The action followed Ottawa's decision to lead the way in withdrawing from the second UN World Conference Against Racism, to be held in Durban, South Africa (later moved to Geneva) in 2009. The government argued that the conference would provide a platform for opponents to resume attacks on Israel begun at the first conference seven years earlier. "We're very happy that we see things in a similar way," said an Israeli official, "Canada has adopted several times in recent months very brave positions."104 In another sign of their deepening relationship, the two countries signed a "declaration of intent" to deal with "common threats" to national security.105

But relations with Israel continued to provoke controversy. In May, Ambassador Baker expressed alarm that the growing Muslim population could produce a shift in Canada's policy. Singling out a Liberal MP, Omar Alghabra, who he claimed, "had been outspoken in his hostility toward Israel," (though he offered no evidence) Baker suggested "that the type of political influence that we're seeing in Britain, in France, might ultimately reach the Canadian political system." Public safety minister Stockwell Day gently chided the ambassador for his intrusion into domestic politics, saying "we are proud of the fact that we are made up and built from people from all countries, including the Jewish people." But Harper appeared to agree with Baker, charging that "some members of Parliament" were willing to pander to "anti-Israeli sentiment," which he described as "a thinly disguised veil for good old-fashioned anti-Semitism."106 In his address to a dinner marking the 60th anniversary of the founding of Israel, Harper assured the audience of his government's "unshakable support."107

Harper tried to balance his stance by praising "the moderate but theologically isolated Ahmadiyya Muslims" at the opening of their new mosque in Calgary, Alberta in July. A party source claimed the overture, similar to those made to Ismaili Muslims, was aimed at the wider Muslim audience. "It's an important signal the prime minister is sending, not just to militant Islamists abroad, but to their sympathizers here at home, that he's perfectly prepared to ignore them and side with persecuted minorities within the faith." Harper's comments provoked predictable criticism from the Arab and Muslim communities. "As a prime minister I can remind people of the danger of extremism in religion or ideology, but you don't try to describe one Islam as better than another," said a spokesman for the Canadian Arab Federation. The Canadian Islamic Congress's Mohamed Elmasry contended that Harper needed to improve his understanding of Muslim issues "instead of relying on overnight experts supplying him with one or two pages [of information]."108 But Harper's remarks were consistent with his strategy of "digging deep into a few select social strata," rather than seeking broad support, in order to enhance his party's electoral prospects.109

Conclusion

Opinion polls conducted as late as August 2008 suggested the Conservatives and Liberals remained about where they stood at the time of the 2006 election.110 But there were signs that Harper's strategy had begun to have an effect. For example, long-standing Jewish support for the Liberals in the Montreal riding of Outremont collapsed in a by-election in September 2007. Jews, who make up 10 percent of the constituency's electors, voted Conservative or stayed away, contributing to the victory of the New Democratic Party candidate. The Liberal standard bearer finished a distant second.111

In another by-election in March 2008, in the British Columbia constituency of Vancouver Quadra where the Liberals had piled up impressive wins in recent years, the Liberal candidate's margin of victory was reduced to 151 votes over the runner-up Conservative. "We have worked aggressively to court the Jewish community there," said a party strategist. Actions included a meeting between Harper and Jewish representatives a week before the vote. "People are now trying to determine if that influenced the numbers," the official said. "This all goes back to the government's strong support of Israel in 2006."112

The big test came in the October 2008 election in which the Conservatives portrayed themselves "as the only party with a staunchly pro-Israel record."113 In a major speech in the Toronto riding of Eglinton-Lawrence, home to the fourth largest Jewish community in Canada, Harper reminded his audience of the government's support for Israel in the Lebanon war and its veto of the Francophone summit resolution acknowledging only the suffering of Lebanese civilians. He also accused opposition MPs of "marching in the streets beside the flag of Hezbollah" at the August 2006 rally in Montreal opposing the government's policy toward the war.114 The Conservatives promised to continue to work closely with Israel on economic and security issues, and reaffirmed that a Harper-led government would not participate in the UN's forthcoming anti-racism conference. They committed to fund a $3 million pilot Security Infrastructure Project to increase safety at places of worship, schools and other community centers for Jewish and other ethnic groups at risk of hate crimes.115

Harper's government was returned to power with 143 seats, short of the 155 it needed to attain majority status.116 Early assessments suggested that the party's ethnic outreach strategy had started to pay dividends. Although the Liberals took 48 of the 80 constituencies with ethnic minorities larger than 20 percent, the Conservatives increased their total to eighteen, six more than in 2006, and boosted their vote in others.117 The party lost ground in Vancouver and Winnipeg constituencies with a substantial Jewish population. It also failed to win in Montreal and Toronto, which together account for more than forty seats. However, it improved its share of the vote, in some cases dramatically, in ridings in both cities where large numbers of Jewish electors reside.118 In the test case riding of Thornhill they helped the Conservative candidate defeat the Liberal incumbent by slightly more than the 5,000 additional votes the party's ethnic outreach team estimated it would take to win. Liberal turned Conservative MP, Wajid Khan, though, was soundly defeated by his Liberal opponent, despite several visits by Harper.119

Bernie Farber of the Canadian Jewish Congress calls the Conservatives' electoral strategy normal political activity. "I see both a positive outreach to communities and I see politics at play, which is not a bad thing."120 Polling firm executive Paul Adams adds, "This is a game of inches in a minority [government] situation. The Jewish community is not a large demographic, but it tends to be concentrated in a small number of seats… It looks like an ethnic group that could be separated from the Liberals."

