HARPER'S SPEECHWRITERS AND HOW THEY GET THERE

With Hannaford Gone. . .

Can Corbella be far behind ?

As the CanWest Global empire sinks into its well-earned sunset many of its employees –including writers and editors - must be scrambling for new jobs. Living on the edge of being out on the street isn’t fun and it’s much worse when you are actually out on the street.

Nigel Hannaford, a pedantic, boring, extreme right wing, politically conservative former editorial writer and columnist who began imparting his antiquated views on Calgary Herald readers in 1999 seemed to be ahead of the pack in testing the waters for more secure employment. Beginning in 2004 when the Harper government took office Hannaford consistently fawned over it, doted on it, and caressed it, while shouting loud huzzahs of approval at each and every of its pronouncements and actions – despite its screw-ups, meanness, lies, and deceits. Anybody reading his tiresome columns could be forgiven if they had concluded that Hannaford was looking to Harper for new and more secure work.

Indeed in October 2009, the zealous opponent of gay-rights and multiculturalism, climate change denier, and ardent Afghanistan war hawk, was hired as a Harper speech writer. One wonders whether or not an even more secure post in the public service awaits him before his pal is finally thrown out of Sussex Drive. For more of Hannaford’s off the charts views see: http://faisalkutty.com/editors-picks/the-man-who-writes-stephen-harper%E2%80%99s-speeches-nigel-hannaford/

Another who many have long suspected as being on the same career path as Hannaford is the Herald’s editorial page editor Licia Corbella. The most recent manifestation of what may be her career aspirations appeared yesterday on the Herald's editorial page – appropriately on Valentine’s Day - with her passionate defence of Harper’s decision to prorogue parliament. See: http://www.calgaryherald.com/news/Double+standard+prorogation+telling/2563069/story.html

In it Corbella whines that no one seems to be outraged with Dalton McGuinty in the wake of announcing his intention to prorogue the Ontario legislature. She rages that “those of us who live in the real world know the answer. Proroguing is only something those professors and protesters care about if it’s someone like Harper who does it.”

Well, I doubt that being in the real world is hanging out – as Corbella does - with the Greed is Good crowd at the Fraser Institute and the co-sponsors of the forthcoming Sarah Palin love-fest like Craig Chandler and the Progressive Group for Independent Business. But she is probably right thinking that it is Harper’s type that gets under people’s skin when he seeks prorogation. I’m speaking of the petty, mean-spirited type that indulges in the politics of personal destruction, assassinates the characters of people who get in their way, and who asks for prorogation twice in one year to keep the Canadian people in the dark and to save their own political skin. I mean, people like that have their detractors, non?

In her defence of Harper Corbella then opts for one of her well-worn diversionary tactics. She brings up the red (no pun intended) herring of Bob Rae as Premier of Ontario. This is a device she has used many times before. Bob, she says, prorogued the Ontario legislature three times in five years, and then goes on to castigate his administration for its various misdeeds. Poor Bob. Corbella seems to be fixated on him, even though it is almost a generation since he was in power. The government of Premier Bob Rae is old news and few people save for the Harper fawners and apologists even talk about it these days.

Corbella then reminds us that it was only in December of 2008 when the Liberals, NDP and the Bloc threatened forming a coalition that most Canadians first heard of prorogation. She calls Harper’s actions in seeking prorogation at that time as “righteous” in the circumstances because the forming of the coalition sought to “usurp democracy.” First of all, it is trite to say that forming a coalition in democratic, responsible government parliaments is entirely within the traditions of democracy. At times coalition governments have been essential to Canada’s survival and development. For anybody who is interested in the subject I invite them to read: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/features/coalition-governments-canada#introduction. Furthermore she forgets that the coalition was a response to an assault on democracy by Harper himself. The coalition threat was an attempt to spurn Harper’s intention to cut off public funding of federal opposition parties. It was the opposition's response to Harper’s attempted ‘putsch.’ For a definition of this descriptive term made famous by an event involving, appropriately enough, Adolf Hitler, read: http://www.answers.com/topic/putsch

There may be quibblers as to my definition of ‘putsch’ in that some will say Harper did not attempt to overthrow a government. I say that if you choke off funding for opposition parties you are trying to overthrow government as Canadians have always known it.

