liberal catnip: Election Nite!

Will Jack Layton be our new overlord? Will Michael Ignatieff’s ego finally implode? Will Stephen Harper cry like a baby? Is this Gilles’ last stand? Will Elizabeth May finally get a seat in the house? Stay tuned! Live online coverage: CPAC CBC Canuck newspapers listed on the left

Continue reading

Election Nite!

Will Jack Layton be our new overlord? Will Michael Ignatieff’s ego finally implode? Will Stephen Harper cry like a baby? Is this Gilles’ last stand? Will Elizabeth May finally get a seat in the house? Stay tuned! Live online coverage: CPAC CBC Canuck newspapers listed on the left

Continue reading

liberal catnip: Reboot

I’ve taken a long hiatus from blogging because I’d reached a point where my head was sure to explode last fall if I’d kept on chronicling the massive corruption, hypocrisy, and general insanity that was continually emanating from TPTB (The Powers That …

Continue reading

liberal catnip: Reboot

I’ve taken a long hiatus from blogging because I’d reached a point where my head was sure to explode last fall if I’d kept on chronicling the massive corruption, hypocrisy, and general insanity that was continually emanating from TPTB (The Powers That Be). Not that this was a new phenomenon

Continue reading

Reboot

I’ve taken a long hiatus from blogging because I’d reached a point where my head was sure to explode last fall if I’d kept on chronicling the massive corruption, hypocrisy, and general insanity that was continually emanating from TPTB (The Powers That Be). Not that this was a new phenomenon

Continue reading

liberal catnip: Cons Steal a Page From Nixon’s Playbook

When Daniel Ellsberg leaked the now infamous “Pentagon Papers” in the 1970s, the Nixon gang decided to go after him with a vengeance.

Via Wiki:

As a response to the leaks, the Nixon administration began a campaign against further leaks and against Ellsberg personally.[17] Aides Egil Krogh and David Young under John Ehrlichman’s supervision created the “White House Plumbers”, which would later lead to the Watergate burglaries.

In August 1971, Krogh and Young met with G. Gordon Liddy and E. Howard Hunt in a basement office in the Old Executive Office Building. Hunt and Liddy recommended a “covert operation” to get a “mother lode” of information about Ellsberg’s mental state to discredit him. Krogh and Young sent a memo to Ehrlichman seeking his approval for a “covert operation [to] be undertaken to examine all of the medical files still held by Ellsberg’s psychiatrist.” Ehrlichman approved under the condition that it be “done under your assurance that it is not traceable.”[18]

On September 3, 1971, the burglary of Lewis Fielding’s office, titled “Hunt/Liddy Special Project No.1” in Ehrlichman’s notes, was carried out by Hunt, Liddy and CIA agents Eugenio Martinez, Felipe de Diego and Bernard Barker. The “Plumbers” failed to find Ellsberg’s file. Hunt and Liddy subsequently planned to break into Fielding’s home, but Ehrlichman did not approve the second burglary.

The break-in was not known to Ellsberg or to the public until it came to light during Ellsberg and Russo’s trial in April 1973.

Fast forward to this century and have a look at the case of Sean Bruyea:

OTTAWA – Confidential medical and financial information belonging to an outspoken critic of Veterans Affairs, including part of a psychiatrist’s report, found its way into the briefing notes of a cabinet minister.

Highly personal information about Sean Bruyea was contained in a 13-page briefing note prepared by bureaucrats in 2006 for then minister Greg Thompson, a copy of which was obtained by The Canadian Press.

The note, with two annexes of detailed information, laid out in detail Bruyea’s medical and psychological condition.

It’s no secret that the Stephen Harper cabal will go to almost any lengths to stifle dissent – from muzzling Conservative MPs and ministers to firing scientists and calling opposition members traitors and terrorist sympathizers – but this has to be a new low.

So, how did Harper react to this situation? By doing what he always does: blaming the previous Liberal government. But there’s a very obvious problem with that little tactic:

The New Veterans Charter was an initiative that straddled the transition between Paul Martin’s Liberal government in 2005-2006 and Mr. Harper’s Conservatives, who assumed power in late January, 2006.

A briefing note prepared for former veterans affairs minister Greg Thompson in March, 2006, was laced with private medical and financial information about Mr. Bruyea, including a quote from a psychiatrist’s letter.

Experts called it a flagrant breach of the country’s privacy laws and an attempt to destroy the former military intelligence officer’s credibility.

The note was prepared for Mr. Thompson in advance of a meeting he had with Mr. Bruyea on March 28, 2006.

From Bruyea’s site:

The document path even went as high as the Prime Minister’s Office when on March 21, 2006, a mid-level staffer called Bruyea and urged to him call off a news conference slated for that day where he publicly urged the Conservatives to hold off enacting the charter.

Harper now claims his government will cooperate fully with an investigation. When have we heard that before?
 