At times, Harper's party has gone to questionable lengths to do so. In November 2009, it targeted six Liberal constituencies containing large Jewish minorities (three in Montreal, two in Toronto, one in Winnipeg) with taxpayer- funded flyers claiming the Liberals had "opposed defunding Hamas and asked that Hezbollah be delisted as a terrorist organization," that Jean Chrétien's government had "willingly participated" in the "overtly antiSemitic" first World Conference Against Racism in Durban in 2001, and that Michael Ignatieff, the Liberals' current leader, had "accused Israel of committing war crimes." As Sheldon Gordon notes, "Only the last charge was incontestably accurate and free of distortion."121 Privileging one set of interests over others to enhance its electoral prospects, moreover, does nothing to further the government's professed goal of multiculturalism.

Likewise, good electoral politics does not necessarily lead to good foreign policy. As James Travers puts it, "Seeing the planet through a provincial prism encourages certainty over caution and, as a glance towards the Middle East confirms, is often catastrophic…. In exercising his foreign policy prerogatives, Harper [has] repositioned the country from being a small part of an elusive solution to the centre of an entrenched problem."122

Former prime minister Joe Clark agrees. In a speech in 2007, he argued that the Harper government had abandoned Canada's traditional "constructive role" in the Middle East. He took issue with Harper's claim that Canada had absented itself from the region during the previous decade, saying, "Apart from being flatly false, that rebuke is even more unsettling as either a warning shot, or an unguarded statement of belief, by the prime minister who so dominates this government." Harper should admit his mistake as Clark himself had to do on "one celebrated occasion."

Successive Liberal and Conservative governments had tried to be a "reliable interlocutor," between Israel and its Arab neighbors. "Not many other countries have that reputation."123 Harper was unmoved, telling the CIJA that a "battle between a democratic state and terrorist groups who seek to destroy it and its people is not a matter of shades of grey, it is a matter of right and wrong."124

However, Israel has sometimes shown more flexibility than its Canadian backer, creating opportunities for states with more balanced perspectives to perform a facilitating role. For example, in May 2008, months of indirect talks between Israel and Hamas brokered by Egypt culminated in a six-month cease-fire in Gaza and a temporary end to Israel's blockade. The following month, with Germany serving as mediator, Israel and Hezbollah agreed to exchange prisoners and the remains of the two Israeli soldiers whose capture helped ignite the 2006 Lebanon war. Turkey was also instrumental in helping Israel and Syria begin indirect negotiations aimed at achieving an overall peace settlement.125

Although Canada is not a major player in Middle East politics, it can encourage constructive solutions to the region's problems. It can also provide expertise, as it has done elsewhere, in such areas as governance, federalism, judicial reform, economic development, border control and enforcement, and the training of security forces. But this will not happen as long as electoral politics dominates the Harper government's foreign policy thinking.

Notes

I would like to thank Tom Flanagan, Paul Heinbecker, Tareq Ismael, Anthony Sayers, Denis Stairs, David Stewart and Livianna Tossutti for their helpful comments on an earlier draft of this article. Responsibility for any errors of fact or interpretation is mine. An extended version will appear in Tareq Y. Ismael, Canadian Foreign Policy and the Middle East: Continuity and Change (forthcoming).