Corbella does have a moment – as even the most partisan of people like her do from time to time – of honest reflection. She calls Harper’s announcement of prorogation on December 30 “a huge miscalculation,” “bordering on disgraceful,” and refers to “Harper’s Machiavellian machinations.” Alas like Dr. Strangelove, after a moment of lucidity she quickly slips back into her normal uber partisan Conservative mode – saying that Harper should come clean with all of the info on the Afghan detainee issue “and let the Liberals come to the defence of Taliban murderers who were having ‘troubles sleeping because of stress’ while in prison.” Sound familiar? It could have been written by Harper himself.

Her column then deteriorates into pure babble with a ridiculous feeble defence of Harper’s action arguing that prorogation saved taxpayers’ money because MPs did not have to fly back to Ottawa from their ridings and would not receive extra pay because the committees of which they were members were not sitting.

Her closing thoughts reflect the rah-rah highly partisan Harperite that she is as she advances the proposition that prorogation is not such a bad thing because question period is vulgar, and that the bitching about prorogation is because Liberals feel entitled to govern.

So what are we to make of all of that?

Surely, the cowtown has produced no greater Harper cheerleader than Corbella, unless it is Nigel Hannaford. From day one she and Hannaford have been devoted to the Harper cause. They have been loyal and faithful through thick and thin whether their hero was mean, petty, deceitful, incompetent or all of the foregoing at once. If there is a place for Hannaford amongst the flim-flam artistes who write prime ministerial bafflegab for the masses, surely there must be a place for Corbella. By God, she’s earned it!

SOME SPONSORS OF THE 'MAKE DITZY SARAH RICH' EVENT IN THE COWTOWN

In case you are wondering just who are the sponsors of the forthcoming Palin-Wallin Calgary conservative gabfest, they are listed on a series of half page ads in the hapless Calgary Herald.

At the top of the list is Walton. Walton is a private Calgary-based land investment company estimated to be worth gazillions and with holdings in many corners of the world. The company has been a soft landing for several right-wing retired politicos who have joined its advisory board after the sun had set on their careers. Among the lucky ones who have landed this sought-after lucrative sinecure are Ernest Manning’s son Preston, conservative gadfly and political groupie Thompson MacDonald, and most recently, ex-Premier Ralph Klein.

The right-wing think tank, The Fraser Institute (surprise, surprise), is also on the list. Among its former directors are those great Canadian role models Conrad Black, David Radler, and Peter Pocklington. Oh yes, the Fraser Institute has also had among its ranks a noted plagiarist by the name of Dr. Owen Lippert. Dr. Lippert who served the institute as a senior fellow and policy analyst, you will recall, took the rap for Stephen Harper when it was disclosed that Harper had given a plagiarized speech in the House of Commons in defence of Canada entering the war in Iraq.

Enmax Corporation is also a sponsor. Enmax is a 2 billion dollar energy distribution company wholly owned by the City of Calgary. Among its directors are Cliff Fryers, a former pooh-bah of the Reform and Alliance parties and loyal and faithful man-servant to Preston Manning, ex-Ontario premier Mike ‘Duffer’ Harris famous for his ‘Common Sense’ nonsense revolution of years gone by, former Klein-era Tory cabinet minister Greg Melchin, and the ubiquitous Thompson MacDonald.

The Rogers Group is also on the list. Apart from the usual assortment of conservative Bay Street captains of industry and members of the Rogers family that grace its board, surprisingly there appears to be a token Liberal – none other than David Peterson, former Ontario Premier who was confined to the dust heap of history by Bob Rae when he led the Ontario NDP to power almost twenty years ago.

The Progressive Group for Independent Business is a sponsor. It’s advisory council is a Who’s Who of Calgary’s lunatic far right including failed Wild Rose Alliance leadership candidate Mark Dyrholm, and uber rabid anti-gay rights conservative motor mouth Craig Chandler. Chandler has had mostly controversial associations with the Social Credit, federal and provincial Progressive Conservative, and Canadian Alliance parties. He has openly apologized to the citizens of the United States for Canada’s unwillingness to invade Iraq, was rejected by Premier Stelmach as a Progressive Conservative candidate to contest a provincial election, and has had run ins with the Alberta Human Rights Commission and the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council. Among his more noteworthy public statements in 2007 the Ontario-born Chandler informed others who came to reside in Alberta:

"You came to here to enjoy our economy, our natural beauty and more. This is our home and if you wish to live here, you must adapt to our rules and our voting patterns or leave. Conservatism is our culture. Do not destroy what we have created."

