Archive for the ‘STEPHEN HARPER’ Tag

JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: IS CANADA GOING TO CRIMINALIZE BDS? WHAT SUCH REPRESSIVE LAWS ACTUALLY MEAN

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN RINF

 

The unpleasant Stephen Harper was definitely headed in this direction, with perhaps even more anti-freedom measures added, as criminalizing criticism of Israel.

We’re hoping our fine new Prime minister can resist this kind of genuinely Stalinist law promoted only by special interests.

But, in any event, all of the ugly laws Israel is promoting abroad and Israel’s tireless building of walls simply scream desperation.

If Israel wasn’t threatened by the weakness of its own founding’s logic, it would require none of this.

Just as the Soviet Union was built with a faulty foundation – flaws in logic and basic understanding of economic and social principles – so Israel, an unimaginably inefficient state kept afloat on the world’s greatest flow of subsidies.

Israel is, just like the Soviet Union was, a garrison state where the military/security/police forces are completely out of any sensible balance for a healthy society.

And it holds millions of people as prisoners.

Sooner or later, the crunch is coming, and for all these reasons.

Advertisements

JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: HOPES FOR JEREMY CORBYN IN JUSTIN TRUDEAU VICTORY? – YES AND HERE IS EXACTLY WHY – HONESTY IN POLITICS – THE DARK MATTER OF ISIS – SECOND HOLOCAUST COURTESY OF AMERICA

John Chuckman

EXPANSION OF COMMENTS POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE GUARDIAN

Yes, there is something to the notion of Justin Trudeau’s experience in Canada having some application to Jeremy Corbyn’s situation in Britain.

Corbyn doesn’t have Trudeau’s good looks or family heritage, but they do share one very important quality.

They are both politicians who speak remarkably honestly.

And the people do come to understand that when they’ve heard from someone enough times.

Insincerity is the hallmark of most run-of-the-mill and smarmy politicians such as David Cameron.

And the people come to understand that, too, just as Canadians understood it about Stephen Harper.

It’s just that they often, or usually, do not have an authentic choice in elections.

Give them a meaningful choice, and the democratic results can be gratifying.

Jeremy Corbyn has before him this possibility, and the hack political establishment knows and fears it.

That’s why they came crawling out of the woodwork, day after day, name after name, at the mere possibility of his nomination as leader.

Imagine the second greatest liar living on the planet, Tony Blair, advising people against an honest man?

And the press gave him generous coverage, too, while he was doing it.

Pretty close to ridiculous.

Now, when we enter the subject of ISIS and other terrorists in Syria, we enter the world of complete dishonesty.

American flunkies like Cameron and Harper can do nothing about ISIS, except making token gestures. They are neither powerful enough nor can they take acts against what is American policy.

ISIS, al Nusra, and other gangs of murderers are doing America’s bidding – Israel, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar serving as America’s chief administrative assistants in the murderous work.

David Cameron’s implicit support for the terrorists in Syria, while blubbering on about fighting them, may be characterized as David’s doing Rupert Murdoch’s bidding.

Rupert is an intense supporter of Israel’s interests, and the effort to destroy a stable Syria largely reflects Israel’s interests, just as the destruction of Iraq did. The cries of the birth of a new Middle East, as Condoleezza Rice once so graciously described subsidized murder and mayhem on a colossal scale.

Only this time, the key players and their associates do not want to take the credit and consequences and lingering sense of blameworthiness and shame involved in another illegal invasion, so they are secretly supporting a big gang of cutthroats – recruiting, training, supplying, and arming them – all while play-acting regret in public about the horrors they inflict. Who knows, such cynical, black-hearted policy may even have included plans to attack their own bloody servants in terror once the job of ruining Syria was done?

It is only because of the apparent contradictions arising from all the stoked-up press propaganda about ISIS – meant to play up their horrible acts as theater for the folks back home, intensifying Islamophobia and support for the existing, highly selective war on terror – that David Cameron feels moved to blubber on about (token) bombing.

But, of course, he has no intention of opposing American policy or Rupert Murdoch’s dictums in such matters. And that would considerably reduce the charm of country-house weekends with Rebekah Brooks.

Cameron wants to have his cake and eat it too, as they say. Talk about the banality of evil – David Cameron surely is one of our chief living examples, much the same as Canada’s now-departed Stephen Harper.

But Russia’s genuine intervention in Syria is changing all of that by revealing the true state of affairs, how a determined attack can decimate these bloody thugs in fairly short order, unlike America’s long-running pretend-attacks and actual attacks on Syrian infrastructure meant to support ISIS against Syria.