1. Tom Flanagan, "Thou shalt not lean too far to the right," Globe and Mail, September 22, 2007.
2. Michelle Collins, "How the Jewish Vote Swung from Red to Blue," Embassy, February 11, 2009. http://www.embassynews.ca/news/2009/02/11/how-the-jewish-vote-swung-from-red-to-blue/37244
3. Flanagan, "Thou shalt not lean too far to the right."
4. Marci McDonald, "Stephen Harper and the Theo-cons," The Walrus, 3:8, (October 2006), 50-51 http://walrusmagazine.com/articles/2006.10-politics-religion-stephen-harper-and-the-theocons/. For the text of the speech see Christian Coalition International (Canada), Stephen Harper, "Rediscovering the Right Agenda," June 2003 www.ccicinc.org/politicalaffairs/060103.html (11/6/2007).
5. The Conservatives won 124 seats (receiving 36.3% of the popular vote) in the 308 seat parliament, followed by the Liberals with 103 (30.3%), the Bloc Quebecois (BQ) with 54 (10.5%), and the New Democratic Party (NDP) with 29 (17.5%). One Independent was elected. Three Liberal members subsequently joined the Conservatives. According to an Ipsos Reid election day poll, 52% of Jewish electors voted Liberal, 25.5% Conservative, and 15.2% NDP. Muslim voters voted 48.6% in favor of the Liberals, 15.5% for the Conservatives, and 28.2% for the NDP. Overall, 50.4% of non-Christian voters supported the Liberals, 23.6% the Conservatives, and 19.8% the New Democrats. Barry Kay, "The Denominational Vote: Non-Christians," September 17, 2008, www.wlu.ca/lispop/fedblog/?p=67 (9/23/2008).
6. Tom Flanagan, Harper's Team: Behind the Scenes in the Conservative Rise to Power (Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2007), 280. http://www.jstor.org/stable/40204376
7. Don Martin, "Tories campaign on ethnic outreach," National Post, February 19, 2008. http://www.nationalpost.com/story.html?id=522a6723-00ee-4796-aaac-4456cd0b6d4d&k=72618
8. Flanagan, Harper's Team, 281.
9. Quoted in Daniel Leblanc, "Tories target specific ethnic voters," Globe and Mail, October 16, 2007; "Anatomy of a Conservative Strategy," Globe and Mail, October 16, 2007.
10. Brent E. Sasley and Tami Amanda Jacoby, "Canada's Jewish and Arab Communities and Canadian Foreign Policy," in Paul Heinbecker and Bessma Momani, eds., Canada and the Middle East in Theory and Practice (Waterloo: Wilfred Laurier University Press, 2007), 197.
11. Daniel Leblanc, "Tories target specific ethnic voters," Globe and Mail, October 16, 2007; "Anatomy of a Conservative strategy," Globe and Mail, October 16, 2007; Daniel Leblanc, "Responses to tactics range from outrage to shrugs," Globe and Mail, October 17, 2007; Marci McDonald, The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada (Toronto: Random House Canada, 2010), 38. In Ontario the boundaries of federal and provincial electoral districts are identical. During the 2007 provincial election, Progressive Conservative party leader John Tory promised that a government led by him would extend education funding beyond the province's public and Roman Catholic schools to other faith-based systems. Tory was forced to withdraw his pledge in the face of public opposition, although it was welcomed by Thornhill's ethnic populations. Premier Dalton McGinty's Liberal government was returned to power. But the Progressive Conservatives won the Thornhill seat, which had been held by the Liberals.
12. "Anatomy of a Conservative strategy," and Sasley and Jacoby, "Canada's Jewish and Arab Communities," 198. Sami Aoun argues that this extends to the issue of Palestine, which because of its "complexity makes objectivity within the Arab and Muslim community in Canada difficult. The resulting differences of opinion have prevented a unified pro-Palestinian position that would help further the Palestinian cause with respect to Canadian foreign policy." "Muslim Communities: The Pitfalls of Decision-Making in Canadian Foreign Policy," in David Carment and David Bercuson, eds., The World in Canada: Diaspora, Demography, and Domestic Politics (Montreal & Kingston: McGill-Queen's University Press, 2008), 118. On Arab Canadian lobbying efforts see Liat Radcliffe Ross, "Canadian Muslims and Foreign Policy," International Journal, LXIII:1 (Winter 2007-08), 187-205.
13. Tom Flanagan, personal communication. Mearscheimer and Walt observe that Jews, including Frum and Krauthammer, "compose the core of the neoconservative movement," in the United States. Neoconservatives support "spreading democracy and preserving U.S. dominance [as] the best route to long-term peace," are "skeptical of international institutions," and "believe that military force is an extremely useful tool for shaping the world in ways that will benefit America." Their agenda includes "vigorous support for Israel and a tendency to favor its more hard-line elements." John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy (Toronto: Viking Canada, 2007), 132, 129, 132.