For more on the distinguished career of the tolerant Mr. Chandler see: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craig_Chandler

And of course – you guessed it – the Calgary Herald is also a sponsor of this ‘Make Ditzy Sarah Rich’ event. The Herald’s participation was no doubt driven by its tiresome, ideological editors and scribes who have turned that once venerable publication into a second rate right wing pamphlet.

Bedford Biofuels, Oilsands Quest Inc. (which has Sarah’s stage prop Ms. Wallin on its board), the Jaymor Group, Land Rover Calgary, Business in Calgary, and It's Me, round out the list of advertised patrons.

All of this info is provided to you in case you are wondering what makes much of the cowtown tick. Dysfunctional? You think?

See: http://www.waltoninternational.com/
http://www.fraserinstitute.org/
http://www.enmax.com/
http://www.rogers.com/web/Rogers.portal?cm_mmc_o=mH4j7BBTkwCjC2By5jPyzEpjvivNi9jwECjCqBTwylCjCyBTwyl
http://www.pgib.ca/
http://www.calgaryherald.com/
http://www.bedfordbiofuels.com/
http://www.oilsandsquest.com/
http://www.landrovercalgary.com/index.htm?sa=t&source=web&ct=res&cd=1&ved=0CA4QFDAA&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.landrovercalgary.com%2F&rct=j&q=land+rover+calgary+ab&ei=uE9wS5LeEYHssgPFl72yDQ&usg=AFQjCNHrCSxD4cFnfL1cKCZeCgKp3VUp-Q
http://www.businessincalgary.com/
http://www.learningtolovecancer.com/

ANOTHER CONSERVATIVE PARTY MESSAGE FROM A ONCE PROUD NEWSPAPER

Yesterday’s Calgary Herald carried more flatulence from the pen of the editor of the editorial page, Ms. Licia Corbella. Money must be awfully tight at that failing broadsheet these days. There seems to be precious little of it available for talented writers to ply their skills on the editorial page. Why else would Corbella’s turgid Conservative flim-flam appear so frequently?

As might be expected, she takes full advantage of her lofty position in the hierarchy of that soon-to-be relic of a bygone kinder and gentler era – her pieces usually appear smack-dab in the middle of the editorial page. Thus, try as one may, there is just no way to avoid them short of skipping the page or cancelling one’s subscription. Understandably, both of those options are increasingly being taken up by Herald readers.

The title of her piece is “Is Ignatieff the Conservatives’s Grinch?” It can be read here: http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/theeditorialpage/story.html?id=ff88108e-2741-4dc4-aeee-8c8c717f6f10&p=2

Her introduction centered around a comment made by her eleven year-old son. According to her, the young lad said to her, “Doesn’t this guy look like the Grinch?” The guy the little fellow was referring to was new Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff. For one of her kids to make that observation speaks volumes about daily conversation around her family dinner table. Corbella's predictable reaction was, “Ha! How perceptive!,” no doubt believing that the kid, like his mother, was just a chip off the old Black. See: Sunday, March 09, 2008
LICIA CORBELLA: ON BEING DEAF, DUMB AND ARROGANT AND A CHIP OFF THE OLD BLACK

Warming to her Yuletide analogy, Corbella continued with the tiresome pejorative blather she always reserves for Liberals. She remarked that with Iggy’s “bushy eyebrows and sly grin [he] looked like he had stolen something . . . ” and that in fact “he had just snatched the leadership” from his rivals and “the Liberal grassroots as well.” She called the move “furtive” and took the opportunity to remark that no “heavy hitters” were interested in the job and that his only rival Bob Rae had been a “disaster” as Premier of Ontario.

Well, to set the record straight – once again in response to one of Corbella's gross columns – Iggy does not look like a Grinch and neither did he steal anything from anybody. The leadership was bestowed upon him by the party and only a handful of Grits across Canada were critical of the move.

