River_God

What the hell do you know Argus, Why won't Harper make a disclosure????

Heavens forbid you see something that disagrees with your opinion. Why aren't there any liberals on this thread? You guys should be all over this.

I didn't realize that this was a conservative forum when I first logged on to it. My guess is that this guy David Frum from the National Post is also closely connected with the the staussian Calgary school or with the Perle Cabal. Does anybody want to make a bet? This cover story on the Maple Leaf Blog seems like double-think to me. http://mapleleafblog.blogspot.com/ Tuesday, January 10, 2006 A Vote to Save Canada? The wisdom of David Frum's column in today's National Post cannot be overstated: "A Liberal defeat would be a unifying moment for Canada, a moment that brings together Canadians from every region and every province to uphold norms of integrity and decency in Canadian politics. "Another Liberal victory, however, will put Canada back on the path to a third Quebec referendum and other grave threats to national unity. "The blunt fact is that Quebec elects separatists as a protest against Liberal over-centralization. The sequence of events tells the story. 1974: Liberal majority. 1976: PQ elected in Quebec. 1984: Conservative majority. 1985: PQ defeated.

Yes Is Harper’s supporting the defense shield his way of paying back American neo-cons for backing him in the election? Could Harper be partially financed with looted Hollinger money? Conrad Black (key Harper supporter and former owner of 3rd biggest media empire in the world, including the National Post and dozens of other Canadian newspapers) was working side by side with Richard Perle (architect of the Iraq Invasion, self proclaimed Darth Vader, and key puppeteer behind the Bush administration) Both of these guys are being indicted over conspiracies involving Hollinger International The amount of money stolen by Black and his cohort David Radler amounted to $400m, a staggering 95.2% of Hollinger’s net income for that period. Hollinger went from being an expanding business to becoming a company whose sole preoccupation was generating current cash for the controlling shareholders (This same treasury plundering happened in the USA when the neo-cons came to power (through massive military corporate welfare schemes including the pseudo-defence shield), and it will happen to Canada if Harper is elected), As a result of his involvement on Hollinger’s executive committee, uber-neoconservative Richard Perle, ‘The Prince of Darkness’, sometime Chairman of the Pentagon Defence Policy Board, may soon find himself out of pocket to the tune of 5 MILLION DOLLARS Hawkish author Tom Clancy (Patriot Games and The Hunt for Red October) "almost came to blows" with Richard Perle. "Perle was saying how Colin Powell was being a wuss because he was overly concerned with the lives of the troops," Clancy said. "And I said, 'Look ..., he's supposed to think that way!' And Perle didn't agree with me on that. People like that worry me." Richard Perle QUOTES If the UN cannot or will not revise its rules in ways that establish beyond question the legality of the measures the United States must take to protect the American people, then we should unashamedly and explicitly reject the jurisdiction of these rules. We must do our utmost to preserve our British ally's strategic independence from Europe. We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

Yeah: they produce hideously expensive, completely impractical products on the public dime. Nice "work" if you can get it, I suppose. Is Harper’s support for the defense shield his way of paying back American neo-cons for backing him in the election? Could Harper be partially financed with looted Hollinger money? Conrad Black (key Harper supporter and former owner of 3rd biggest media empire in the world, including the National Post and dozens of other Canadian newspapers) was working side by side with Richard Perle (architect of the Iraq Invasion, self proclaimed Darth Vader, and key puppeteer behind the Bush administration) Both of these guys are being indicted over conspiracies involving Hollinger International The amount of money stolen by Black and his cohort David Radler amounted to $400m, a staggering 95.2% of Hollinger’s net income for that period. Hollinger went from being an expanding business to becoming a company whose sole preoccupation was generating current cash for the controlling shareholders (This same treasury plundering happened in the USA when the neo-cons came to power (through massive military corporate welfare schemes including the pseudo-defence shield), and it will happen to Canada if Harper is elected), As a result of his involvement on Hollinger’s executive committee, uber-neoconservative Richard Perle, ‘The Prince of Darkness’, sometime Chairman of the Pentagon Defence Policy Board, may soon find himself out of pocket to the tune of 5 MILLION DOLLARS Hawkish author Tom Clancy (Patriot Games and The Hunt for Red October) "almost came to blows" with Richard Perle. "Perle was saying how Colin Powell was being a wuss because he was overly concerned with the lives of the troops," Clancy said. "And I said, 'Look ..., he's supposed to think that way!' And Perle didn't agree with me on that. People like that worry me." Richard Perle QUOTES If the UN cannot or will not revise its rules in ways that establish beyond question the legality of the measures the United States must take to protect the American people, then we should unashamedly and explicitly reject the jurisdiction of these rules. We must do our utmost to preserve our British ally's strategic independence from Europe. We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