14. Quoted in Stacey Stein, "Harper criticizes Liberals on Israel," Canadian Jewish News, January 30, 2003. Harper has said little about his religious convictions. Raised in the United Church, he sometimes attends Ottawa's East Gate Alliance Church, which belongs to the evangelical Christian and Missionary Alliance. In 2005, Harper told an interviewer, "I won't say I always keep my faith and my politics separate, but I don't mix my advocacy of a political position with my advocacy of faith." Quoted in McDonald, "Stephen Harper and the Theo-cons," 49.
15. Lloyd Mackey, Stephen Harper: The Case for Collaborative Governance (Toronto: ECW Press, 2006), 92.
16. Quoted in Brian Laghi, "It's a marriage of principle and politics," Globe and Mail, July 18, 2006.
17. Quoted in Leslie Scrivener, "Jewish Liberals a Hezbollah casualty?" Toronto Star, August 20, 2006. See Father Raymond J. De Souza, "The Christian case for supporting Israel," National Post, May 8, 2008.
18. Not all of these MPs would identify themselves as evangelical Christians. However, they tend to fall within David Bebbington's classic definition of evangelicalism, based on a belief in biblicism (biblical authority), crucicentrism (the redemptive role of Christ on the cross), conversionism (the conversion of non-Christians), and activism (a commitment to spreading the Christian message). They may be members or followers of evangelical or conservative Protestant or Catholic churches, attending on a regular or periodic basis. Their activities may include participation in prayer breakfasts or faith-based study or advocacy groups. Lloyd Mackey, personal communication.
19. Harold M. Waller, "Organized Canadian Jewry: 'CJC's glory days are long past," Canadian Jewish News, March 15, 2007.
20. Harold M. Waller, "The evolution of Canadian Jewish advocacy: CIJA shifts the focus," Canadian Jewish News, March 22, 2007.
21. Ibid. The group included Gerald Schwartz, CEO, Onex Corporation; Schwartz's wife Heather Reisman, CEO, Indigo Books and Music Inc.; Brent Belzberg, owner of Torquest Partners; Larry Tannenbaum, chairman, Maple Leaf Sports & Entertainment; Stephen Cummings, CEO, Maxwell Cummings; Stephen Reitman, executive vice-president, Reitmans (Canada) Ltd.; Israel Asper, CEO, CanWest Global; Sylvain Abitbol, CEO of NHC Communications; Senator Leo Kolber, a former director of the Toronto-Dominion Bank, Seagram's and Loews Cineplex; and philanthropist Julia Koschitzky. See David Noble, "The New Israel Lobby in Action," Canadian Dimension (November-December 2005), and Dan Freeman-Maloy, "AIPAC North: Israel Advocacy in Canada," ZNet, June 26, 2006, www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=107&ItemID=10486 (12/20/2007).
22. The Canadian Council for Israel and Jewish Advocacy, www.cija.ca/eng/home.htm (7/11/2008); Waller, "The evolution of Canadian Jewish Advocacy"; McDonald, The Armageddon Factor, 318-321.
23. Jeff Sallot, "Neutrality on Mideast favoured, polls found," Globe and Mail, November 12, 2004; Jeffrey Simpson, "Canadians don't share Ottawa's pro-Israel tilt," Globe and Mail, February 1, 2005.
24. Waller, "The evolution of Canadian Jewish Advocacy."
25. The author of the strategy is B'nai Brith's Frank Dimant, who has close ties to Charles McVety of the Canada Christian College. In 2004, the college awarded Dimant an honorary doctorate. Four years later he was appointed inaugural chair of its new Department of Israel Studies. Another important figure is Joseph Ben-Ami. In 2002, after serving on the staff of Stockwell Day, Ben-Ami joined B'nai Brith first as director of communications and later as director of government relations and diplomatic affairs. In 2005, he left B'nai Brith to become executive director of McVety's Institute of Canadian Values. Three years later, Ben-Ami established the Canadian Centre for Policy Studies, his own conservative think tank. See Stephen Scheinberg, "Partners for Imperium: B'nai Brith Canada and the Christian Right," Canadian Jewish Outlook (July-August 2008), 5-8, 37-39; McDonald, The Armageddon Factor, 318-323.
26. Paul Lungen, "Evangelical Christian leaders head to Israel," Canadian Jewish News, March 13, 2003; Paul Lungen, "Evangelical Christians planning next mission," Canadian Jewish News, March 27, 2003. Christian Zionists are a subset of opinion within the evangelical community. They "tend to hold more rigid views on policy matters related to Israel than mainstream evangelicals," although Canadian members are inclined "to be more moderate" than their US counterparts. While Israel and many pro-Israeli groups cultivate the support of Christian Zionists, their views cause unease in some quarters. Robert McMahon, "Christian Evangelicals and U.S. Foreign Policy," www.cfr.org/publication/11341 (27/3/08) and Douglas Todd, "'Christian Zionist' beliefs cause unease among Jews," Vancouver Sun, August 25, 2007. See also Mearscheimer and Waltz, The Israel Lobby, 132-139.
