Canada Advances to Top Tier Warmongering. Congratulations All.

Also Available in Green

Did you hear the news?  Pakistan has inked a deal to buy eight modern Chinese submarines.  Pakistan, yeah.  And the Pakistan navy is looking at developing nuclear warheads for the torpedoes and cruise missiles those subs carry.  What do you think of that?  Does it evoke any sort of visceral reaction in you? I wouldn't bet on it.

Those familiar with this blog know that I devote some time monitoring arms races underway in many corners of the world but especially in the Middle East, South and Southeast Asia and, of course, Russia and Eastern Europe.  They're all little beehives of martial adventurism and incipient mass mayhem.

Interesting piece in today's Guardian about how the West's mega-billion dollar annual arms sales to our 'Middle Eastern allies' (snicker, snicker) is destabilizing the region.  On this score even Canada gets special mention.


The Middle East is plunging deeper into an arms race, with an estimated $18bn expected to be spent on weapons this year, a development that experts warn is fuelling serious tension and conflict in the region.

Given the unprecedented levels of weapons sales by the west (including the US, Canada and the UK) to the mainly Sunni Gulf states, Vladimir Putin’s decision last week to allow the controversial delivery of S-300 anti-aircraft missiles to Iran – voluntarily blocked by Russia since 2010 – seems likely to further accelerate the proliferation.

That will see agreed arms sales to the top five purchasers in the region - Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Algeria, Egypt and Iraq – surge this year to more than $18bn, up from $12bn last year. Among the systems being purchased are jet fighters, missiles, armoured vehicles, drones and helicopters.

...“It’s crazy,” says Ben Moores, author of IHS Jane’s annual report on arms buying trends. “The one Canadian deal alone – to supply Saudi Arabia with light armoured vehicles – will account for 20% of the military vehicles sold globally in years covered by the contract. And this is just the thin edge of the wedge. Saudi has booked enough arms imports in 24 months for them to be worth $10bn a year.”

...as Tobias Borck of the Royal United Services Institute points out, states in the Middle East are now more prepared to use the weapons they are buying.

“[The] Saudi-led military operations in Yemen [are] the latest manifestation of Arab interventionism, a trend that has been gaining momentum in the Middle East since the uprisings of the Arab spring,” he says. “Middle Eastern countries appear to be increasingly willing to use their armed forces to protect and pursue their interests in crisis zones across the region.”

Referring to the inconsistent approach by key security council members towards arms control in the region, he adds: “There are a lot of different streams feeding into this arms race.

“On Syria’s chemical weapons and the Iranian nuclear programme the two issues were ringfenced as pure arms control questions. When it comes to how we perceive our arms sales – whether they are British or US or whatever – it tends to be seen as a domestic economic issue – protecting our factories.

“That neglects the regional political dimensions, with arms sales taking place with a lack of regard for that context and without long-term strategic awareness.”

...Omar Ashour, an expert on Middle East security issues at Exeter University, adds another caution, this time over the intentions of the new Saudi-led Arab coalition, warning that its interventions are unlikely to contribute to stability.

...Speaking to the Guardian last week, he added: “On top of that, the increases in arms sales are bound to be extremely destabilising. At the moment most of the interventions have been against softer targets – Saudi Arabia targeting guerrillas in Yemen; Egypt against Bedouin in Sinai; or strikes against ragtag armies in Libya.

“But if the ‘soft’ keeps being hit hard they won’t remain soft. They will find their own patrons and proxies and hit back and it will lead to a vicious cycle.”

Pieter Wezeman, a senior researcher at Sipri, which maintains a database tracking arms contracts, raises another concern. “Something that doesn’t get mentioned is the complete lack of interest in arms control among the countries in region. It is not in the minds of leaders and decision-makers except for the need to arm to defeat any potential opponent.

“There is already instability in the region on several levels. You have instability in Yemen, Syria and Iraq. There is instability between Iran and the Gulf states. What is important now is how the massive expansion of the armed forces of Saudi Arabia, UAE and Qatar will be seen as posing a clear threat to Iran.”

Borck adds a final warning: “If you are going for an ever-bigger hammer, then the more desperate you are to make every problem a nail.”

In summary, Stephen Harper just inked a massive deal to perpetuate the Middle East conflicts and ensure that the region remains destabilized for years, possibly decades to come.  Yet, at the very same time, we're over there bombing one bunch of bad actors in order to restore stability to the region.  Neat trick, eh? What do we have in mind for a third act?  It should be pretty exciting for laid back Canada.

While I'm on the topic of warmongering and this insane global arms bazaar, I thought I'd share with you an investment analysis that arrived in my inbox yesterday concerning industry giant, Lockheed Martin.  The title speaks volumes:

"Lockheed Martin: Well-Positioned To Take Advantage Of Global Destabilization"

You can't make this stuff up:

With the huge ramp up in geopolitical tensions and global conflict, the international markets are becoming much more relevant for Lockheed Martin. As such, Lockheed Martin's decision to put increasing emphasis on international expansion is extremely smart. The company even plans to have its international segment account for at least one-quarter of its total sales. Given how much worse geopolitical tensions and conflicts have gotten in the last few quarters, Lockheed Martin will very likely be able to follow through on its international ambitions.