Could Harper be partially financed with looted Hollinger money? Conrad Black (key Harper supporter and former owner of 3rd biggest media empire in the world, including the National Post and dozens of other Canadian newspapers) was working side by side with Richard Perle (architect of the Iraq Invasion, self proclaimed Darth Vader, and key pupeteer behind the Bush administration) Both of these guys are being indicted over conspiracies involving Hollinger International The amount of money stolen by Black and his cohort David Radler amounted to $400m, a staggering 95.2% of Hollinger’s net income for that period. Hollinger went from being an expanding business to becoming a company whose sole preoccupation was generating current cash for the controlling shareholders (This same treasury plundering happened in the USA when the neo-cons came to power (through massive military corporate welfare schemes including the pseudo-defence shield), and it will happen to Canada if Harper is elected), As a result of his involvement on Hollinger’s executive committee, uber-neoconservative Richard Perle, ‘The Prince of Darkness’, sometime Chairman of the Pentagon Defence Policy Board, may soon find himself out of pocket to the tune of 5 MILLION DOLLARS Hawkish author Tom Clancy (Patriot Games and The Hunt for Red October) "almost came to blows" with Richard Perle. "Perle was saying how Colin Powell was being a wuss because he was overly concerned with the lives of the troops," Clancy said. "And I said, 'Look ..., he's supposed to think that way!' And Perle didn't agree with me on that. People like that worry me." Richard Perle QUOTES If the UN cannot or will not revise its rules in ways that establish beyond question the legality of the measures the United States must take to protect the American people, then we should unashamedly and explicitly reject the jurisdiction of these rules. We must do our utmost to preserve our British ally's strategic independence from Europe. We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

Could Harper be partially financed with looted Hollinger money? Conrad Black (key Harper supporter and former owner of 3rd biggest media empire in the world, including the National Post and dozens of other Canadian newspapers) was working side by side with Richard Perle (architect of the Iraq Invasion, self proclaimed Darth Vader, and key pupeteer behind the Bush administration) Both of these guys are being indicted over conspiracies involving Hollinger International The amount of money stolen by Black and his cohort David Radler amounted to $400m, a staggering 95.2% of Hollinger’s net income for that period. Hollinger went from being an expanding business to becoming a company whose sole preoccupation was generating current cash for the controlling shareholders (This same treasury plundering happened in the USA when the neo-cons came to power (through massive military corporate welfare schemes including the pseudo-defence shield), and it will happen to Canada if Harper is elected), As a result of his involvement on Hollinger’s executive committee, uber-neoconservative Richard Perle, ‘The Prince of Darkness’, sometime Chairman of the Pentagon Defence Policy Board, may soon find himself out of pocket to the tune of 5 MILLION DOLLARS Hawkish author Tom Clancy (Patriot Games and The Hunt for Red October) "almost came to blows" with Richard Perle. "Perle was saying how Colin Powell was being a wuss because he was overly concerned with the lives of the troops," Clancy said. "And I said, 'Look ..., he's supposed to think that way!' And Perle didn't agree with me on that. People like that worry me." Richard Perle QUOTES If the UN cannot or will not revise its rules in ways that establish beyond question the legality of the measures the United States must take to protect the American people, then we should unashamedly and explicitly reject the jurisdiction of these rules. We must do our utmost to preserve our British ally's strategic independence from Europe. We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

Mulroney was far more nationalistic than Harper. Considering the risks, and the evidence, this should be investigated immediately. It would be extremely imprudent not to force Harper to provide full disclosure on who has been financing his campaign. All dealings with fellow Strausians Richard Perle, Dick Cheney, and Paul Wolfwittz, and other US conservative extremists should also be publicly scrutinized and disclosed.