27. Etgar Lefkovits, "Canadian government forming pro-Israel lobby," Jerusalem Post, February 4, 2007, www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1170359780973&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull (11/5/2007); Knesset Christian Allies Caucus, www.cac.org.il (11/22/2007).
28. Janice Arnold, "Christians must stand with Israel, evangelical leader says," Canadian Jewish News, July 12, 2007; Lloyd Mackey, "Israeli politicians court Canadian evangelicals," canadi- anchristianity.com, www.canadianchristianity.com/cgi-bin/na.cgi?nationalupdates/070215israel (3/6/2008); McDonald, The Armageddon Factor, 332-333.
29. Scrivener, "Jewish Liberals a Hezbollah casualty?"
30. Charles Flicker, "Next Year in Jerusalem," International Journal, LVIII:1 (Winter 2002-03), 115-138; Jeffrey Simpson, Discipline of Power: The Conservative Interlude and the Liberal Restoration (Toronto: Personal Library, Publishers, 1980), 153.
31. Flicker, "Next Year in Jerusalem," 137.
32. David H. Goldberg, "The Post-Statehood Relationship: A Growing Friendship," in Ruth Klein and Frank Dimant, eds., From Immigration to Integration, The Canadian Jewish Experience: A Millennium Edition (Toronto: Malcolm Lester, 2001), 141.
33. Michael Bell, Michael Malloy, and Sallama Shaker, "Practitioners' Perspectives on Canada-Middle East Relations," in Heinbecker and Momani, eds., Canada and the Middle East, 12.
34. Goldberg, "The Post-Statehood Relationship," 143.
35. John Ibbitson, "In case you missed it, our Mideast policy has shifted," Globe and Mail, December 3, 2004.
36. Goldberg, "The Post-Statehood Relationship," 143; Scrivener, "Jewish Liberals a Hezbollah casualty?"
37. They were: Montreal MP Irwin Cotler (justice), Vancouver's Stephen Owen (public works and government services), Toronto area members Joe Volpe (human resources), Carolyn Bennett (public health), Jim Peterson (international trade), and Vancouver senator Jack Austin (government leader in the Senate). Pat Johnson, "Israel supporters in cabinet," Jewish Independent, January 9, 2004.
38. Paul Lungen, "Canada shifts vote on UN resolution," Canadian Jewish News, March 16, 2006. The criteria, whether the resolution singled out Israel, used excessive language, and offered a balanced treatment of the issue, of course, leave considerable room for discretion in making such decisions.
39. Ibbitson, "In case you missed it, our Mideast policy has shifted"; John Ibbitson, "Is Canada preparing to shift line in the sand?" Globe and Mail, October 21, 2004; Ron Csillag, "Liberal MPs work to change Canada's UN votes on Israel," Canadian Jewish News, October 28, 2004; Scrivener, "Jewish Liberals a Hezbollah casualty?" Private contributions, once the mainstay of party financing in Canada, are now strictly limited as a result of the Federal Accountability Act, passed by parliament in 2007. The act bans corporate and union donations to political parties and party leadership candidates, and restricts individual contributions to $1,000 per year.
40. Campbell Clark, "Pro-Israel shift at UN keeps balance, MPs say," Globe and Mail, December 2, 2004; Paul Martin, Hell or High Water: My Life In and Out of Politics (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 2008), 348-352.
41. Sean McCarthy, "Ottawa set to reject anti-Israeli resolutions," Globe and Mail, December 1, 2005.
42. Quoted in Ron Csillag, "No Jewish MPs in new government," Canadian Jewish News, February 2, 2006.
43. Anna Morgan, "Elections here and there pose a Mideast dilemma," Toronto Star, January 22, 2006.
44. Quoted in Jeff Sallot, "How Tories tripped over Hamas," Globe and Mail, March 9, 2006.
45. Canada, Office of the Prime Minister, "Statement by the Prime Minister on the situation in the Palestinian Authority," News Release, February 14, 2006.
46. Sallot, "How Tories tripped over Hamas."
47. Quoted in "Canada halts funding to Hamas-led PA," Canadian Jewish News, April 6, 2006; Paul Wells, Right Side Up: The Fall of Paul Martin and the Rise of Stephen Harper's New Conservatism (Toronto: McClelland & Stewart, 2006), 294-295.
48. Quoted in CJN News Services, "Canada halts funding to Hamas-led PA," Canadian Jewish News, April 6, 2006.
49. Quoted in Diane Koven, "Cutting off Hamas 'a no-brainer,' ex-envoy Norm Spector says," Canadian Jewish News, April 27, 2006.
50. Diane Koven, "Prime Minister links Holocaust with current threats to Israel," Canadian Jewish News, May 4, 2006.
51. McDonald, The Armageddon Factor, 308-311.
52. Brian Laghi, "Discipline, control mark PM's management style," Globe and Mail, April 8, 2006; Jeff Sallot, "Canada vetoes key UN motion on refugees," Globe and Mail, March 11, 2006.
53. Quoted in Paul Lungen, "Canada shifts vote on UN resolution," Canadian Jewish News, March 16, 2006.
54. Quoted in Mark MacKinnon, "Lebanon invasion 'serious failure' Israeli panel says," Globe and Mail, January 31, 2008.
55. Quoted in Jane Taber, "Harper defends Israel's right to 'defend itself'," Globe and Mail, July 14, 2006.