The Middle East, in particular, represents huge opportunities for Lockheed Martin. With conflicts in the Middle East escalating, the company's sales to the region will surely constitute a huge portion of its international business segment. Just recently, another Middle Eastern conflict emerged in the form of a rapidly destabilizing Yemem. The Yemen situation has gotten so bad that Saudi Arabia is now basically in a proxy war against Iran. Given Lockheed Martin's somewhat close relationship with Saudi Arabia, this conflict should present the company with plenty of new opportunities. In fact, CEO Marillyn Hewson met with several senior Saudi Arabian leaders to discuss new business opportunities.

The Middle East is just one of many promising international markets for Lockheed Martin. From increasing missile defense system sales in conflict zones such as Eastern Europe (e.g. MEADs sales to Ukraine) to jet deals in the APAC region(e.g. F-35 sales to South Korea), Lockheed Martin is building a formidable international presence. As international tensions/conflicts are only getting worse, Lockheed Martin has an opportune chance to cement its global presence.

Maybe Harper should dispatch Old Leatherback, Joe Oliver, over to the ME as Canada's ambassador for warmongering.  This is just getting started and there's countless billions to be had with the race going to the quickest.

The Phone Lines are Buzzing Between Ottawa and Canberra. We Listen In.

"Hello"

"Hi Tony.  Stephen here."

"Hi Steve, good to hear a friendly voice.  Bloody few around here today."

"Tony, I heard about this "spill" thing.  Is it true?  Can those backbencher nothings really push you out?"

"Yeah, Steve.  'Fraid they can, mate.  The morning papers are even calling on me to quit."

"Tony, sorry to hear that.  I know what you're going through.  I had a close call myself a few years ago."

"Yeah, Steve, but you managed to get through it.  And it wasn't your own MPs trying to knife you in the back.  That bastard, Turnbull."

"Wait, Tony, I might just have the answer.  Have you got one of those governor-general guys?  You know, like a ceremonial valet who comes out every now and then for things like throne speeches."

"Yeah, Steve, I'm pretty sure I've got one of those."

"Well Tony, here's the plan.  You go to that little bugger and tell him you want to prorogue Parliament.  That's p-r-o-r-o-g-u-e.  Pro-rogue as in 'in favour of you going rogue'."

"What's that do, Steve?"

"It sends all those little bastards - all of'em even your own backbench - into limbo.  It's like you're packing them off to summer camp.  They love it actually. Some of them will paint the boat house or put a new deck on the cottage.  One or two might write a book about their family no one will ever read.  That sort of thing."

"Gee, Steve, that sounds great!  Then I get to run the country however I like, right?"

"That's right, Tony.  You've got a name for it, "captain's call."  It's like one giant, endless captain's call."

"Steve, you're a godsend.  Well, I've got work to do if I'm going to prorogue Parliament by tomorrow morning.  I've got that governor general's phone number around here somewhere.  What was that old bugger's name again?"

"Give'em Hell, Tony.  And, if the reporters get whiney, tell them you're saving the country from a constitutional crisis.  By the time they figure out how to spell 'constitutional', they'll have forgotten the whole thing."

"Talk to you soon, Steve.  Bye.  And thanks again, cobber.  I owe you for this, big time."

"Bye, Tony. Remember, "captain's call."

click

And that, kids, is how Tony Abbott became monarch of the Kingdom of Australia.

The Exorcism of Stephen Joseph Harper

Steve, He's Coming for You

Stephen Harper has a problem.  The Holy Father is coming for him and the rest of his ilk.  This time it's not a legion of scientists who can be gagged and dismissed or a bunch of whiny Third World leaders up to their knees in rising sea water to be ignored.  It's Pope Francis, indisputably the most powerful living religious icon on the planet.  And it's not just Catholics who love this guy - the rest of us also like him just fine.

This year Pope Francis is on a climate change crusade to drive out the carbon demons that have crawled up the ass of Harper and company.  Steve can't duck this one.  His permanently coiffed hair is the telltale sign of demonic possession.

According to The Guardian, Francis is going to issue a Papal edict on climate change, a call to arms to the world's 1.2-billion Catholics.

"...can Francis achieve a feat that has so far eluded secular powers and inspire decisive action on climate change?

"It looks as if he will give it a go.  In 2015, the pope will issue a lengthy message on the subject to the world's 1.2 billion Catholics, give an address to the UN general assembly and call a summit of the world's main religions."

What's that, a "summit of the world's main religions"?  Francis is planning on uniting not only Christendom but also the Muslims, Hindus, and  Buddhists behind climate change and squarely against our own Steve and the rest of the Carbon Clique.