Harper, Bush Share Roots in Controversial Philosophy Link Address: http://thetyee.ca/Mediacheck/2005/11/29/HarperBush Published: 2005-11-29 21:32:00 By Donald Gutstein TheTyee.ca 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, Harper 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. (Why would Civitas not want to advertise their agenda on a website? Obviously because the public would not find any benefit in that agenda.) 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, Harper said (just as moderates including Colin Powel, were jettisoned for the extreme right wing Bush Aministration (aka Richard Perle Cabal)) 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," Harper said, so the public won't be spooked. Regime change, one step at a time. Donald Gutstein, a senior lecturer in the School of Communication at Simon Fraser University, writes a regular media column for The Tyee. Remember how furious Harper was that Chrétien wouldn't let Canadian soldiers die "shoulder to shoulder" with Americans over Iraq's non-existent weapons of mass destruction --- even when it was completely obvious that Iraq didn't pose any near-term threat to anybody? Well the war drums are still beating. The neo-cons still have Iran, Syria and Venezuela in their gun-sights. How has Harper changed in the last few years. Probably not much -- though he may be more cunning.

Mon, 05 Dec 2005 20:54:28 EST CBC News Liberal MP Belinda Stronach lashed out Monday at the leader of her former party, saying she defected because of the threat Stephen Harper posed to national unity. Stronach should have been much more explicit about her evidence. Harper highjacked the ex-Reform /Alliance/ Conservative party in the same way that Bush's cabal highjacked the US republican party (by stealth, a fortress mentality of non-disclosure, manipulating the media (It’s chilling that Hollinger Corp (National Post etc.) has been Harper’s biggest voice box in Canada, and that Hollinger’s scandal plaugued ex-director Richard Perle is a key Bush puppeteer). Note that the National Post (Hollinger Corp) is the biggest Harper supporter in Ontario, even though Harper's stated ambition is to create an autonomous Alberta. Albertans should decide that it is time to seek a new relationship with Canada. The next logical step is to begin building a much more autonomous Alberta. ( Stephen Harper National Post, December 8, 2000) “Whether Canada ends up as one national government or two national governments or several national governments, or some other kind of arrangement is, quite frankly, secondary in my opinion… And whether Canada ends up with one national government or two governments or ten governments, the Canadian people will require less government no matter what the constitutional status or arrangement of any future country may be.” (Stephen Harper Speech to the Colin Brown Memorial Dinner, National Citizens Coalition, 1994) Harper's statements are clear to me. It wouldn't even surprise me if Harper is backing the Quebec separatists because he hopes that will help precipitate Alberta's (or nothern Alberta's) separation. Harper, along with his predecessor Preston Manning, is well known to have found his Roots in the Straussian Calgary School headed by Dr Tom Flanagan. http://ontario.indymedia.ca/twiki/bin/view...rperFullArticle Barry Cooper, Flanagan's closet departmental pal, blatantly stated that, "The sooner those guys (Quebec) are out of here the better." In 1997, Dr Flanagan and Harper made their media debut in the short-lived Next City, arguing coalitions were the only route to conservatives seizing national power. Flanagan and Harper's writing collaboration would last four years. In Harper, Flanagan finally had his dream candidate to carry the neo-conservative torch: an alter ego whose benign boyish good looks belied the radical agenda they shared. (I personally think that Harper has angry eyes, and a semi-plastic 2-D face. Martin has much deeper humanism in his appearance) "Stephen has an incredible strategic sense," Cooper says. "It's like playing chess: he can always see five or six moves ahead." Shadia Drury, a member of the U of C department until 2003, accuses her former colleagues of harbouring a sinister mission. An expert on Leo Strauss, the philosophical father of the neo-conservative movement, Drury paints the Calgary School as a home-grown variation of American Straussians like Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and Dick Cheney, who share their teacher's deep suspicion of liberal democracy. General Powell's chief of staff until January 2005, Lawrence Wilkerson, alleged that US policy on Iraq before and after the March 2003 invasion had been hijacked by an alliance between Dick Cheney and Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, fostered by President George Bush's "detached" attitude to details of post-war planning. http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...ticle330218.ece