Continue reading

House-a-palooza

I did my impression of an “average” Canadian this summer i.e. I paid very little attention to the boring shenanigans of the federal pols – and it’s obvious I didn’t miss much. I heard about a poll not long ago – see how much I wasn’t paying attention? – that

Continue reading

liberal catnip: Disgust

Well, I suppose I’ve put this off long enough. There’s one word that sums up why I haven’t been blogging lately: disgust. It crept up slowly and finally and reached a crescendo with an exclamation point at the beginning of the farce of a Gitmo “military tribunal” for former child

Continue reading

Disgust

Well, I suppose I’ve put this off long enough. There’s one word that sums up why I haven’t been blogging lately: disgust. It crept up slowly and finally and reached a crescendo with an exclamation point at the beginning of the farce of a Gitmo “military tribunal” for former child

Continue reading

liberal catnip: Disgust

Well, I suppose I’ve put this off long enough.

There’s one word that sums up why I haven’t been blogging lately: disgust.

It crept up slowly and finally and reached a crescendo with an exclamation point at the beginning of the farce of a Gitmo “military tribunal” for former child soldier Omar Khadr – an expression of the moral bankruptcy of the American Empire™ and our own minority Conservative government which, despite a Canadian Supreme Court ruling stating that his charter rights were violated, has refused to lift a finger to help Khadr.

His “trial” has now been postponed for one month while his military lawyer recovers from an apparent gallbladder surgery-related illness.

Let me share an interview transcript with you that exemplifies why I’ve reached the point of disgust.

On July 26, 2010, CNN’s Larry King interviewed Wikileaks founder Julian Assange and Daniel Ellsberg, leaker of the infamous Pentagon Papers.

ELLSBERG: You know, the people who put U.S. forces in harm’s way, 100,000 men and women are — in Afghanistan, are the last two administrations, but particularly this one — the last administration, particularly this one, with a decision to escalate the war. It’s — I think it takes a lot of — I don’t know what to say, chutzpah (INAUDIBLE) for people who made the reckless, foolish, and I would say, irresponsible decisions to escalate a war that I’m sure they know internally is as hopeless as these new revelations reveal it to be.

And yet, they’re preferring to send men and women into harm’s way to die and to kill civilians and others — in a war that I think they perceive is endless and hopeless, rather than to face the accusations of generals that they have, these politicians have lost a war that the generals claimed is winnable, they claimed that very foolishly.

I’d say that was exactly the same as the boss I served in 1965, Lyndon Johnson. He didn’t want the General Johnson, the chief of staff of the Army, and others to resign if he didn’t give them enough of what they were asking for. I think President Obama has made the same terrible error.

***

KING: Daniel, do you understand why Mr. Gibbs, representing the president, is so upset?

ELLSBERG: Well, he’s very upset in part because he’s working for a president who has indicted more people now for leaks than all previous presidents put together. And two of those people — Thomas Drake and Shamai Leibowitz — have been indicted for acts that were undertaken under Bush, which George W. Bush administration chose not to indict.

Powerful, indisputable facts.

But then came this:

ELLSBERG: So this is an administration that’s more concerned about preventing transparency, I would say, than its predecessor which I’m very sorry to hear. As somebody who voted for Obama and expect to vote for him again, despite all this.

So, why should I care how Ellsberg votes?

The point is that this isn’t about him.

It’s about citizens who, in the face of horrendous human and civil rights violations, continue to support the perpetrators as if they have no other choice.

It’s about citizens who surrender their power to an oligarchy whose only function is to sustain itself – rights be damned.

It’s about citizens who think that believing in The Goodness of a leader trumps the very real and destructive actions of that leader.

It’s about people who put the survival of political parties before the principles those parties are supposed to stand for.

It’s about people who would rather “move forward” and not do what the law and international treaties demand: prosecuting government war criminals – a festering wound that has now been re-opened with this little parade of the so-called “last combat brigade” leaving Iraq this week – book-ended by the spokesman for US forces in Iraq, Maj Gen Stephen Lanza, (in an interview with Rachel Maddow) declaring that it’s not a “war” anymore. The only thing missing was a “Mission Accomplished” banner for Obama to stand in front of.

It’s about a dangerous subservience to governmental and corporate authority.

It’s about an addiction to money and the supposed promise it’s believed to fulfill.

It’s about media more interested in maintaining access and survival than credibility.

It’s about focusing on contrived political issues when the fundamentals of our very lives are at stake.

It’s about disgust.

And it’s about damn time more people woke up. Or maybe living in a suspended state of ignorant apathy is the best most people can do. Is that it? If it is, count me out. I refuse to live my life cowering in fear of my supposed “betters” when they have done nothing to earn my trust, respect, support or vote. You don’t get to trample on peoples’ rights and expect anything but disgust in return.
 

Continue reading