_________________________

Response to a reader saying Trudeau’s victory was all in his name:

 

No, you are wrong. He fought a tough campaign, going from a point of being third in polls to victory.

__________________________

 

Response to another reader calling Corbyn “a dead man walking”:

 

Yours are words which carry the pungent, seamy odor of Tony Blair with them.

JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: ONE OF THE REALLY STUPID THINGS JUSTIN TRUDEAU SAID IN HIS ELECTION CAMPAIGN – SOUNDS LIKE HE IS DRINKING AMERICA’S SPIKED KOOL-AID

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE THE TORONTO STAR

Sorry, but your calling Putin a bully is mighty shabby stuff, Justin Trudeau.

It truly makes you sound like Stephen Harper, likely the most dishonest and disliked politician in Canadian history, a true bully, if you will.

I do not see how there’s really anything you must tell Putin, unless you count repeating some boilerplate phrases borrowed from America’s sprawling junkyard of needless attacks and propaganda.

If there is a legitimate bully on the world’s stage today, it is, without question, America, responsible as it is for the deaths, destruction, and refugees of Syria.

It is America also that is responsible for the mess in Ukraine, putting an illegitimate government in place by coup and then supporting its awful policies of intolerance and war.

And even in the case of Flight MH-17, it is America who has kept things hidden. It never released data from its radars and spy satellite – which was overhead at the time – and that is mighty suspicious. Likely it was afraid of seeing its coup-induced government in Ukraine embarrassed. So we’ve had long delays and much evidence never used and a useless report.

Putin is the most able leader on the international scene today, a totally reasonable man, and a far more honest one than Obama or Harper or Cameron, all of whom lie regularly about matters like Syria. Putin’s country, too, is certainly destined to be a great one in future, given its endowments of natural resources and human ingenuity. It is extremely short-sighted to use American trash-talk about a leader Russians embrace as strongly as they do Putin.

We should welcome working with a reasonable man like Putin for many reasons, but if some chose not to do so, they can at least avoid bellowing undiplomatic nonsense for a few cheap votes, as you did with your campaign statement.

That’s not how your much-respected father would have acted in these circumstances – witness his independent-minded judgment and policies about Castro’s Cuba – and in the case of Russia today, Pierre Trudeau’s way would be far more productive than bellowing.

JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: CONSERVATIVE PARTY DISMISSES TWO EMBARRASSING PRANKSTER CANDIDATES – BUT IN DOING SO THEY MISSED A GREAT OPPORTUNITY – NATURE OF CANADA’S CONSERVATIVE PARTY

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO A COLUMN IN THE NATIONAL POST

Christie Blatchford seems to have become The Conservatives’ chief apologist.

Her apology here though seems totally unneeded.

I believe in these two cases of dropped candidates, the bone-headed people involved would have made perfect Conservative candidates.

Pranks? Isn’t this the party of robo-calls and frat-boy negative advertising?

Isn’t this the party of never telling the truth to people?

Of never giving a straight answer?

The party of not complying with officials attempting to investigate misdeeds?

The party of hiding the many stupid things it has done?

The party of Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin, Nigel Wright, and other charmers?

The party of slavishly catering to special interests?

The party of giving the finger to many of the world’s serious concerns?

The party of John Baird who resembles nothing so much as a mad dog when he argues with people?

The party of Peter MacKay, a man who had an affair with a subordinate, later harassed her and called her a dog in public, and then lied about it as well as a man who has demonstrated incompetence in almost every portfolio in the cabinet?

The party of the absolute thug, Patrick Brazeau?

The party of Maxime Bernier, who left top secret NATO papers at his biker girlfriend’s house for weeks?

The party of Pierre Poilievre, perhaps the most seriously twisted sister ever in Parliament?

I just cannot believe what an opportunity the party has missed with these two new fellows, each surely potential minister material.

It’s a shame, I guess that’s the price you pay for political correctness.

JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: ARTICLE ABOUT “FOREVER CAMPAIGNS” RAISES THE ISSUE OF AMERICAN PLUTOCRACY REPLACING CANADA’S DEMOCRACY – AND ONLY STEPHEN HARPER IS RESPONSIBLE

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN THE NATIONAL POST

The article is technically well done, but it seems to me there is such an important set of facts understated in, or missing from, the article that, taken as a whole, it becomes inaccurate and misleading.

I might call it polished propaganda.

There is only one source for the election phenomenon we see now in Canada, and that source is Stephen Harper. It has little to do with “competition run amok.”

Harper is on record for admiring the American system, a system which is so dominated by big money that many astute and knowledgeable observers have said America is no longer a democracy but a plutocratic oligarchy.

