Its attitude is typical of a group of right wingers, centred around U.S-born academic Tom Flanagan of the University of Calgary. This "Calgary school," with which Harper is very closely allied, peddles a Canadian version of Paul Wolfowitz-style neo-conservatism, and it likes the idea of using oil-rich Alberta as a right-wing battering ram against the more socially democratic vision of Canada that prevails in much of the rest of the country.
Certainly, the authors of the "firewall letter" don't sound much concerned about fostering national unity — presumably something we'd expect in a prime minister.
If the "firewall letter" had been published during this campaign, Harper would almost certainly be heading for a crushing defeat, instead of perhaps poised to become prime minister.
I bet most Canadians don't know about the letter, or have forgotten what's in it. After all, people don't have time to go looking up what Harper wrote years ago.
The media have time, but little interest. Instead, the media treat the campaign as a horse race, fixating on polls, offering voters little more than their own reflection in the mirror.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_PrintFriendly&c=Article&cid=1136589011460&call_pageid=968256290204
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on January 11, 2006]
Note: http://www.thestar.com/...
Political Animal Can't Hide Neo-Con Spots
Posted on Tuesday, January 10 at 10:52 by AnonymousContributed By
Topic
Article Rating
(0 votes)
Options
Stumble It!Comments
view comments in forum
Harper, Bush Share Roots in Controversial Philosophy
Close advisors schooled in 'the noble lie' and 'regime change'.
What do close advisors to Stephen Harper and George W. Bush have in common? They reflect the disturbing teachings of Leo Strauss, the German-Jewish émigré who spawned the neoconservative movement.
Strauss, who died in 1973, believed in the inherent inequality of humanity. Most people, he famously taught, are too stupid to make informed decisions about their political affairs. Elite philosophers must decide on affairs of state for us.
In Washington, Straussians exert powerful influence from within the inner circle of the White House. In Canada, they roost, for now, in the so-called Calgary School, guiding Harper in framing his election strategies. What preoccupies Straussians in both places is the question of "regime change."
Strauss defined a regime as a set of governing ideas, institutions and traditions. The neoconservatives in the Bush administration, who secretly conspired to make the invasion of Iraq a certainty, had a precise plan for regime change. They weren't out to merely replace Saddam with an American puppet. They planned to make the system more like the U.S., with an electoral process that can be manipulated by the elites, corporate control over the levers of power and socially conservative values.
Usually regime change is imposed on a country from outside through violent means, such as invasion. On occasion, it occurs within a country through civil war. After the American Civil War, a new regime was imposed on the Deep South by the North, although the old regime was never entirely replaced.
Is regime change possible through the electoral process? It's happening in the U.S., where the neocons are succeeding in transforming the American state from a liberal democracy into a corporatist, theocratic regime. As Canada readies for a federal election, the question must be asked: Are we next?
The 'noble lie'
Strauss believed that allowing citizens to govern themselves will lead, inevitably, to terror and tyranny, as the Weimar Republic succumbed to the Nazis in the 1930s. A ruling elite of political philosophers must make those decisions because it is the only group smart enough. It must resort to deception -- Strauss's "noble lie" -- to protect citizens from themselves. The elite must hide the truth from the public by writing in code. "Using metaphors and cryptic language," philosophers communicated one message for the elite, and another message for "the unsophisticated general population," philosopher Jeet Heer recently wrote in the Globe and Mail. "For Strauss, the art of concealment and secrecy was among the greatest legacies of antiquity."
The recent outing of star New York Times reporter Judith Miller reveals how today's neocons use the media to conceal the truth from the public. For Straussians, telling Americans that Saddam didn't have WMD's and had nothing to do with Al-Qaeda, but that we needed to take him out for geopolitical and ideological reasons you can't comprehend, was a non-starter. The people wouldn't get it. Time for a whopper.