It'll be the Fossil Fuelers versus God in all his/her iterations.  And among those who'll be hearing the message will be a goodly, God-fearing chunk of Canada's electorate.  Oh my, my.  Talk about Divine Intervention.

Given Pope Francis' already impressive batting average, it doesn't look good for Sideshow Steve and his Carbon Demons.  You might say the Vatican is planning to give him a high colonic exorcism.

Update:

Fanciful as this might seem, a bit of Google research turned up some interesting facts.  Roman Catholicism is the given religion of 38.7% of Canadians which is about the same as the percentage of votes cast in the last election that handed Harper his majority.  Canada's progressive Protestant churches make up another 15-20% of the population.  You can pretty much count on those Protestant churches to support the pope on climate change.  Even Harper knows not to expect much support from the fact-based outlook of the non-religious.

I think it's certainly possible that a good, climate-change nudge from the nation's pulpits could cost Harper his crown.  Watch for the CRA to crack down on our churches.

The Green Devil - Australia's One Man Environmental Wrecking Crew

Tony Abbott is a man going to war.  His chosen target is Australia's environment and, according to Foreign Policy, he means to do it in.

Located at the bottom of the world, Tasmania is a bioregion so unique that it is listed as a World Heritage site by the United Nations for "outstanding universal value." It satisfies more criteria for that designation than any other World Heritage site on Earth.

But for Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott, this remarkable natural legacy isn't worth protecting. Instead, it should be stripped.

Soon after being elected in September 2013, Abbott started making plans to fulfill his campaign promise of removing some environmental protections on Tasmania's forest and opening it to industry, specifically logging. In March, he invited loggers to Australia's Parliament House and told them that members of the country's Green party were "the devil" and that "the environment is meant for man." The loggers were thrilled.

A few months later, however, Abbott had to convince a different audience of his proposal -- and this time, the response was not enthusiastic. When the World Heritage Committee of the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) met in Doha in June 2014, it unanimously rejected Abbott's plan to remove 74,000 hectares of Tasmanian forest from its list of cherished sites. One delegate said the move would have set an "unacceptable precedent." Thedecision took less than 10 minutes.

While the old growth forest of Tasmania might have been spared, Tony Abbott is proceeding apace with other plans.  One of them is to dredge a new coal port and then to dump the millions of tons of dredged soil and sand into the Great Barrier Reef.  Honestly, this guy believes that's a sane thing to do.  To Abbott, trashing Australia is merely taking the fight to the socialists.

Australia's opposition leader, Bill Shorten, has called Abbott an "environmental vandal," and university researchers have said his first year in office has been nothing but an "environmental train wreck." This dates back to his very first day in office, when Abbott introduced legislation to repeal a carbon tax on Australia's most polluting industries. Soon after, a document created by Abbott's cabinet surfaced, stating that his administration would no longer tolerate "any measures which are socialism masquerading as environmentalism."

And Abbott is increasingly and eerily coming to resemble our very own environmental Beelzebub.

Feel like a sauna?  You betcha.

For Abbott, all environmental regulations are merely "green tape" that hold back corporate profits. He has hacked away at that tape by gutting the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, the legislative process for determining whether a development project is environmentally safe. Instead oil, gas, and mining permits are now funneled to other agencies where they can get a green stamp.

To make sure no one can adequately challenge his dictums, Abbott has eviscerated federal funding for programs such as the Environmental Defenders Offices (EDO), independent legal centers that operate in the public interest. 

It sounds as though Harper must have slipped Abbott a copy of the Conservatives' own environmental dirty play book.

Environmental author Bill McKibben has written that Americans who traveled abroad during George W. Bush's administration should have sympathy for Australians right now: "[I]t's not easy being citizens of countries run by international laughing stocks." The comparison is apt: Like the Bush administration, Abbott chooses to ignore or undercut federal and international law when it doesn't suit his interests.

Yet he has no qualms about using the law as a political hammer to quash the opposition: In Tasmania right now, Abbott's Liberal Party government is backing a new bill explicitly drafted to stop environmental protesters. The Workplaces (Protection From Protesters) Bill is aimed at quelling those who "prevent, impede or obstruct the carrying out of business activities." Mining and logging industries are mentioned by name, but the bill is written so broadly that it could cover nearly any business. It includes a sweeping list of prohibitions against "protest activity," with fines up to $10,000 if demonstrations interrupt business -- and mandatory prison sentences for a second offense.

I don't mean to be cynical but I'd guess the only thing preventing Harper from passing his own, protection from protesters act in advance of the Northern Gateway pipeline is the cut lip and bloody nose he's earned in past encounters with the Supreme Court of Canada.  I have to assume that Abbott has the benefit of a weaker constitution and a more compliant court.

Here's Lil' Stevie

This shouldn't come as a surprise but here's Rick Mercer's take on the dickhead we know as Steve Harper

Yeah, it's Lil' Steve and, yes, he's a dildo.