The leadership process was sped up as a result of a justifiable lack of trust among all Liberals in Stephen Harper. They were rightly convinced that if Harper tried to kill off the opposition by shutting down its source of funds, he would call an election during their leadership campaign. Thus they had to act fast, and that is exactly what they did. As a result of the party's decision to quickly confer the leadership upon Ignatieff, the Liberals are now more united than at any other time in this decade.

As for there being no heavyweights who pursued the Liberal crown, that too is false. Both Ignatieff and Rae make each and every Conservative party jackal who will feed on Harper’s carcass at his next misstep look like, well, the lightweight jackals that they are. Both Ignatieff and Rae are great Canadians whose positive contributions to this country and society generally make Harper and his likely successors look like freeloaders.

Being the Conservative flak that she is, Corbella then commented extensively on perceived inconsistencies in Ignatieff’s messaging during the 2006 leadership race. She ignores the fact that Harper’s past utterances, apart from being scary, makes Ignatieff look and sound like the model of consistency. See: Wednesday, November 12, 2008
MORE TWADDLE FROM THE CALGARY HERALD: HARPER, OBAMA TWO PEAS IN A POD!!!!????

Altogether another sorry contribution from the editorial pages of a once proud newspaper. CanWest Global common stock closed yesterday at $ 0.507 Cents.

PRESTON MANNING WANTS GEORGE W. BUSH TO MANAGE THE CANADIAN ECONOMY

Fraser Institute political hack, Preston Manning

Canada's George W. Bush (on the left) with the real thing (on the right)

Preston Manning’s column of this today’s Globe and Mail asks the question: Who would be the best person at the helm of the ship of state as Canada heads into stormy economic seas?

After giving short shrift to Elizabeth May ( “ . .weak, terribly weak, on the economy.”), Jack Layton (“ . . . cut from the same cloth” as “economic disasters . . Bob Rae and Dave Barrett”), Stephane Dion (Dion’s degrees from university “are in political science and sociology – adequate preparation for salon politics but not for economic crises.”) - - surprise, surprise, he recommends his fellow arch-conservative and prodigy Stephen Harper.

Manning these days spends much of his time beating the drum for conservative causes. He remains a Fellow of the Fraser Institute.

You know the Fraser Institute, don’t you? It is that political arm of the Conservative Party that masquerades as a think tank. Amongst its former trustees are convicted felons David Radler and Conrad Black, both of whom helped to fund it. A former Fellow is Dr. Owen Lippert, an admitted plagiarist and patsy who fed Stephen Harper his Commons speech urging that Canada join George W. Bush in invading Iraq. Another Fellow of the Institute is that genius that brought Health Care in Alberta to its knees. Yes, Ralph Klein is also a Fellow of the Institute.

It is the same organization that has recently hosted George W. Bush’s political guru Karl Rove in two expensive dinners in Toronto and Calgary so that they could listen intently about what a great success his boss’s Presidency has been.

Yes, Manning actually believes that Stephen Harper is the best man to lead our country as the economy goes into the tank.

But think about this. Harper is an unabashed cheerleader for Bush and has been during all of the dark Bush era. Whether it was supporting the war in Iraq, mindlessly supporting the lost cause in Afghanistan, sticking a finger in the eye of China, supporting a disastrous course in the Middle East, or telling the Canadian people that the fundamentals of the economy are strong as we headed towards the abyss, Harper has been Canada’s George W. Bush.

And now Manning is telling the Canadian people that they should support Canada’s George W. Bush to manage the Canadian economy! That’s like putting the inmates in charge of the asylum.

Preston Manning is a neocon Reform/Alliance hack, and has been since his first foray into the federal arena. His advice is not only worthless, it is downright dangerous!

THIS JUST IN: HARPER VICTIMIZED BY OWN PLAGIARIZED SPEECH

WELL KNOWN CONTROL FREAK

VICTIMIZED

BY

MYSTERY PLAGIARIST
FROM THE FRASER INSTITUTE

This morning Liberal Foreign affairs critic and Toronto MP Bob Rae revealed Prime Minister Harper as a possible plagiarist. And not just a mere bagatelle of a plagiarist. But a real doozer of a plagiarist - a lulu, a dilly, a humdinger, the real McCoy!