56. Jane Taber, "PM brands Canada an 'energy super power'," Globe and Mail, July 15, 2006.
57. Peter Baker, "Overseas tensions force Bush to change direction," Washington Post, July 27, 2006; John Ibbitson, "Harper under the gun in first foreign-policy crisis," Globe and Mail, July 17, 2006.
58. G8 Summit 2006, "Middle East," News Release, July 16, 2006, http://en.g8russia.ru/docs/21.html (2/27/2008); Jane Taber and Graeme Smith, "G8 leaders urge Israel to exercise restraint," Globe and Mail, July 17, 2006.
59. Canadian Press, "Harper stance firm despite deaths," Toronto Star, July 17, 2006.
60. Quoted in Mike Blanchfield, "Harper nixes call for peacekeepers," National Post, July 18, 2006.
61. For an account of the evacuation see Graham Fraser and Tonda MacCharles, "Evacuation: the inside story," Toronto Star, July 21, 2006.
62. Mike De Souza, "Harper's evacuation efforts OK, poll finds," Calgary Herald, July 22, 2006.
63. Juliet O'Neil, "Public split on PM's Mideast stand," Calgary Herald, July 24, 2006.
64. Les Whittington, "No deal on truce at Rome meeting," Toronto Star, July 27, 2006; Allison Hanes, "No peace in Mideast with Hezbollah: PM," National Post, July 26, 2006.
65. CBC News, "Deaths of Canadian officer, UN observers preventable: board," February 1, 2008, www.cbc.ca/canada/ottawa/story/2008/02/01/kruedener-inquiry.html (2/7/2008); Steven Edwards, "Bomb fallout rattles UN," National Post, July 27, 2006.
66. Quoted in Jessica Freiman, "8,000 rally for Israel in Toronto," Canadian Jewish News, August 3, 2006; CBC News, "Pro-Israel rally in Toronto draws thousands," July 27, 2006, www.cbc.ca.canada/toronto/story/2006/07/27/toronto-rally-israel.html (11/29/2007).
67. Institute for Canadian Values, "Christians cannot remain neutral," News Release, August 1, 2006, www.canadian values.ca/friendly.aspx?aid=203 (11/6/2007).
68. Christians United for Israel-Canada, "Christian and Jewish Leaders call for National Day of Prayer for Israel and the Peace of Jerusalem," News Release, August 9, 2006, www.cufi.ca/documents/0008.htm (11/6/2007); Marci McDonald, "Stephen Harper and the Theo-cons," 58.
69. Quoted in Linda Diebel, "Tories draw on Mideast crisis to raise money," Toronto Star, July 29, 2006; Bill Curry, "Tories seek donations to defend Ottawa's stand on Middle East," Globe and Mail, July 29, 2006.
70. Bill Graham, "Mr. Harper has squandered our historic role as Mideast bridge-builder," Globe and Mail, August 2, 2006, http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060802.wcomment0802/BNStory/Front (8/3/2006).
71. Brian Laghi, "Only 32% back PM on Mideast," Globe and Mail, August 1, 2006.
72. Quoted in Paul Lungen, "Harper rejects moral equivalence between Israel and terrorists," Canadian Jewish News, August 3, 2006.
73. Quoted in Campbell Clark, "Liberal power couple back Harper on Mideast," Globe and Mail, August 4, 2006.
74. Quoted in Allison Hanes, "Jewish leaders see support shift from Grits," National Post, August 5, 2006.
75. Quoted in Mike De Souza, "Harper refuses to let polls dictate policy on Mideast," National Post, August 5, 2006, and Les Whittington, "Reaction to Mideast policy expected, PM," Toronto Star, August 5, 2006.
76. Christopher Guly, "Middle East crisis 'at the top' of Tory caucus agenda," Hill Times, August 7, 2006.
77. Canada, Office of the Prime Minister, "Prime Minister Harper announces Special Advisor on South Asia and the Middle East," News Release, August 8, 2006.
78. Quoted in Linda Diebel, "PM seeks advice—from a Liberal," Toronto Star, August 9, 2006.
79. Quoted in Campbell Clark, "PM picks Muslim Liberal MP as advisor on Mideast," Globe and Mail, August 9, 2006.
80. Quoted in CanWest News Service, "Arab-Canadian groups skeptical about Harper's Liberal advisor," National Post, August 11, 2006.
81. Quoted in Joel Kom, "Liberal under fire from own party over Hezbollah remarks," National Post, August 22, 2006; Jeff Sallot, "Hezbollah to stay on banned list," Globe and Mail, August 22, 2006; Ian Bailey, "Liberal resigns post over Mideast remarks," Calgary Herald, August 24, 2006.
82. Quoted in Sean Gordon, "War crime remark costs Ignatieff key aide," Toronto Star, October 12, 2006.
83. Quoted in Graeme Hamilton, "Leadership contenders anti-Israel, Harper says," National Post, October 13, 2006.
84. Editorial, "Ignatieff plays into his opponents' hands," Globe and Mail, October 13, 2006; John Ivison, "Ignatieff's judgment the real issue," National Post, October 13, 2006.
85. Quoted in Graeme Hamilton, "Jewish voters face 'moment of truth'," National Post, October 18, 2006.
86. Prime Minister Stephen Harper, "Speech to B'nai Brith at the Award of Merit Dinner," October 18, 2006; Daniel Leblanc, "PM blocks Lebanon resolution," Globe and Mail, September 30, 2006.
87. Quoted in Sheri Shefa, "PM stresses his support for Israel," Canadian Jewish News, October 26, 2006.