Harper is also on record as hating many of Canada’s traditions in politics. His past assertions are so unpleasant and “Canadian self-hating” one wonders why he did not long ago seek a career in the United States. His total set of views and attitudes would have done him well in a place like Texas. They are in perfect keeping with politicians of the quality of Dick Armey or Phil Gramm or Tom Delay.

His major obsession in his entire political career has been to destroy the Liberal Party, the institution he holds largely responsible for the Canada he dislikes so intensely.

His basic method has been simple. Remove as much government funding as possible. Remove as much quasi-judicial oversight and rules as possible. Bend national policy in the direction big contributors want to see. Collect as much money from these special interests as possible. Lengthen the election period so that you can spend more than ever under laws you yourself have created.

Added to those structural changes are changes in practice completely learned from America’s example. Throw lots of dirt through advertising, knowing that if you throw enough, some will stick. Use third-party organizations to fund these whenever possible. Avoid direct contacts with press and interviewers as much as possible, and never answer a question in an honest and straightforward way. Use any costly frat-boy trick – such as robo-calls to misdirect voters – which might make gains for you in a swing area. Afterward, sandbag government officials investigating such matters. These approaches take full advantage of having a treasure chest full of private funds with which to play.

It is a formula guaranteed over time to badly damage Canadian democracy, and it is a formula favored by no other party.

JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: STEPHEN HARPER AS PUBLIC SPEAKER – HARPER FACES ELECTION WITH A MUCH REDUCED BENCH – WHY I THINK SO MANY HAVE ABANDONED HIS GOVERNMENT

JOHN CHUCKMAN

COMMENT POSTED TO THE NATIONAL POST TO A CCOLUMN BY REX MURPHY

What is Mr. Murphy on, medical  marijuana?

An excellent speaker? Harper? The guy who addresses us as “friends” much in the manner of a tent preacher?

Harper is only comfortable either giving a set speech on a topic with which he is comfortable or in delivering a cheap, fast put-down in Question Period.

Hardly the skill range of a good speaker.

Add to that his basic dislike of people and the kind of stiff arrogance we saw in Ignatieff, and you do not have a winning combination.

Really great speakers always possess a kind of honesty in wanting to communicate something – even if its selective in nature – and Harper is likely the most dishonest personality ever to hold office in Canada.

Harper is driven by negatives.

He doesn’t like Canada and its traditional way of doing things. He said so himself.

He hates the Liberal Party and would love to destroy it. Again he said so himself.

He admires the way things are done in the United States, a country which today approaches no longer even being a democracy.

This is a man full of resentments with not a lot positive to contribute.

I almost suspect he was bullied as a kid in Toronto and has never forgiven his tormentors. He works hard to get back, possessing a genuinely destructive personality.

He has little popular appeal, naturally enough, and I think it fair to say his career is largely one of circumstances, of having lucked out with the Liberals so divided.

His lack of genuine feeling – except for a warm feeling about power – comes right through. He can’t hide it.

I believe the Conservative Party associates who have left before the election have done so for a generally unobserved reason: they are tired of his private tyranny and relentless suppression of individuality. They’ve put up with it long enough, likely believing he should have retired as leader and given someone else a chance, but, no, his negative personality listens to no one and his love of power has reached badly corrupt levels. Most of them will return after he is defeated.

And he is going to lose and lose big, no matter what polls may say.

JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: CANADA’S LEONA AGLUKKAQ’S BIZARRE COMMENTS ON EASTERN UKRAINE DURING A MEETING OF THE ARCTIC COUNCIL GROUP OF NATIONS WHOSE IMPORTANT PURPOSE IS NOT POLITICS BUT THE EMERGING PROBLEMS OF THE ARCTIC

John Chuckman

COMMENT POSTED TO AN ARTICLE IN RUSSIA INSIDER

Please don’t take Leona Aglukkaq’s words too seriously. They do not represent mainstream thinking in Canada.

Leona Aglukkaq has had a record of mishandling the ministerial portfolios she has been handed by Stephen Harper. Her time as Minister of Health is a genuinely embarrassing memory.

Stephen Harper’s 39%-government (his share of vote totals split several ways) is mighty light on talent. It is team, as they say in hockey, whose bench is pretty thin. So he must use virtual incompetents like Ms Aglukkaq to fill posts.

Mr. Harper has been appropriately nick-named a party of one. He has a personality, and this is not an exaggeration, sharing some characteristics with Stalin. No one in his government says one word that was not put into their mouths by him. The various comments coming from Ministers like Ms Aglukkaq these days not only do not reflect the views of most Canadians, they often may not even reflect the timid minister’s own views.

Readers may enjoy:

http://chuckmancartoons.blogspot.ca/search?updated-max=2013-05-11T12:04:00-07:00&max-results=300