Wilkerson even accused Vice-President Dick Cheney of creating the climate in which prisoner abuse could flourish, and implied that he might have committed war crimes. Wilkerson said that Cheney must have sincerely believed that Iraq could be a spawning ground for new terror assaults, because "otherwise I have to declare him a moron, an idiot or a nefarious bastard." http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/29/wil...w.ap/index.html The Canadian made documentary "The Corporation" 2004 - 2005, contains a chilling segment where highly decorated US Major General Smedley Butler publicly exposed a plot in the 1920s and 1930s , by major US Corporations, to highjack US democracy and form a de-facto dictatorship in the USA. Major General Smedley Darlington Butler, a Marine for 33 years, who fought in dozens of wars and was awarded two Congressional Medals of Honor. At the time of his death, he was the most highly-decorated Marine in American history. Butler’s most famous quote was: I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National city Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. He was also one of the first people to speak about the "military-industrial complex", which Eisenhower made more famous in his farewell address to the nation at the end of his presidency. After retiring from the U.S. Marines in 1931, Butler wrote a book called "War Is A Racket", which you can read here (highly recommended). Amongst other things, he predicted war with Mussolini and Hitler, who at the time were allies of the United States. in the 1920s and 1930s, General Butler exposed a plot by a group of influential businessmen and politicians' to overthrow the democratically elected government of the United States. The leaders of the attempted coup were: • Irenee Du Pont - Right-wing chemical industrialist and founder of the American Liberty League, the organization assigned to execute the plot. • Grayson Murphy - Director of Goodyear, Bethlehem Steel and a group of J.P. Morgan banks. • William Doyle - Former state commander of the American Legion and a central plotter of the coup. • John Davis - Former Democratic presidential candidate and a senior attorney for J.P. Morgan. • Al Smith - Roosevelt's bitter political foe and codirector of the American Liberty League. • John J. Raskob - A high-ranking Du Pont officer and a former chairman of the Democratic Party. In later decades, Raskob would become a "Knight of Malta," a Roman Catholic Religious Order with a high percentage of CIA spies, including CIA Directors William Casey, William Colby and John McCone. • Robert Clark - One of Wall Street's richest bankers and stockbrokers. • Gerald MacGuire - Bond salesman for Clark, and a former commander of the Connecticut American Legion. MacGuire was the key recruiter to General Butler. http://texasturkey.us/backup/270.html It’s possible that the Bush-Cheney-Perle cabal succeeded in doing just this in 2001. As General Powell's chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson suggested, even though most of the people in the US government had gigh integrity, a small group used the preciptous event's of 9/11 to turn once, beloved America, into a country corrupted by unprecedented scandals (Iraq War, Abu Graihb, Patriot Act, Tom Delay, Patriot Act, Diebold Computers, Exit-polls that indicated Democracy had been highjacked). http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...ticle330218.ece http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/29/wil...w.ap/index.html This same kind of thing could happen to Canada if Harper gets elected. We should get rid of any touch-creen Diebold voting computers as soon as possible, or at least do extensive exit polls at all these sites. Voting computers that leave no paper trail are a seroious threat to the checks and balances of Democracy, but their ability to produce fraudent election results might go farther than that. http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1118-22.htm Harper's takeover of the Canadian Alliance was followed by his annexation of Peter MacKay's Tories Note that following the Reform/Alliance/Conservative merger, Harper wouldn't even talk to Peter Mackay for weeks at a time, even though Makay rushed to register the new party on a Sunday when the electoral office was normally closed.. Nor was MacKay, the only former Progressive Conservative to be snubbed. Key players in the old Tory election apparatus -- including the Ontario team that propelled Mike Harris to power -- never received the expected calls for their services after the merger. David Orchard, the Saskatchewan farmer whose support had clinched the Tory leadership for MacKay, denounced Harper’s new party as "conceived in betrayal and born in deception." Veterans of the Reform Party see that snub of the Tories as a rerun of Harper's treatment of party stalwarts, including