Miller was responsible for pushing into the Times the key neocon lie that Saddam was busy stockpiling weapons of mass destruction. This deception helped build support among Americans for the invasion of Iraq. Miller was no independent journalist seeking the truth nor a victim of neocon duplicity, as she claimed. She worked closely with Lewis "Scooter" Libby, who was U.S. Vice President Dick Cheney's Chief of Staff and responsible for coordinating Iraq intelligence and communication strategy. Libby is a Straussian who studied under Paul Wolfowitz, now head of the World Bank, and before that, deputy secretary of defense, where he led the 'Invade Iraq" lobby. Wolfowitz studied under Strauss and Allan Bloom, Strauss's most famous student.
Miller cultivated close links to the neocons in the administration and at the American Enterprise Institute, the leading Washington-based neocon think tank. AEI played the key role outside government in fabricating intelligence to make the case for invading Iraq. Straussian Richard Perle, who chaired the Defence Policy Board Advisory Committee until he was kicked off because of a conflict of interest, is a senior fellow at AEI and coordinated its efforts. Miller co-wrote a book on the Middle East with an AEI scholar. Rather than being a victim of government manipulation, Miller was a conduit between the neocons and the American public. As a result of her reporting, many Americans came to believe that Saddam had the weapons. War and regime change followed.
'Regime change' in Canada
As in the U.S., regime change became a Canadian media darling. Before 9-11, the phrase appeared in Canadian newspapers less than ten times a year. It usually referred to changes in leadership of a political party or as part of the phrase "regulatory regime change." Less than a week after 9-11, the phrase began to be used in its Straussian sense, as if a scenario was being choreographed.
From 19 mentions in Canadian newspapers in 2001, regime change soared to 790 mentions in 2002 and 1334 mentions in 2003. With the Iraq invasion accomplished that year, usage tailed off in 2004 (291 mentions) and in 2005 (208 mentions to November 10).
There's one big difference between American and Canadian Straussians. The Americans assumed positions of power and influence in the administrations of Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush. The Canadians have not had much opportunity to show (or is that hide?) their stuff. That may change with a Harper victory.
Paul Wolfowitz's teacher, Allan Bloom, and another Straussian, Walter Berns, taught at the University of Toronto during the 1970s. They left their teaching posts at Cornell University because they couldn't stomach the student radicalism of the '60s. At Toronto, they influenced an entire generation of political scientists, who fanned out to universities across the country.
Two of their students, Ted Morton and Rainer Knopff, went to the University of Calgary where they specialize in attacking the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. They claim the charter is the result of a conspiracy foisted on the Canadian people by "special interests." These nasty people are feminists, gays and lesbians, the poor, prisoners and refugee-rights groups who are advancing their own interests through the courts at the expense of the general public, these Straussians allege.
The problem with their analysis is that the special interest which makes more use of the courts to advance its interests than all these other groups combined -- business -- receives not a mention. Deception by omission is a common Straussian technique. The weak are targeted while the real culprits disappear.
Harper's mentors
Harper studied under the neocons at the University of Calgary and worked with them to craft policies for the fledgling Reform Party in the late 1980s. Together with Preston Manning, they created an oxymoron, a populist party backed by business.
Ted Morton has turned his attention to provincial politics. He's an elected MLA and a candidate to succeed Premier Ralph Klein. But he did influence the direction of right-wing politics at the federal level as the Canadian Alliance director of research under Stockwell Day.
When Harper threw his hat in the ring for the leadership of the Alliance, Tom Flanagan, the Calgary School's informal leader, became his closest adviser. Harper and Flanagan, whose scholarship focuses on attacking aboriginal rights, entered a four-year writing partnership and together studied the works of government-hater Friedrich Hayek. Flanagan ran the 2004 Conservative election campaign and is pulling the strings as the country readies for the election.
Political philosopher Shadia Drury is an expert on Strauss, though not a follower. She was a member of Calgary's political science department for more than two decades, frequently locking horns with her conservative colleagues before leaving in 2003 for the University of Regina.
Strauss recommended harnessing the simplistic platitudes of populism to galvanize mass support for measures that would, in fact, restrict rights. Does the Calgary School resort to such deceitful tactics? Drury believes so. Such thinking represents "a huge contempt for democracy," she told the Globe and Mail's John Ibbotson. The 2004 federal election campaign run by Flanagan was "the greatest stealth campaign we have ever seen," she said, "run by radical populists hiding behind the cloak of rhetorical moderation."