He appeared to have plagiarized almost half of a speech of more than 3000 words – much of it verbatim and most of it in wide swaths. Harper’s plagiarized speech was delivered by himself to the House of Commons on March 20, 2003 when he was Leader of the Opposition Canadian Alliance.

When he delivered the stolen words, the ink had hardly dried on the originals. The original speech had been given only two days earlier on March 18, 2003 by fellow neocon and Australian Prime Minster John Howard, to the Australian Parliament.

Howard used his speech to announce that Australia was joining the Bush II coalition of the willing neocons to invade Iraq. In it, he also set forth the reasons for the action - weapons of mass destruction, the threat of terrorism, the evil-doer Saddam Hussein, yada, yada, yada. Harper delivered the plagiarized version to exhort the Canadian Parliament to join in the great crusade and advanced the same reasons.

It is instructive to reflect on plagiarism in light of this astonishing revelation of contempt for the Canadian people. The following two appropriate quotes express the revulsion appropriate to such sleaze.

”In essence, plagiarism and her two twins--fabrication and falsification, emanate from sheer human greed.” S.M. Sapatnekar, An editorial in JAPI (Journal of the Association of Physicians of India), vol. 52, pp. 527-530.

And,

“What is even more tragic, however, is that those who purposely commit plagiarism reveal the shallowness of their own character. To knowingly steal the work of another and pass it off as your own is to betray yourself in a way that can never be redeemed. By committing this act you are destroying the honor, integrity and principles of your own spirit. This is perhaps the longest lasting and most tragic consequence of plagiarism.” "Editorial: Plagiarism is a Serious Offense." The Rebel Yell

Late today a former foreign policy advisor to Harper took the fall. Dr. Owen Lippert (pictured as a young man in the lower photo above) who was up to now a paid Conservative campaign worker, said he did it.

A biographical sketch of the now disgraced Lippert is to be found on the website of the venerable neocon Fraser Institute. It notes that Lippert is a senior policy analyst for the Institute. He holds a PhD in Modern European History from the University of Notre Dame and was a trusted press secretary to Kim Campbell when she was federal minister of Justice. For further information on this pathetic mystery man see http://oldfraser.lexi.net/about_us/people/owen_lippert.html

Lippert apologized and stated that he had resigned his position in the Conservative campaign. No doubt the Fraser Institute will give this miserable worm the boot as well.

Ah, yes. Lippert’s dirty little secret has been exposed at last. His boss was his victim. Yes, ahem, indeed.

THE CALGARY HERALD AND THE ART OF THE WHOPPER

CORBELLA

In today's edition of the Calgary Herald, Licia Corbella, Editorial Page Editor of the Calgary Herald has fired her first salvo of the imminent Federal Election. See: http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/columnists/story.html?id=4ead416f-5b85-469d-b6eb-a4f6781eb902 It masquerades as speculation on the risk that Bush's pal Steve Harper is taking by breaking his own certain election day promise as well as law by calling an election.

But its real purpose is to bamboozle her readership and malign the Liberals.

Nobody maligns Liberals like Corbella. Even her former colleague from her Calgary Sun days, Paul Jackson (ret) - one of the biggest Liberal tormentors in the business - doesn't hold a candle to the meanness and pure bullshit of Ms. Corbella's invective pen when it comes to Grits.

Her column today goes all the way back to 1991 to lambaste former Ontario Liberal Premier David Peterson as "self-serving," "arrogant," "cynical, " and ultimately "humiliated." Poor Peterson, the only place in the country where he is still reminded of his now quite irrelevant but ignominious defeat is in the yellow pages of the Calgary Herald. Shurely, he's suffered enough!

Then she turns her sights on his successor, the former NDP Ontario Premier - now Liberal M.P. - Bob Rae. Rae in her words, was "an unmitigated disaster" . . . "not just for Ontario but for the entire country." I'm sure Rae will be surprised to learn of his vast national influence during his short reign as Premier.

Then she turns her guns on Dion bigtime.

About the Grit leader she says, "Dion is spectacularly inarticulate in English and apparently not a very good speaker in French either."