his former boss Deborah Grey, who bolted the Alliance caucus under Stockwell Day. Even after Harper took over, they found themselves treated as not quite trustworthy and relegated to the back benches http://ontario.indymedia.ca/twiki/bin/view...rperFullArticle Paul Martin opened last nights debate by promising to reform our constitution to prevent any future government from abusing its powers, and overriding the rule of law in Canada. This would further protect all future Canadians basic rights to have free speech, freedom of conscience and freedom from abusive discrimination. It would also guarantee that we have an independent media and open debates on all future legislation. I'm sure that this was in large part do to the very real threat Harper poses to Canada. Harper blames the Martin for alleged corruption, but he himslf is unwilling to open his books. In last night's debate (Jan 8) Harper said that his party wasn't funded by Conrad Black, but her never said anything about Hollinger. It wouldn't be suprising in Black and Richard Perle still had close allies at Hollinger. Richard Perle's Cabal could also has infiltrated Harper's "Calgary School", the wellknown think tank that fostered Harper's rise to Power. The Calgary School's neo-conservative agenda may read as if it has been lifted straight from the dusty desk drawers of Ronald Reagan: lower taxes, less federal government, and free markets unfettered by social programs such as medicare that keep citizens from being forced to pull up their own socks. But their arguments also echo the local landscape, where Big Oil sets the tone -- usually from a U.S. head office. http://ontario.indymedia.ca/twiki/bin/view...rperFullArticle From a war room that ironically once housed Groupe Action, the ad firm behind the Liberals' sponsorship scandal, Flanagan directed Harper's 2004 election effort that stunned even veteran Parliament Hill reporters with its fortress mentality. "Everything was very tightly held," says one Tory. "It was circle the wagons completely." Why won't Harper open is books to disclose who has been funding him? Stephen Harper QUOTES Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society... It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff. Whether Canada ends up as one national government or two national governments or several national governments, or some other kind of arrangement is, quite frankly, secondary in my opinion. (what could “some other kind of arrangement” mean in the context of Harper’s fellow Straussian Richard Perle’s quotes.) Richard Perle QUOTES If the UN cannot or will not revise its rules in ways that establish beyond question the legality of the measures the United States must take to protect the American people, then we should unashamedly and explicitly reject the jurisdiction of these rules. We must do our utmost to preserve our British ally's strategic independence from Europe. We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

I agree with you 100%. Last Updated Mon, 05 Dec 2005 20:54:28 EST CBC News Liberal MP Belinda Stronach lashed out Monday at the leader of her former party, saying she defected because of the threat Stephen Harper posed to national unity. Stronach should have been more explicit about her evidence. Harper highjacked the ex-Reform /Alliance/ Conservative party in the same way that Bush's cabal highjacked the US republican party (by stealth, a fortress mentality of non-disclosure, manipulating the media (It’s chilling that Hollinger Corp (National Post etc.) has been Harper’s biggest voice box in Canada, and that Hollinger’s scandal plaugued ex-director Richard Perle is a key Bush puppeteer). Note that the National Post (Hollinger Corp) is the biggest Harper supporter in Ontario, even though Harper's stated ambition is to create an autonomous Alberta. Albertans should decide that it is time to seek a new relationship with Canada. The next logical step is to begin building a much more autonomous Alberta. ( Stephen Harper National Post, December 8, 2000) “Whether Canada ends up as one national government or two national governments or several national governments, or some other kind of arrangement is, quite frankly, secondary in my opinion… And whether Canada ends up with one national government or two governments or ten governments, the Canadian people will require less government no matter what the constitutional status or arrangement of any future country may be.” (Stephen Harper Speech to the Colin Brown Memorial Dinner, National Citizens Coalition, 1994) Harper's statements are clear to me. It wouldn't even surprise me if Harper is backing the Quebec separatists because he hopes that will help precipitate Alberta's (or nothern Alberta's) separation. Harper, along with his predecessor Preston Manning, is well known to have found his Roots in the Straussian Calgary School headed by Dr Tom Flanagan. http://ontario.indymedia.ca/twiki/bin/view...rperFullArticle