Straus and 'Western alienation'
The Calgary School has successfully hidden its program beneath the complaint of western alienation. "If we've done anything, we've provided legitimacy for what was the Western view of the country," Calgary Schooler Barry Cooper told journalist Marci McDonald in her important Walrus article. "We've given intelligibility and coherence to a way of looking at it that's outside the St. Lawrence Valley mentality." This is sheer Straussian deception. On the surface, it's easy to understand Cooper's complaint and the Calgary School's mission. But the message says something very different to those in the know. For 'St. Lawrence Valley mentality,' they read 'the Ottawa-based modern liberal state,' with all the negative baggage it carries for Straussians. And for 'Western view,' they read 'the right-wing attack on democracy.' We've provided legitimacy for the radical-right attack on the Canadian democratic state, Cooper is really saying.
A network is already in place to assist Harper in foisting his radical agenda on the Canadian people.
In 2003, he delivered an important address to a group called Civitas. This secretive organization, which has no web site and leaves little paper or electronic trail, is a network of Canadian neoconservative and libertarian academics, politicians, journalists and think tank propagandists.
Harper's adviser Tom Flanagan is an active member. Conservative MP Jason Kenney is a member, as are Brian Lee Crowley, head of the Atlantic Institute for Market Studies and Michel Kelly-Gagnon of the Montreal Economic Institute, the second and third most important right-wing think tanks after the Fraser Institute.
Civitas is top-heavy with journalists to promote the cause. Lorne Gunter of the National Post is president. Members include Janet Jackson (Calgary Sun) and Danielle Smith (Calgary Herald). Journalists Colby Cosh, William Watson and Andrew Coyne (all National Post) have made presentations to Civitas.
The Globe and Mail's Marcus Gee is not mentioned in relation to Civitas but might as well be a member, if his recent column titled "George Bush is not a liar," is any evidence. In it, Gee repeats the lies the Bush neocons are furiously disseminating to persuade the people that Bush is not a liar.
Neo-con to Theo-con
The speech Harper gave to Civitas was the source of the charge made by the Liberals during the 2004 election -- sure to be revived in the next election -- that Harper has a scary, secret agenda. Harper urged a return to social conservatism and social values, to change gears from neocon to theocon, in The Report's Ted Byfield's apt but worrisome phrase, echoing visions of a future not unlike that painted in Margaret Atwood's dystopian work, A Handmaid's Tale.
The state should take a more activist role in policing social norms and values, Harper told the assembled conservatives. To achieve this goal, social and economic conservatives must reunite as they have in the U.S., where evangelical Christians and business rule in an unholy alliance. Red Tories must be jettisoned from the party, he said, and alliances forged with ethnic and immigrant communities who currently vote Liberal but espouse traditional family values. This was the successful strategy counselled by the neocons under Ronald Reagan to pull conservative Democrats into the Republican tent.
Movement towards the goal must be "incremental," he said, so the public won't be spooked.
Regime change, one step at a time.
liberals hide $30 billion offshore
The neoliberal consensus holds that the best way to fund development is through foreign direct investment. As for me, I m not quite ready to tremble with excitement every time United Fruit deigns to gift a poor country with a new plantation. In any case, it s a bit strange that the government of Canada is as hungry for inward FDI as a developing country. Doubly strange, since Canada has exported more capital abroad than it imports since 1997, indicating there is no shortage of domestic capital.Looking at where exactly Canada exports all its capital, I found this astonishing chart. Barbados, Bahamas, Bermuda were all in the top six destinations for Canadian outward FDI in 2001. Further studying the numbers, Canadians sent more FDI in 2004 to Barbados and Bermuda than to all of Asia put together, and more to the Cayman Islands than to Germany. One obvious question turned up:
Why did Canadians send over $30 billion dollars in FDI to Barbados in 2004?