CBC "comedian" Rick Mercer has painted the face of Canada's 22nd prime minister on a wooden penis. The piece of "art" is called "Lil' Steve".

It's all for a good cause. The wooden phallus—or "woody"—and others like it are being auctioned off as a fundraiser for the Calgary Sexual Health Centre. The centre provides pregnancy testing, birth-control and post-abortion counselling, sexuality-education programs, anti-homophobia presentations, and other services—you know, stuff Harper's Conservative base loves.

"Woodies are wooden phalluses that we use to demonstrate proper condom use," the centre's auction website states. "These woodies have been hand-decorated by some prominent supporters of our work who have graciously donated their talents so that we can offer these unique conversation pieces to other supporters like you!"

Right now, bids on "Lil' Steve" are up to $694. The auction closes on October 25.

And surely, demonstrating condom technique is all "Lil' Steve" will be used for.

Dear North Korea. Sorry For Your Loss. Maybe We Can Help.

Our sincere condolences on your loss.  A guy like Kim Jong-Il doesn't come along every day and he'll be hard to replace.  Sure you've got his pork pie kid but he's untested, unproven and, let's face it, a bit of a long shot.  What if he turns out to be a dud?  What then?  Why your whole country could fall apart!

Don't fret.  There is a sure-fire, no-risk solution to your dilemma.   Canada has just the guy to meet your every need.  Say the word and he's yours.

Our guy has six years of on the job training in despotism.  He's got everything you could dream of - in spades.  He's grandiose.  He is secretive and a born manipulator.  He truly understands the power and majesty of fear.  He's a thoroughly nasty shit with a volatile temper but he never shows a trace of that in public.  He's power crazed and yearns to transform any nation in his own image.  He's an ardent believer in absolute, one-man rule.   He won't reform your economy.  In fact he'll be too busy staring at himself in a mirror, arranging his hair that he won't even notice that your economy exists.

Best of all, our guy is, well, pudgy.  Maybe not quite to the scale you're accustomed to but, don't fear, he can pork out in a heartbeat.  And, well, perhaps he's a bit on the tall side compared to those he'd replace but we can assure you that, inside, he's really, really small.   And did we mention shallow?

So think about that and get back to us.  But wait, there's more.  Order within the next 48-hours and the shipping's on us.

Euros Tell Harper - Quit Stalling on Climate Change

It's time for Stephen Harper to quit stalling on global warming.

European Union president Jose Manuel Barrosa says Canada can't keep stalling, waiting for the rest of the world to act before it takes concrete measures to fight climate change. From CBC News:

"What we don’t want to see, frankly speaking, is that someone does not move because the others don’t move."

He said that if every country adopts Canada's position that it won't start taking drastic action to combat climate change until most other countries in the world agree to do the same, "no one will move in the end."

Not only is the Big Blue Buffoon letting down Canada and embarrassing us on the world stage but he is creating a bottleneck that deters action by other states. Stephen Harper is a genuine disgrace to Canada.

Steve's Cheatin' Heart

Stephen Harper has a Nixonesque regard for rules - if he doesn't make them, they don't matter .

That point is driven home in Elizabeth May's book, Losing Confidence. From the Toronto Star:

Elizabeth May felt like a schoolgirl when she glanced over at the powerful man sitting beside her and noticed he had broken the rules.

The Green party leader had fought hard to be included in the national televised debates during the campaign for last October's election, and remembers participants were told they would be provided with blank index cards for taking notes, but they were forbidden to bring their own background material.

"Stephen Harper's staff took care to print out background notes on index cards, but they picked the wrong-sized cards. And no one writes in printer font. Looking over from my seat, I remember the shock of realizing he was cheating," May writes in her new book. "I felt like I was back in grade school. Do you 'tattle' on a cheater? Now, all I can think is 'What were his staff thinking?' It is clear they thought he wouldn't be caught."

Steve, cheating on a debate? Looking the Canadian people straight in the eye and gaming hell out of them?

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/617893

Time For Straight Talk, Steve!

Steve Martin, sorry, he's that other comedian, - Steve Harper has been running an empty campaign. No issues, no platform. Vote for me because I'm better than the others. Don't worry about what I'll do with your vote, that'll be none of your concern after the election.

Harper has told us that there's a Bad Moon Risin' south of the border and therefore we should put our trust in him to do - well he doesn't want to say what he's got in mind.

That's just not good enough now that America's boiling pot of red ink and bad paper is threatening to spill over. C'mon Steve, what gives? Just what do you see coming? What is it likely going to mean for Canada and Canadians? What can we do about it? What are our options? What do you plan to do about it if you get another minority? What do you have in mind if you get a majority?

Steve, if you don't seek a mandate by giving us a clear platform, a plan of action to deal with what's coming, don't claim afterward that you've got a mandate. That'd be a goddamned lie and that's a serious sin for a pious man like yourself, Steve.