Barry Cooper, Flanagan's closet departmental pal, blatantly stated that, "The sooner those guys (Quebec) are out of here the better." In 1997, Dr Flanagan and Harper made their media debut in the short-lived Next City, arguing coalitions were the only route to conservatives seizing national power. Flanagan and Harper's writing collaboration would last four years. In Harper, Flanagan finally had his dream candidate to carry the neo-conservative torch: an alter ego whose benign boyish good looks belied the radical agenda they shared. (I personally think that Harper has angry eyes, and a semi-plastic 2-D face. Martin has much deeper humanism in his appearance) "Stephen has an incredible strategic sense," Cooper says. "It's like playing chess: he can always see five or six moves ahead." Shadia Drury, a member of the U of C department until 2003, accuses her former colleagues of harbouring a sinister mission. An expert on Leo Strauss, the philosophical father of the neo-conservative movement, Drury paints the Calgary School as a home-grown variation of American Straussians like Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz, Richard Perle and Dick Cheney, who share their teacher's deep suspicion of liberal democracy. General Powell's chief of staff until January 2005, Lawrence Wilkerson, alleged that US policy on Iraq before and after the March 2003 invasion had been hijacked by an alliance between Dick Cheney and Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, fostered by President George Bush's "detached" attitude to details of post-war planning. http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...ticle330218.ece Wilkerson even accused Vice-President Dick Cheney of creating the climate in which prisoner abuse could flourish, and implied that he might have committed war crimes. Wilkerson said that Cheney must have sincerely believed that Iraq could be a spawning ground for new terror assaults, because "otherwise I have to declare him a moron, an idiot or a nefarious bastard." http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/29/wil...w.ap/index.html The Canadian made documentary "The Corporation" 2004 - 2005, contains a chilling segment where highly decorated US Major General Smedley Butler publicly exposed a plot in the 1950s and 1960s , by major US Corporations, to highjack US democracy and form a de-facto dictatorship in the USA. Major General Smedley Darlington Butler, a Marine for 33 years, who fought in dozens of wars and was awarded two Congressional Medals of Honor. At the time of his death, he was the most highly-decorated Marine in American history. Butler’s most famous quote was: I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National city Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. He was also one of the first people to speak about the "military-industrial complex", which Eisenhower made more famous in his farewell address to the nation at the end of his presidency. After retiring from the U.S. Marines in 1931, Butler wrote a book called "War Is A Racket", which you can read here (highly recommended). Amongst other things, he predicted war with Mussolini and Hitler, who at the time were allies of the United States. General Butler exposed a plot by a group of influential businessmen and politicians' to overthrow the democratically elected government of the United States. The leaders of the attempted coup were: • Irenee Du Pont - Right-wing chemical industrialist and founder of the American Liberty League, the organization assigned to execute the plot. • Grayson Murphy - Director of Goodyear, Bethlehem Steel and a group of J.P. Morgan banks. • William Doyle - Former state commander of the American Legion and a central plotter of the coup. • John Davis - Former Democratic presidential candidate and a senior attorney for J.P. Morgan. • Al Smith - Roosevelt's bitter political foe and codirector of the American Liberty League. • John J. Raskob - A high-ranking Du Pont officer and a former chairman of the Democratic Party. In later decades, Raskob would become a "Knight of Malta," a Roman Catholic Religious Order with a high percentage of CIA spies, including CIA Directors William Casey, William Colby and John McCone. • Robert Clark - One of Wall Street's richest bankers and stockbrokers. • Gerald MacGuire - Bond salesman for Clark, and a former commander of the Connecticut American Legion. MacGuire was the key recruiter to General Butler. http://texasturkey.us/backup/270.html It’s possible that the Bush-Cheney-Perle cabal succeeded in doing just this in 2001. As General Powell's chief of staff, Lawrence Wilkerson suggested, even though most of the people in the US government had gigh integrity, a small group used the preciptous event's of 9/11 to turn once, beloved America, into a country corrupted by unprecedented scandals (Iraq War, Abu Graihb, Patriot Act, Tom Delay, Patriot