88. Brian Laghi, "Liberals, Tories in a dead heat," Globe and Mail, October 18, 2006; Innovation Research Group, "Foreign Policy Under a Conservative Government: An Interim Report Card," October 30, 2006, www.cdfai.org (10/11/2006).
89. Quoted in Steven Edwards, "Conservatives reversing Canada's position at UN," National Post, November 17, 2006; Steven Edwards, "Canada's UN stance shows tilt to Israel," Calgary Herald, December 1, 2006.
90. Quoted in Gloria Galloway, "Harper calls Hamas 'genocidal'," Globe and Mail, December 21, 2006.
91. Quoted in "Canada pursues 'niche' in restoring Middle East peace," Toronto Star, December 26, 2006.
92. Matthew Fisher, "Palestinians seek Canada's help," Calgary Herald, January 20, 2007; Mark MacKinnon, "MacKay meets Abbas, but there's no welcome mat," Globe and Mail, January 20, 2007; Carolynne Wheeler and Mark MacKinnon, "MacKay chides Israel's Livni over barrier," Globe and Mail, January 22, 2007; Josh Mitnick, "MacKay dodges questions on thorny refugee issue," Toronto Star, January 22, 2007.
93. Quoted in Matthew Fisher, "Canada, Israel united against Iranian threats: MacKay," Calgary Herald, January 23, 2007, and Mike Blanchfield, "Arabs, Muslims to mobilize against Tories," National Post, January 25, 2007.
94. James Travers, "MacKay's muddled mission," Toronto Star, January 23, 2007.
95. Campbell Clark, "Khan's Mideast report to remain under wraps, despite initial promise," Globe and Mail, January 8, 2007; Campbell Clark, "Khan assailed Harper before joining Tories," Globe and Mail, January 10, 2007.
96. Quoted in Allan Woods, "Harper says defections prove Tories appeal to ethnic voters," Toronto Star, January 12, 2007.
97. Campbell Clark, "Khan's Mideast report to remain under wraps despite initial promise," Globe and Mail, January 8, 2007; Sheri Shefa, "Withheld report on Middle East trip raises questions," Canadian Jewish News, January 25, 2007.
98. Quoted in Carolynne Wheeler and Alex Dobrota, "PM faces fresh furor over Khan 'charade'," Globe and Mail, January 16, 2007.
99. Quoted in Alan Freeman, "Ottawa restores aid to Palestinian Authority," Globe and Mail, July 24, 2007; Andy Levy-Ajzenkopf, "Harper mulling reinstatement of funding to Palestinian Authority," Canadian Jewish News, July 19, 2007.
100. Quoted in Daniel Leblanc, "Voters disturbed by PM's letters, Thornhill MP says," Globe and Mail, October 19, 2007, and Bruce Cheadle, "Jewish groups defend PM over holiday cards," Globe and Mail, October 13, 2007. The privacy commissioner concluded that there had been no breach of Canada's privacy legislation because political parties are not bound by most of its terms. However, the commissioner also began a broader study of political parties and privacy matters that will lead to recommendations on how personal information should be used. Michael Valpy, "Holiday wish both baffling and bothersome," Globe and Mail, September 10, 2008.
101. Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada, "Canada Supports Palestinian Reform and Development," News Release 179 and attached Backgrounder, December 17, 2007; Karin Laub, "Donors pledge billions to Palestinians," Globe and Mail, December 18, 2007.
102. Quoted in Andy Levy-Ajzenkopf, "Bernier, Olmert trade complements," Canadian Jewish News, January 17, 2008, and Oakland Ross, "Minister fails to answer policy question," Toronto Star, January 15, 2008.
103. Bal Brach and Glenn Johnson, "Ottawa cautions Israel on Gaza," National Post, March 3, 2008; Paul Lungen, "Canada 'concerned' over Israeli measures," Canadian Jewish News, March 6, 2008; Carolynne Wheeler, "Gaza ceasefire deal at hand, Abbas says," Globe and Mail, March 11, 2008; Oakland Ross, "Shifting towards Israel?" Toronto Star, March 17, 2008.
104. Quoted in Steven Edwards, "Canada's courage sets pace," National Post, February 25, 2008.
105. Quoted in Andy Levy-Ajzenkopf, "Canada, Israel sign security declaration," Canadian Jewish News, March 27, 2008.
106. Quoted in Campbell Clark, "Israeli envoy fears policy shift," Globe and Mail, May 8, 2008, Brian Laghi, "Canada's backing of Israel unshakeable, Harper says," Globe and Mail, May 9, 2008, and Tonda MacCharles, "Rae objects to Harper's 'smear'," Toronto Star, May 10, 2008.
107. Canada, Office of the Prime Minister, "Prime Minister's Speech for Israel's 60th Anniversary," 8 May 2008.
108. Quoted in Jeff Davis. "PM Stirs Debate by Cozying Up to Moderate Muslims," Embassy, July 9, 2008; Michelle Collins, "The Test: Ethnic Voters Could Make or Break Tories," Embassy, September 17, 2008.
109. James Travers, "Going negative big positive for Tories," Toronto Star, March 27, 2008.
110. Canwest News Service, "Conservative majority still out of reach, poll finds," Calgary Herald, August 2, 2008.
111. Janice Arnold, "Jewish shift to Tories in vote helped NDP, observers say," Canadian Jewish News, September 26, 2007.
112. Quoted in Jane Taber, "Where's Layton leaning? Toward hockey commentary," Globe and Mail, March 22, 2008.