Listen Steve, what's that sound? It's something flying off the blades of the fan down America way. We'll need a lot more than sweater vests to get through this winter, Steve.

Time for some straight talk, Steve Harper. You called this scam election. You owe us that.

Travers Nails Harper the Bully

If you haven't already read it, take a couple of minutes to scan James Travers' insightful take on Stephen Harper in today's Toronto Star.

http://www.thestar.com/comment/article/447680

Comrade Harper Doesn't Want to Run the Government, He Wants to Own It!

Docile, complacent, timid. Those words pretty much describe the Canadian media and how they've let down the people of this country as Comrade Stephen has forcefully insinuated himself between the Canadian government and the Canadian people.

You no longer have access to your government. You have access to Comrade Stephen and his minions, the political commissars of the PMO, the Prime Minister's Office. Our Furious Leader and his faceless cadre will decide what you need to know about the federal government's workings and that'll be exactly what they want you to know and nothing more. Does that sound a little bit Stalinist to you? Well, yeah, it is. Does it seem undemocratic, un-Canadian even? It is and it's a stain that taints everyone who supports the Harper government.

The Toronto Star is publishing a series this week called "Secret Capital":

"In the 6th-floor office of a nondescript building sit the gatekeepers, the bureaucrats who decide what Canadians learn about the workings of their government.

Questions on the hot issues of the day all get funnelled through this office, the "communications and consultations" unit of the Privy Council Office, housed in the Blackburn building that fronts the Sparks St. pedestrian mall.

Throughout the government, it's known simply as "downtown," the place where decisions are made on who speaks on issues and what they say. In the Conservative government's clampdown on communications, this is Ground Zero.

Public appearances by cabinet ministers – whether it's a speech or an interview – are carefully staged, starting with a "message event proposal" vetted by the Privy Council Office, the bureaucratic wing of the Prime Minister's Office (PMO).

And in a marked change from previous governments, now even basic demands for information from reporters, once easily fielded by department spokespersons, are sent to this office for review – and often heavy editing – before they are okayed for public release, government insiders say.

David Taras, a professor in the department of communications and culture at the University of Calgary said, 'You can control events for so long, you can only manipulate for so long and ultimately I think this has harmed the Harper government to the extent that Harper's image has become `Mr. Partisan, Mr. Mean, Mr. Control Freak,'

"It's just got to a point where control is the image of what his government is. That's damaging. ... You wonder what they're running from and what they're afraid of," he said.

The clampdown could get worse. Auditor-General Sheila Fraser recently revealed that the government is proposing a new policy that would require all communications "products" to be vetted by the Privy Council Office.

One government official said the new rules would formally enshrine in policy the unwritten rule that now exists.

"The screws are being tightened bit by bit. It's gotten very extreme in the last six months. Just more and more delays, more and more control over things, less and less things getting approved," the official said."

http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/429906

It's time those who support Harper's assault on Canadian democracy face up to their choice - defend Canada and our democracy or empower Harper.

Why I Don't Hate Stephen Harper

I received some angry rebukes from Harper supporters in response to the item I posted, "What I can't stand about Stephen Harper." I was accused to hating Harper. Coming from that part of the political spectrum that embraces hatred, along with fear and suspicion, as philosophical staples, my critics probably just can't help themselves.

For the record, I don't hate Stephen Harper. I don't hate people as a rule, it takes far too much effort and tends to cloud the mind. I'll save my hatred for someone of much greater consequence than this fellow.

I can't stand some of Mr. Harper's policies and I can't stand some of his actions and skullduggery. I routinely comment on his hypocrisy and duplicity and yet I don't hate him. To me, at least, hatred is the most extreme variety of disapproval or dislike, an irrational emotion that carries a desire to see the person harmed or destroyed. I'd be enormously pleased to see Harper and his policies powerfully rejected by the electorate but that's about it.

Another point that my rightwing scolds bring up is the notion that Harper deserves our respect. I see nothing at all in him warranting my respect. Withholding my respect, however, is based on his actions and ideas and is not tantamount to hatred.

Harper loves America and he loves the American way although he's clever enough to know not to make that too obvious while he still heads a minority government. The irony is, if he was an American his political career would be dead. Look at the demeaning remarks he made about Canada and the Canadian people, how he mocked us to an audience of influential Americans in Montreal a decade ago. Any American leader who had shown such disrespect to his nation and people would be shown the door and handed a sandwich wrapped in a road map. He wouldn't be able to stand for dog catcher much less president. For Canadian conservatives, however, that same behaviour in their leader is just fine. Not only fine, they can't wait to proclaim their respect for the man who so plainly doesn't respect our country or our people.

I don't respect Stephen Harper but that's because I am proud of my country and my people. I don't respect Stephen Harper's policies or his chicanery or his hypocrisy or his duplicity. There are many things about Stephen Harper I can't stand. But I don't hate Stephen Harper. He's not worth that.