Act, Diebold Computers, Exit-polls that indicated Democracy had been highjacked). http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...ticle330218.ece http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/29/wil...w.ap/index.html This same kind of thing could happen to Canada if Harper gets elected. We should get rid of any touch-creen Diebold voting computers as soon as possible, or at least do extensive exit polls at all these sites. Voting computers that leave no paper trail are a seroious threat to the checks and balances of Democracy, but their ability to produce fraudent election results might go farther than that. http://www.commondreams.org/views04/1118-22.htm Harper's takeover of the Canadian Alliance was followed by his annexation of Peter MacKay's Tories Note that following the Reform/Alliance/Conservative merger, Harper wouldn't even talk to Peter Mackay for weeks at a time, even though Makay rushed to register the new party on a Sunday when the electoral office was normally closed.. Nor was MacKay, the only former Progressive Conservative to be snubbed. Key players in the old Tory election apparatus -- including the Ontario team that propelled Mike Harris to power -- never received the expected calls for their services after the merger. David Orchard, the Saskatchewan farmer whose support had clinched the Tory leadership for MacKay, denounced Harper’s new party as "conceived in betrayal and born in deception." Veterans of the Reform Party see that snub of the Tories as a rerun of Harper's treatment of party stalwarts, including his former boss Deborah Grey, who bolted the Alliance caucus under Stockwell Day. Even after Harper took over, they found themselves treated as not quite trustworthy and relegated to the back benches http://ontario.indymedia.ca/twiki/bin/view...rperFullArticle Paul Martin opened last nights debate by promising to reform our constitution to prevent any future government from abusing its powers, and overriding the rule of law in Canada. This would further protect all future Canadians basic rights to have free speech, freedom of conscience and freedom from abusive discrimination. It would also guarantee that we have an independent media and open debates on all future legislation. I'm sure that this was in large part do to the very real threat Harper poses to Canada. Harper blames the Martin for alleged corruption, but he himslf is unwilling to open his books. In last night's debate (Jan 8) Harper said that his party wasn't funded by Conrad Black, but her never said anything about Hollinger. It wouldn't be suprising in Black and Richard Perle still had close allies at Hollinger. Richard Perle's Cabal could also has infiltrated Harper's "Calgary School", the wellknown think tank that fostered Harper's rise to Power. The Calgary School's neo-conservative agenda may read as if it has been lifted straight from the dusty desk drawers of Ronald Reagan: lower taxes, less federal government, and free markets unfettered by social programs such as medicare that keep citizens from being forced to pull up their own socks. But their arguments also echo the local landscape, where Big Oil sets the tone -- usually from a U.S. head office. http://ontario.indymedia.ca/twiki/bin/view...rperFullArticle From a war room that ironically once housed Groupe Action, the ad firm behind the Liberals' sponsorship scandal, Flanagan directed Harper's 2004 election effort that stunned even veteran Parliament Hill reporters with its fortress mentality. "Everything was very tightly held," says one Tory. "It was circle the wagons completely." Why won't Harper open is books to disclose who has been funding him? Stephen Harper QUOTES Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society... It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff. Whether Canada ends up as one national government or two national governments or several national governments, or some other kind of arrangement is, quite frankly, secondary in my opinion. (what could “some other kind of arrangement” mean in the context of Harper’s fellow Straussian Richard Perle’s quotes.) Richard Perle QUOTES If the UN cannot or will not revise its rules in ways that establish beyond question the legality of the measures the United States must take to protect the American people, then we should unashamedly and explicitly reject the jurisdiction of these rules. We must do our utmost to preserve our British ally's strategic independence from Europe. We should force European governments to choose between Paris and Washington. All this talk about first we are going to do Afghanistan, then we will do Iraq . . . this is entirely the wrong way to go about it. If we just let our vision of the world go forth, and we embrace it entirely and we don't try to piece together clever diplomacy, but just wage a total war . . . our children will sing great songs about us years from now."