This fact makes no intuitive sense. According to government figures, Canadian trade with Barbados totalled less than $60 million in 2004. Our largest export is pork and our largest import is rum. Barbados has a mere 271,800 citizens, with a GDP of $3.6 billion. So we re sending over $100,000 in FDI per citizen of Barbados, and about nine times the size of their entire economy. You would think every Barbadian citizen is getting their own Bombardier jet.
Not quite. As of 2000, the OECD classified thirty-three jurisdictions as tax havens. Most of these tax havens do not have trustworthy, reliable, and transparent financial sectors. Barbados is not only a tax haven but also quite reputable. And critically, Canada has a tax treaty with Barbados. This permits Canadian corporations to pay Barbadian, not Canadian tax rates, on income declared through their Barbados operations. In effect, Canadian corporations get legal use of a tax haven.
As far back as 1992, the Auditor General was able to conclude that it is reasonable to conclude that hundreds of millions of dollars in tax revenue have already been lost and will continue to be at risk. Canadian FDI in Barbados has risen from just $496 million in 1987 to over $30 billion in 2004. That is an approximately 6000% increase. In 2002, the Auditor General noted that tax arrangements for foreign affiliates continue to erode Canadian tax revenue.
You would think that if hundreds of millions, if not billions, of dollars were being lost, the Ministry of Finance would have taken action, especially given its constant calls for belt-tightening in the 1990s. Far from it. Paul Martin s own company, Canada Steamship Lines International, set up offices in Barbados and replaced the Canadian flag with the Liberian flag on its maritime fleet. While at Finance, Paul Martin managed to do the following things at once: slash social spending dramatically; stop flying the Canadian flag on his ships; personally profit from a known tax loophole he refused to close; and see his company receive $161 million in government contracts. This is an embarrassment, not leadership.
Here s the kicker. In September of 2003, the Bloc submitted a motion that in order to ensure tax equity, the government should terminate Canada s tax convention with Barbados, a tax haven, which enables wealthy Canadian taxpayers and companies to avoid their tax obligations, and should play a leadership role at the international level in activities to eliminate tax havens. Despite both NDP and Conservative support, the Liberals voted the motion down.
It is scandalous the Liberal Prime Minister continues to knowingly allow his own enterprise and those of his corporate friends evade taxes. The Canada-Barbados tax agreement can be ended without sanction. It should be torn up. It may be good for a lucky clutch of wealthy men, but it s bad for Canada, and it seriously calls into question the supposed virtues of FDI
<br />
Canada's Conservatives edge closer to election win<br />
Tue Jan 10, 2006 5:37 PM GMT12<br />
<br />
By David Ljunggren<br />
<br />
OTTAWA (Reuters) - Canada's opposition Conservatives swept into a commanding position in the polls on Tuesday ahead of the January 23 federal election, increasing the chances of a major shift in the political landscape after 12 years of Liberal rule.<br />
<br />
An EKOS Research poll for the Toronto Star and La Presse newspapers showed the Conservatives of Stephen Harper have the support of 39.1 percent of voters, with the Liberals trailing far behind with 26.8 percent.<br />
<br />
The figures suggest the Conservatives have a good chance of forming a majority government, an outcome that looked impossible just a week ago.<br />
<br />
<a href="http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-01-10T173718Z_01_WRI054425_RTRUKOC_0_UK-POLITICS-POLL.xml&archived=False">http://today.reuters.co.uk/news/newsArticle.aspx?type=worldNews&storyID=2006-01-10T173718Z_01_WRI054425_RTRUKOC_0_UK-POLITICS-POLL.xml&archived=False</a>
at the actions of these 2 parties.....are we headed for a real FASCIST government<br />
in Canada....????<br />
<br />
The 14 Characteristics of Fascism<br />
<br />
<a href="http://globalresearch.ca/articles/BRI411A.html">http://globalresearch.ca/articles/BRI411A.html</a><br />
There's plenty left to be desired with this entire crop of leadership candidates ... but fascist? What gave it away: the wanting to remove notwithstanding from the constitution, the addition of private property rights to same, or the proposed accountability/transparency act to enhance oversight and shut down the govt/lobbyist revolving door?