What I Can't Stand About Harper

A few BC Libs have gotten together to exchange ideas about the LPC, the CPC and, of course, Stephen Harper. In search of consensus, each of us set out just what it is we most dislike about Stephen Harper. It's a neat exercise that does wonders to focus the mind.

Here are some of my thoughts on why I don't like Stephen Harper:

"My partner put it best. She doesn't like Harper because he doesn't like us. Harper's comments going back a decade reveal his contempt for the Canadian people and our social values. Harper is outside our values in a place more likely to be inhabited by right-wing ideologues, would-be Republicans. At a purely personal level I believe he has set himself up against me and against my country. Harper doesn't want to serve and build Canada. He wants to transform it by shifting it far to the right following the same method that has worked in the United States.

I don't like Harper because I find him parochial. His preference is for wholesale devolution, a rejigging of our confederation and a Balkanization of the nation.

I dislike Harper because he flies false flags and employs ruse to effect fundamental change. Take the GST cuts. Harper didn't cut the GST for economic stimulus. In fact economists were nearly universal in holding economic stimulus would better be achieved by direct cuts in income taxes. What Harper was really doing, without being honest about it, was defunding the government. Doing that, covertly, is, in my view utterly subversive.

The world is now entering an era that promises great upheaval - socially, politically, economically - and Canada, while relatively blessed, won't be immune. Yet our central government has been rendered impotent to act quickly and powerfully should that need arise. It has been deprived of its fiscal strength and that has been a deliberate but unspoken policy of the Harper cons.

I see in Stephen Harper a man guided by a narrow, mechanical ideology who pursues objectives but without any clear or compelling vision. He's a glorified clerk. His lack of vision is reflected in a common failing of our time among the political classes - an utter indifference to posterity.

The times that are upon us mandate that we incorporate posterity into all our decision-making. What's good for us in five years is important but not if it requires neglecting or impairing the welfare of the country for generations to follow. That surely must be the nub of the entire climate change dilemma. Looked at in the span of an election cycle, it's vastly different than when taken on a generational scale.

Harper's goals are immediate and that makes his focus small and devoid of the inconvenience of vision. It gives rise to that "bull in the china shop" decision making where immediate results eclipse long-term consequences. The Tar Sands development to lever Canada into an "energy superpower" reflects that way of thinking.

Our society, our nation, our world are facing long-term challenges that can't be met by short-term thinking. It needs vision with an eye to posterity to begin developing long-term, effective responses - both remedial and adaptive.

The coming three decades will usher in enormous problems of a global dimension. Taken collectively they're unprecedented in scale and impact. Global warming, desertification, overpopulation, resource depletion, freshwater exhaustion, species extinction, the arrival of peak oil. Society is going to undergo change, the nation is going to undergo change, the global community is going to undergo change, often unpleasant and threatening and ultimately unavoidable. It's going to take strong social cohesion and clear vision-based consensus to find and implement the very best responses, short and long-term, to these challenges. Put another way, this will require leadership totally at odds with the corporate management style of movement conservatives."

And that, in brief, is what I can't stand about Stephen Harper. He's stuck in a rigid and atrophied ideology that does not serve this country well, even in the short run, and will certainly harm it in the long run.

So, do you dislike Stephen Harper? Is there something about him you can't stand? If so, why not take a few minutes, go to your blog and put your thoughts down in writing for the rest of us to share?

Is Harper Cracking Up?

Stephen Harper is going to sue Stephane Dion, Ignatieff and Goodale for defamation arising out of two articles published on the Liberal party website.

Well, if the Liberals needed something to keep the Cadman scandal front and centre in the public eye, our Furious Leader just served it up on a platter.

Apparently the articles, which I haven't read but will now, offend Stevie because they claim he knew about a plan to attempt to bribe Cadman to vote to bring down the Liberal government of Paul Martin.

“These malicious and reckless statements impugn the reputation of the Prime Minister and meant, and were understood to mean inter alia, that the Prime Minister knew of a bribe of a Member of Parliament and was an accomplice to that bribe.”

Oh Steve, say it isn't so. Harper's lawyers apparently claim that the Liberal articles suggest Harpo is, “dishonest, unethical, immoral and lack integrity.” Suggest? C'mon, we all know he's dishonest, unethical, immoral and lacks integrity. That's like whining that Dion alleges the sun will rise at dawn.

Well, there you have it. If Dion is smart, he'll play Harper's game because it's one that Harper won't win in the public's mind, no matter the outcome should it reach trial.

Within a couple of months the lawyers should be able to begin the Examinations for Discovery. Imagine Harpo, under oath, being put to discovery. Oh wait, wasn't there another Tory prime minister who sued for libel and had a difficult moment or two under discovery? Too bad Harper isn't taking Mulroney's calls any more.

Can Harper Feel MacKay's Hot Breath on His Neck?