First of all, Corbella has obviously not spoken to Herald reporter Jason Fekete. For if she had, he would have told her that in his speech in Calgary during Stampede Week to a Liberal gathering, Dion was spectacularly articulate in English. He would have told her that he gave an excellent address in both official languages for which he was heartily rewarded with a standing ovation by his 500 or so listeners.

As for Dion being "apparently not a very good speaker in French either," the use of the word "apparently" here is a bush league weasel word. It is oftentimes used by irresponsible journalists - Corbella being a champ in that department - when they cannot prove the assertion that they are making and have no evidence of it.

She continued the heavy guns on Dion by writing that the Greenshift plan "will cause gasoline prices to soar." In making this statement, either Corbella has not done her homework, or shows a mendacious disregard for the truth (if Corbella needs this last phrase translated, she should check the definitions through Google; however, in order to get the right definition of the words she will have to spell them correctly). Gasoline at the pump is exempt from the Greenshift plan! See: http://www.liberal.ca/story_14102_e.aspx

Corbella also points out that the Greenshift plan "is so complex it takes hours to explain properly . . " Well, maybe I can help. The Greenshift plan taxes the polluters. The taxes generated will be equitably distributed among middle and lower income earners so as they can recoup something of what they have been dishing out to governments and oil companies over the past several years of high energy prices. There it is in a nutshell. Corbella, are you reading this? What part of that do you not understand??

She went on to malign Jean Chretien. She tells this whopper - that from the Liberal victory in 1993 Chretien's popularity "was all downhill from there." The truth is that Chretien went on to win two majority governments after 1993, with the popularity of the Liberals declining a negligible 0.1% between Chretien's first general election of 1993 to his last in 2000. She then writes that Chretien's downhill path "proves that telling whoppers isn't exactly the way to increase your popularity." Well, Ho! Ho! Ho! Statistics show that editors telling whoppers these days isn't exactly the way to increase your readership, or for that matter, the share value of Canwest Global Communications!

But now, for the Corbella granddaddy of all whoppers. Harper, she writes, says that "the Liberals have carried out obstructionist tactics in committees so key work is not getting done. She goes on, "Depending on who you talk to on Parliament Hill that is either very true or partially true . . "

In her column this morning in the good and true Globe and Mail - a great English language journal of record and one of the only two remaining in all of Canada, the other being the Toronto Star - June Taber writes in her political notebook that Herald Ottawa columnist Don Martin is Hot. Martin, she writes, "has a copy of the . . Conservative dirty tricks manual or "Parliamentary Obstruction Document," a 200 page tome on how to make Parliament dysfunctional" that many opponents of the Harper crowd would love to get their hands on. In fact, the Conservatives have written the book on how to make parliament dysfunctional. Corbella should talk to her colleague Martin, so that she may perhaps sneak a peek.

If Corbella thinks that this Conservative text book is gathering dust somewhere and not being put to the use for which it was intended, she probably believes that the Greenshift will result in higher gasoline prices or that Chretien's popularity went all downhill after 1993, or that Dion can't speak English or French articulately or that Canwest shares will increase in value as a result of her presiding over the editorial page of the Calgary Herald.

GRANATSTEIN ON AFGHANISTAN: SPINNING MIKE PEARSON

Jack Granatstein is a much admired historian, holds a multitude of degrees and honors, and has authored or co-authored more than sixty books. His writings have earned him a host of medals and prizes. He is a Professor of History and a true intellectual heavyweight. He has served his country in the Canadian Armed Forces, and has been an ardent believer in One Canada with a strong central government.


His specialty is Canadian military history. He has some very strong views on the subject, which he airs passionately, and frequently in speeches, television appearances and publications of all kinds. He beats the drum for a stronger Canadian military capability.


He believes that for the past forty years Canada has been derelict in its duty to properly arm itself or fully and honorably participate in its defence alliances. Thus, he has been highly critical of what he considers as weak-kneed Canadian Federal Governments of recent years. Recently, he has become a loud cheerleader for Stephen Harper, rightly recognizing that Harper's blood-thirsty streak is consistent with Granatstein’s own macho defence policy positions.