Harper was anixous to send troops into Iraq, look where the debt of America is now,<br />
<br />
Cost of Iraq war passes 2 trillion dollars<br />
<<a href="http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060110/ts_nm/iraq_cost_dc>">http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060110/ts_nm/iraq_cost_dc></a>;<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
why do i say this, well take the issue of the news that the Israelies and US using nukes in the <br />
middle east, does one really think that Canada will not be the lap dog of the Americans and send soldiers <br />
into this conflict ?<br />
<br />
does one really think for one moment that there will be normal funtioning government once the nukes start flying<br />
<br />
does one really think that Harper and Martin will not send troops into this, the answer is for sure<br />
<br />
do all the clap trap BS promises from these politicians will actually be done...Hell No<br />
<br />
JUST REALLY THINK ABOUT THIS... I am amazed no one is addressing this issue about the <br />
nukes being talked about in the middle east<br />
<br />
do you really think that society will funtion in a normal way once the nukes start flying ???<br />
<br />
for one thing your children will be used for cannon folder while the rich kids will be exempt from war<br />
<br />
oil will stop flowing or be cut back drastically, China and Russia will be pissed off at the <br />
Israelies and the US<br />
<br />
also you will have a lot of Muslims pissed off<br />
<br />
and what about North Americans travelling abroad, their lives will be threaten because of the nukes, <br />
<br />
I for one would not be travelling anywhere near any Muslim country, that's for sure<br />
<br />
and what about how oil flow will affect the economy, higher gas prices, higher prices<br />
for product and services, and this will be the fault of our governments and those that support them<br />
<br />
we are headed for chaos, and too many are scared to even talk about this.....when it happens and <br />
it will what will you do ????....we are true animals and it will be everyone for themselves to survive<br />
<br />
I am aware that you still have to get on with trying to make a living , but when this crap starts<br />
God or whatever you believe in, help us all <br />
<br />
<br />
the link below basically sums it up<br />
<a href="http://www.new-enlightenment.com/dollar_imperialism.htm">http://www.new-enlightenment.com/dollar_imperialism.htm</a><br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
have been told , because i know for fact that the setup will occur after the elections.....<br />
kiss all those mega dollar promises good-bye, it's going into security and military......dictorship, martial law<br />
<br />
<br />
Israelis plan pre-emptive strike on Iran<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/53948.html">http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/53948.html</a>
<<Israelis plan pre-emptive strike on Iran>>
IDF makes plans, really? They don't just wait until an enemy "wipes them off the map". If you were in charge of defending Israel would you not plan similarly? Or would you trust in the stern warnings issued by the UN, backed up by the tough talk/bribes of EU nations? Or maybe you think the Iranians cracked those seals for energy research.
In other news...Israeli fire trucks plan routes ahead of time, rather then waiting for a fire.
And why can't Iran have nuclear energy ??
why are the American and Israelies allowed nuclear energy and not Iran ???
personally i do not believe it has anything to do with nuclear but about the energy resources ,
and the oil currancy issues
. The real hidden reason for attacking Iran is it's huge energy reserves--and its daring to create an oil bourse linked to the euro. The international cabal's attack on Iran is almost inevitable, because Iran is about to commit a far more unforgivable "offense" than Saddam Hussein's conversion of Iraq's oil exports to the euro in the fall of 2000; Iran is also encouraging other nations of the world to join them in setting up an international energy market linked to the Euro.
And why can't Iran have nuclear energy ??
<<<
You don't need to enrich uranium to weapons grade to have nuclear energy... Just to make atomic bombs.
>>
personally i do not believe it has anything to do with nuclear but about the energy resources ,<<<
Of course you don’t.
The guy who lives down stairs is both American and Jewish…
Ill bet he is behind this whole “setting up of Canada for a big surprise” thing because he is always setting up something, like setting up his trash in my goddamn recycling bin… A coincidence? I doubt it… Iran is probably also involved somehow with this recycling bin debacle.
This reminds me of one of my favorite moments from the Simpsons.
"OK, here's what we've got: the Rand Corporation, in conjunction with the Saucer People, under the supervision of the reverse vampires..."