There's a curious piece in the Canadian Press, "MacKay says he has no knowledge of alleged financial offer to Cadman." My first reaction was "okay, so what?"

"I don't know anything about how this has come about. Certainly it was something that I was not involved with," said MacKay, who was in St. John's, N.L., to make a funding announcement.

"I think it's sad, quite frankly, that this seems to have come up. It's very unfortunate."

All MacKay seems to be saying is that he's lily-clean in this "unfortunate" business. No denial that Cadman was bribed. No indignant vouching for the integrity of his boss, Harpo. No accusation that the Libs are exploiting the issue to smear the prime minister. Just that "it's sad" and "frankly ...unfortunate."

I wonder if Peter sees the writing on the wall for Stevie? Just curious.

Uncle Joe Harper's Political Commisars

"In all dictatorships, targeting the free press begins with political pressure - loud, angry campaigns for the news to be represented in a way that supports the group that seeks dominance." - Naomi Wolf, "The End of America."

Now, relax, I'm not claiming that Harper intends to seize dictatorial power in Canada. I think it's only a matter of time before that chump runs his course and the stain of his administration fades. That said, we do need to be mindful of this guy's autocratic bent. Part of that lies in Harper's manipulation of the Canadian media.

It came out late last year that Harpo had imposed a political filter on the Department of National Defence where requests for interviews or the release of information to the media had to be pre-cleared with senior bureaucrats in the PMO, the Prime Minister's Office. These political commisars were obviously intended to control the message on the Afghanistan controversy. It's a form of media manipulation and it's a technique that Harper has shown he'll use with other controversial issues.

The Vancouver Sun, a full-fledged KanWest paper, says the same tactics are being used by Harpo against Environment Canada.

"Environment Canada's muzzling of its scientists might be shocking, but it's hardly surprising.

The new policy, which apparently went into force in recent weeks, is designed to control the media message and ensure that Environment Minister John Baird faces no "surprises" when he reads or listens to the news.

The policy dictates that researchers refer all media queries to Ottawa. The media office then directs reporters to submit their questions in writing, and then researchers are to send written responses to senior management for approval. If the researcher is cleared to do an interview, he or she is asked to stick to "approved lines," though it's not clear what that enigmatic phrase means.

Needless to say, the new policy has infuriated scientists and sent a chill through Environment Canada. After all, while Gregory Jack, acting director of Environment Canada's ministerial and executive services, insisted "there is no change in the access in terms of scientists being able to talk," it's clear that scientists are being severely hobbled in their ability to speak freely.

This is in stark contrast to Environment Canada's treatment under previous governments, when it was one of the most open and accessible federal departments. That openness and accessibility, however, is seen by Environment Canada's executive committee as a problem that needs to be remedied.

It appears that the Conservatives refuse to recognize any distinction between policy based on science and science itself. Rather than using scientific evidence to inform policy, the Conservatives seem more interested in ensuring that the science conforms to their policy."

Once again we see the true face of Stephen Harper and it's pretty ugly.

Harper Screws the Messenger

It's up to the Canadian Forces to decide what they will and won't tell us about their actions in Afghanistan. That came from Blockhead himself, our Furious Leader, Stephen Harper, as he lovingly greased himself up to slip to safety from the detainee controversy. From the Globe & Mail:

"The military is free to release information about Afghan detainees if it chooses, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said yesterday, as he was criticized for excessive secrecy on how Canadian troops handle their prisoners.

"These are operational matters of the Canadian military. If the Canadian military chooses to reveal that information, that's their decision. But the government certainly isn't going to release it on their behalf," Mr. Harper said in the House of Commons."

There you have it, hands off from the Cons. Canadian Forces will say what they like, when they like and to whom they like, so don't blame the Harpies if they're not up front, blame the military. Wait a second, that doesn't sound quite right, does it?

It's not, that is unless Lardo has repealed the gag order he slapped on the Canadian Forces that came to light just two weeks before Christmas. That's when word got out that the Forces had been told that requests for information and interviews had to be pre-cleared with their political commisars, senior officials from the prime minister's office.

"The Privy Council directive applies to all matters of "national importance" but is primarily focused on shaping information relating to the war in Afghanistan."

Oh my goodness, Harper appears to be - lying. Worse, he seems to be hanging the Armed Forces out to dry to give himself political cover. Not Harper, he wouldn't do that, would he?

(the original story was posted on 10 December, 2007)

What Harper and Rex Murphy Can't Grasp

I watched the clip of Rex Murphy endorsing Stephen Harper's policy on cutting carbon emissions. The policy, as I've heard Harper explain it, is that all nations must commit to binding cuts in greenhouse gas emissions.

On its face it has the same appeal as the flat tax proposals that get bandied about. From our perspective in the advantaged, industrialized world, Harper's carbon policy makes plain sense.