But despite the bloody nature of his subject and his passionate support for tanks, grenades, automatic rifles and other instruments of death, Granatstein has the demeanor and delivery of an unthreatening, avuncular uncle. Listening to Granatstein speak for me is like listening to a kindly grandpa reading Hans Christian Andersen to the little ones as he lulls them to sleep.

Be that as it may, Uncle Jack can get it wrong. Very wrong, as he did in his National Post column of February 2nd, 'Mike Pearson's true heir: Stephen Harper': http://www.nationalpost.com/opinion/story.html?id=280672

Granatstein’s subject was his high opinion of the Manley report on Afghanistan. Manley, he said with enthusiastic approval, made it clear that Canada’s mission in Kandahar upheld the UN Charter. It was Pearson’s Charter, he said, and it represented liberal and Liberal values.

Granatstein reminded us of the brilliant career of former Liberal Prime Minister Lester 'Mike' Pearson. For a Grit like myself who had great admiration for Pearson and was lucky enough to have met him several times, I enjoyed the brief biographical review. Granatstein reminded us of Pearson’s Great War experience, his sparkling career as a Canadian diplomat dealing with our allies during the Second World War, and his support and promotion of Collective Security as advanced in the formation of the UN, and later NATO and NORAD.

He spoke with approval of Canada’s post-war contribution to the collective security of post-war Europe and our generous financial contribution at the time (7% of the GNP) to defence spending. Granatstein also praised Canada’s military contribution to the UN forces in the Korean War and Pearson’s Nobel Peace Prize efforts in bringing the Suez Crisis to an end.

After trashing Bob Rae and Stephane Dion as namby-pambies for their support of a Canadian role in peacekeeping in Afghanistan, he argued that the true heir to Pearson’s foreign and defence policy was Harper. Because it was Harper who was “trying to give the Afghan people the human security they want and being prepared to fight alongside our friends against a fundamentalist, totalitarian army.”

Granatstein forgets that Pearson was a realist. Surely the good Professor remembers Viet Nam. Pearson never came close to helping LBJ out of his debacle in Viet Nam. It was a useless exercise as far as Mike Pearson was concerned. LBJ was on his own. Collective Security be damned. He even made a speech at Temple University in Philadelphia urging the President in his own backyard to stop the bombing of North Vietnamese cities (On their next meeting at the LBJ ranch, the hulking President apparently grabbed Mike by the lapels, shook him, and warned him never again to defecate in his nest. Pearson was surprised but undaunted).

Even with the issue of the Suez crisis that made Pearson a star, he was not going to get involved in the folly of the invasion of Egypt by our great ally Great Britain. No siree. Pearson sat down, figured things out and organized a peace-keeping force to end the hostilities. This brought Pearson the Nobel Peace Prize, the leadership of the Liberal Party, and ultimately the Prime Minister's Office.

Really, what would Mike Pearson have done in Afghanistan - with his allies providing a measly 35,000 troops and refusing to put their troops in harm's way, and the troops themselves having to look the other way while the poppy farmers supplied the world with 95% of its heroin supply?

Would he have continued to prop up a corrupt and brutal regime whose claim to be a democracy hangs by a thread, if that? Would Mike have ignored the fact that our sacrifice in lives was far greater on a proportionate basis than American military deaths in Iraq? Would he have asked for an extra thousand troops and some helicopters and dug in? While the government he was defending used torture as state policy, and even provided for the death penalty for anyone converting from Islam to Christianity?

And would Mike have hung in to fight a hopeless and endless war because not doing so would affect Canada’s reputation in the world and our influence in international affairs, as Uncle Jack would have us believe?

Would Mike have hung in, in all of those awful bloody circumstances? Not bloody likely. Mike Pearson was a realist.

What Granatstein does not appreciate is a civilian perspective of war. People are prepared to sacrifice their lives and their children’s lives in a war if the cause is noble and just or if our country’s security is at stake. They are not prepared to do so merely for the sake of our international reputation or to have influence in international affairs. Those issues may drive Granatstein but they do not drive the people. For proof, look to the people of the United States and their vastly unpopular wars in Viet Nam and Iraq.

If Granatstein or Harper for that matter, think that its important that Canada has “a seat at the table” and lives should be sacrificed for that goal, then by all means, let them be our guests. Let them go into the filthy streets in Kandahar and fight an impossible war.