113. Quoted in Andy Levy-Ajzenkopf and Janice Arnold, "Tories make inroads with Jewish voters," Canadian Jewish News, October 23, 2008.
114. Quoted in David Akin, Andrew Mayeda, Juliet O'Neill and Glenn Johnson, "Harper affirms Afghan pullout by 2011," Calgary Herald, September 11, 2008.
115. Levy-Ajzenkopf and Arnold, "Tories make inroads with Jewish voters."
116. The Conservatives won 143 seats (37.7 % of the popular vote), the Liberals 77 (26.3%), the BQ 49 (10%), the NDP 37 (18.25%), Independent candidates 2. The Green Party did not win any seats but garnered 1% of the vote.
117. Levy-Ajzenkopf and Arnold, "Tories make inroads with Jewish voters"; Marina Jiménez, "Tories see wins in ethnic ridings as proof Liberal lock on minorities is ending," Globe and Mail, October 27, 2008.
118. Levy-Ajzenkopf and Arnold, "Tories make inroads with Jewish voters"; Mike Cohen, "Tories building Jewish support," Jewish Tribune, 23 October 2008.
119. Andy Levy-Ajzenkopf, "Kent beats Kadis in Thornhill," Canadian Jewish News, October 23, 2008; Tess Kalinowski, "The wrath against Khan," Toronto Star, October 15, 2008. It is not clear whether the provincial education funding issue had an impact on the federal vote in Thornhill or elsewhere in Ontario.
120. Quoted in Leblanc, "Responses to tactics range from outrage to shrugs."
121. Sheldon Gordon, "Where have all of Canada's Jewish Liberals gone?" Haaretz.com, December 24, 2009, www.haaretz.com/misc/article-print-page/where-have-all-of-canada-s-jewish-liberals-gone-1.1474?trailingPath=2.169%2C2.208%2C2.209%2C (6/18/2010). Describing the controversy over his comment as "the most painful experience of my short political career" and "an error," Ignatieff later apologized for his choice of words saying it might have been better to have said that Israel "may have failed to comply with the Geneva Convention of the laws of war," or that it "has the right to defend itself but had to avoid civilian casualties." Quoted in Linda Diebel, "Ignatieff apologizes for Israeli war crime comment," Toronto
Star, April 14, 2008.
122. James Travers, "Poke at mandarins misguided," Toronto Star, June 26, 2007.
123. Quoted in Janice Arnold, "Clark raps Harper government on Mideast," Canadian Jewish News, February 8, 2007. For a discussion of Canada's policy toward the region see Heinbecker and Momani, eds., Canada and the Middle East.
124. Quoted in Diane Koven, "Harper cheered at CIJA event," Canadian Jewish News, February 15, 2007.
125. Michelle Collins reports that although most observers agree that "the Conservative government has positioned itself strongly behind Israel… it is the way the PMO [Prime Minister's Office] so tightly controls its affairs with the Middle East—experts say more than any previous minister—that for many signals a distinct drift away from Canada's traditional foreign policy in the region. 'People in Ottawa run scared of the PMO on Middle East issues,' one source close to the government's Middle East policy process told Embassy, speaking on condition of anonymity for fear of reprisal. 'You see at CIDA (Canadian International Development Agency), you see it at DFAIT (Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade). People are worried about putting things forward in case of getting slapped down by the Prime Minister's Office for not being sufficiently inclined toward Israel, so there's a real chill cast over the federal bureaucracy on these kinds of issues now, over our ambassadors in the region, and so forth,' the source said." Michelle Collins, "Harper's Silence on Middle East Politically Calculated, Experts Say," Embassy, January 7, 2009.

Originally published in Arab Studies Quarterly Produced and distributed by Pluto Journals. Donald Barry is a professor of political science at the University of Calgary.

continue reading source: http://www.truenorthperspective.com/Friday_27_July_2012/harper_dangerous_game


Remember, politics is a contact sport, like hockey, so please feel free to add quick contributions, observations and relevant information as a comment below!

Contact us if you would like to contribute to our collaborative efforts or would like to share/submit articles, data or additional content, feel free to add feedback, additional info, alternative contact details, related links, articles, anonymous submission, etc. as a comment below, via web-form, through social media outlets or email us directly and confidentially at: dumpharper [at] live [dot] ca


This site may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in an effort to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. and intend its use to be for education and instructional purposes only. Therefore, we believe this constitutes a ‘fair use’ of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use," you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.

ShareAlike Statement: https://dumpharper.wordpress.com/sharealike/