What we don't want to consider is how this policy is seen by the emerging economies and the Third World and we certainly don't want to consider how it makes them see us. Only once we look at it from their perspective does the manifest inequity of the Harper proposal become apparent. From their perspective the policy looks patently racist.

The Harper policy embraced so warmly by Rex Murphy is a policy considered in a void. Completely left out are some unfortunate realities these people would rather not have mentioned. For example, North Americans create so much greenhouse gas because we use a disproportionate amount of fossil fuels.

It's easiest to look at the American example. Our numbers are pretty close so we can fall under the US example. Americans represent about 5% of the world's population. Americans consume more than 25% of the world's fossil fuels. That means Americans use five times the world average in fossil fuels and produce five times the world average in greenhouse gases.

Now, let's take India. Indians use considerably less than the world average in fossil fuels and produce commensurately less greenhouse gas emissions. Ballpark it at about one-tenth of the American numbers.

The big difference is that there are 1,130,000,000 Indians, give or take a few million. The same source (the CIA) estimates America's population as of July, 2007 at 301,000,000. So, India is nearly four times as populous as the United States. China comes in at 1,322,000,000.

India and China are considered emerging economies and that means industrialization and that means fossil fuels and that means greenhouse gas emissions. Still, on a per capita basis, their fossil fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions are a small fraction of our own.

Now, let's say we decide that everyone should agree to cut their greenhouse gas emissions by 50%. Let's say an Indian, on a per capita basis, produces about 10% of the per capita American emissions figure. So, by cutting 50% across the board, we're in effect preserving our ratio discrepancies in perpetuity. We're locking in our right to continue consuming the lion's share of the world's energy and to continue pumping out the lion's share of the world's greenhouse gas emissions. What's more, we expect them to agree to that. If you were the little guy on the receiving end of that ultimatum, would you agree to it? You're lying if you said you would.

There has to be accommodation on this problem. We emit vastly more so we should have to cut at least somewhat more. Measures do need to be taken by India and China but we in the advantaged, industrialized world have to do more than we expect of them, a lot more.

Overall, what we need to do is determine, on the best scientific evidence available, a global emissions target. That'll be the pie. And then we have to work out how much of that pie each nation should be allocated based on a variety of factors including population. It's a form of global carbon rationing but there's no other way to make this work through international co-operation.

This is not some "off the wall" concept. It's actually the very basis of the Bali Communique of 150-major British and European corporations.

Harper can't hide behind his simplistic reasoning any longer, and there's no excuse for Rex Murphy following suit either.

Harper's Deliciously Perverse Logic

When it comes to global warming, trust Stephen Harper to say whatever suits him at the moment. Even with Canada's worst polluters, his beloved Tar Sands, he won't tolerate any talk about hard caps on emissions. There, the formula is "intensity based" targets. That's a scam. What he means is cleaning up bitumen extraction and processing - a little bit - while increasing overall extraction and processing - quadrupling or even quintupling operations. The net result - an enormous jump in GHG emissions from Big Oil at the Tar Sands.

When it comes to global warming and Stephen Harper - that's what you're dealing with. Fighting climate change will not come at the expense of Tar Sands expansion and that's the bottom line.

In order to make any sense out of what Harper says elsewhere, you need to keep his Tar Sands perspective in mind.

On the weekend, Harpo made Canada the pariah of the Commonwealth (alright, alright - we're still not up there with Zimbabwe or Pakistan, but... ) by scuttling a resolution calling for binding caps on greenhouse gas emissions.

Harper, being the sleazeball he is, wasn't candid enough to admit that he would not tolerate emissions caps because that would screw up his Tar Sands. Steve knows that sort of honesty could cost him big at home. Instead he resorted to the tried and true tactic of all swindlers - distraction.

Steve looked for another way out and found it - in India. He said the rest of the Commonwealth is flat out wrong in wanting developed nations to cut greenhouse gas emissions first. Harpo smugly described his knuckledragging as "the only right position."

"If we are all to believe that climate change is a major problem caused by greenhouse gas emissions then we have to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and the only way we can do that is if all major emitters reduce their emissions. It's that simple, so we are not going to settle for anything less." - Harper

It is indeed "that simple" to a real con man. What's simple about it is that it tells it tells the emerging economies that, henceforth, we intend to preserve our per capita emissions differential. That means that every citizen of Canada is going to be entitled, indefinitely, to generate greenhouse gas emissions five or six times that of every citizen of India. Why? Because we're Canadians, civilized, still mainly white folks - and they're not. Why? Because we're already accustomed to monster SUVs and 4,000 square foot houses with three car garages - and they're not.

Then again, remember, this is a con - a distraction. Stephen Harper is not prepared to tolerate hard caps in any case. It's all about "intensity based" targets for him, so all this business about China signing on to this or India signing on to that is just smoke and mirrors.

That, my friends, is what Stephen Harper is all about - and he's laid it right out at your feet. He wants a return to the British Raj. That's what this is all about - White Man's Burden.