Lawrence Wilkerson, General Colin Powell's chief of staff until January this year, alleged that US policy on Iraq before and after the March 2003 invasion had been hijacked by an alliance between Dick Cheney and Defence Secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, fostered by President George Bush's "detached" attitude to details of post-war planning. http://news.independent.co.uk/world/americ...ticle330218.ece Wilkerson even accused Vice-President Dick Cheney of creating the climate in which prisoner abuse could flourish, and implied that he might have committed war crimes. Wilkerson said that Cheney must have sincerely believed that Iraq could be a spawning ground for new terror assaults, because "otherwise I have to declare him a moron, an idiot or a nefarious bastard." http://www.cnn.com/2005/POLITICS/11/29/wil...w.ap/index.html River, Are you trying to pick fights with me? I don't think I disagreed with you criticisms of a lot of the Bush government's policies. However, I am not satisfied that Harper or Martin are involved in any of them. I should add: Martin is involved in many of the research I have done as well No I was agreeing with you that most of the US politicians are probably pretty good. Cheney and Perle's cabal, however, probably highjacked the US administration on the Iraq war. They fooled everybody with their fake evidence and blatant lies. Wilkerson alluded to that himself. This same group are are in the Washinton Times which recently gave Harper such a showering. The Washington Times Published December 2, 2005 Why does President Bush hope Christmas comes a little late this year? Because on Jan. 23, Canada may elect the most pro-American leader in the Western world. Free-market economist Stephen Harper, leader of the opposition Conservative Party, is pro-free trade, pro-Iraq war, anti-Kyoto, and socially conservative. Move over Tony Blair: If elected, Mr. Harper will quickly become Mr. Bush's new best friend internationally and the poster boy for his ideal foreign leader. Last Updated Mon, 05 Dec 2005 20:54:28 EST CBC News Liberal MP Belinda Stronach lashed out Monday at the leader of her former party, saying she defected because of the threat Stephen Harper posed to national unity.

My question is why in an American extremist conservative group be trying to get Harper in Power? They would obviously want some kind of pay-back for any pre-election financing.

Everybody seemed to agree that the format of Monday’s Federal debate was fantastic. The two-hour, non-stop debate was expertly moderated and, though not exhaustive, gave all parties the opportunity to clearly explain their views. A series of 4 to 10 debates of this caliber, in future elections, will vastly improve our ability to intelligently choose future governments. Paul Martin opened up the debate by promising to reform our constitution to prevent any future government from abusing its powers, and overriding the rule of law in Canada. This would further protect all future Canadians basic rights to have free speech, freedom of conscience and freedom from abusive discrimination. It would also guarantee that we have an independent media and open debates on all future legislation. All the candidates, however, acknowledged that changes were needed to ensure that more Canadians were eager to exercise their right to vote. Harper continually advanced his agenda for creating more accountability in the Federal Government. Martin, recently assaulted by Government scandals, would have done well to support the best parts of Harper's proposal. Harper has some good ideas and there is no reason why partisanship should prevent Martin from openly endorsing them. Jack Layton explained that the NDP was willing to work with all political parties to improve Health Care and Education, and to ensure that less wealthy Canadians also have a very bright future. Gilles Duceppe debated constructively with Layton, Martin and Harper, while maintaining his steadfast support for Quebec. Duceppe complained about shortfalls in federal transfer payments to Quebec and articulated his goal of separating into a Canadian Union that is similar to the European Union. Duceppe, however, wouldn’t allow small English sections of Quebec to join the rest of English Canada. This point was not debatably extensively. It is clear, however, that few people would want every city, oilfield and goldmine to become an autonomous section of a Canadian Union. Martin, Layton and, at times, Harper, articulated their desire to only have one Canada. Martin was emphatic that by helping each other, Canadians have the brightest future in the world. Hopefully all four of these guys can work together constructively during the next term. They all have good ideas. Future steps should probably be taken, however, to eliminate incentives for partisanship to trump good judgment.