Harper's plagiarized 2003 Iraq speech

[scribblet]

What about Dion's plagiarism, no mention of that huh..

http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/f...plagiarism.aspx

Plagiarism happens when one person uses the work of another in order to present himself as an expert in a field, when really only the original author can make that claim. This is far more serious because it misleads people. That seemed to be the situation in 2006 when Liberal Party leadership contender Stephane Dion passed off work down by the David Suzuki Foundation on climate change in Dion's own environmental platform without giving credit:

Liberal leadership candidate Stephane Dion's campaign hastily changed part of the candidate's environmental platform as posted on his Web site today after a blog reported that part of it were almost identical copies - without attribution - of a David Suzuki Foundation paper published the previous week.

cont...

[Peter F]

I think the worst part of this whole plagiarism speech is that Stephen Harper is presenting this as why canada should go to war in Iraq. Am I the only one concerned that he wouldn't have sat down and thought out what he wanted to say regarding Iraq on his own? OK I can see with maybe a few advisors but letting a backroom staffer essentially lay out your whole speech(and copying it for that matter) for going to war is less then I would expect from a leader. Not only that but it just adds to the whole notion of Harper being a pawn of the US republicans, more ammo for the tin foil hat bregade.

...

I do wonder why on earth it took so long to actually come to light, are the media in this country asleep or something?

No, you are not alone. I find it astounding that a leader of the opposition would pawn off such an important speach (even if, as a member of a minority party) aimed to get the majority party to enter into the war, entirely to an underling.

I think it shows Harper to be a callous and without concern to the well being of Canadians in general and our Armed Forces in particular. All can be sacrificed to the goal of gaining power.

That the press were asleep is no surprise. I wouldn't call it asleep though, I call it being willfully blind.

[Argus]

http://www.canada.com/saskatoonstarphoenix...57-9268b22f3277

This guy shouldn't have resigned. He should have been fired.

First thing you've ever written that I agreed with wholeheartedly.

[Wild Bill]

No, you are not alone. I find it astounding that a leader of the opposition would pawn off such an important speach (even if, as a member of a minority party) aimed to get the majority party to enter into the war, entirely to an underling.

I think it shows Harper to be a callous and without concern to the well being of Canadians in general and our Armed Forces in particular. All can be sacrificed to the goal of gaining power.

That the press were asleep is no surprise. I wouldn't call it asleep though, I call it being willfully blind.

Same old, same old. EVERY such leader uses speech writers for virtually ALL their speeches! Only very rarely do we see a leader craft his own. Why? Because unless they are the Prime Minister for Grand Fenwick they simply don't have the time. Their entire day, evening and sometimes night is scheduled, right down to pee breaks.

Once in a while you get a speechwriter who makes a mistake. He either is lazy, rushed or both. That's when he falls into temptation and steals someone else's words, like a schoolkid cutting and pasting up an essay from googling the Internet.

It's happened to Harper and it's happened to Dion. It's probably happened to Layton as well but no one noticed 'cuz no one ever listens to his speeches anyway.

Opposition partisans will seize on this because they're desperate! They don't seem to have had much success with real issues so they're dragging out this sorry ad hominem attack. On one hand they blame Harper for a speech written by someone else and then to cover all bases they criticize him for not writing his own speech!

I'm quite frankly enjoying this campaign. Not necessarily because I want the Tories to win but simply I'm enjoying the delicious irony of watching the Liberals get the same treatment they had dished out to the fractured Right all those years.

Do unto SOME others as they have done unto you!

It's the only way some folks can ever learn some courtesy.

[Argus]

I think the worst part of this whole plagiarism speech is that Stephen Harper is presenting this as why canada should go to war in Iraq. Am I the only one concerned that he wouldn't have sat down and thought out what he wanted to say regarding Iraq on his own?

Even if he had, there were bound to be a lot of similiarities. For example, in going over the history of the dispute, what opportunities were given Sadaam to allow inspections, to cooperate with the UN, what dangers existed in allowing him to develop nuclear weapons, etc. There's only so many ways you can phrase that sort of stuff, and it would have had to be included.

OK I can see with maybe a few advisors but letting a backroom staffer essentially lay out your whole speech(and copying it for that matter) for going to war is less then I would expect from a leader.

Generally, the politician will give a very broad outline of what he wants in a speech of that level to a senior staffer. The senior staffer will then flesh that out a bit more with the speechwriter. "Don't forget to say this... add that, mention this..." etc. etc. Then the speechwriter will go write. He'll bring it back to the senior staffer, they'll go over it, the senior staffer will request some changes, some additions, cut some stuff, ask that other stuff be rephrased. When the senior staffer thinks the speech is okay he'll deliver it to the politician, who will go over it, if he's a capable guy, and then make his own changes, and ask for portions to be redone.

What the speechwriter appears to have done is borrowed the more "general" stuff, on dangers, on history, on justifications, from another speech, then added the Canadian angle in on top of that. It was incredibly lazy, it was insanely stupid and irresponsible, and it's most unlikely this guy will ever find a job writing again. And rightly so. But it does, oddly, fall in line with the modern generations, which, or so I understand, don't see much wrong with surfing the internet and grabbing stuff in wholesale lots fo fill out their school reports - from primary school straight through graduate school.

[Argus]

No, you are not alone. I find it astounding that a leader of the opposition would pawn off such an important speach (even if, as a member of a minority party) aimed to get the majority party to enter into the war, entirely to an underling.

You have not one single clue regarding what contribution Harper did or did not make to this speech, but that hasn't, for a second, stopped you from blowing more diahrea all over the internet. Apparently only about five or six sentences out of 97 were actually lifted from Howard's speech anyway.

I think it shows Harper to be a callous and without concern to the well being of Canadians in general and our Armed Forces in particular.

Unlike the Liberals, who deprived the military of equipment, and then sent them out on a dangerous combat mission where they knew some would die. Liberal Defense Minister Bill Graham was even going around warning various offices and agencies to expect body bags, and that this was not like missions in the past. Yet they didn't even give them proper uniforms for the mission. How many Canadians have died in Afghanistan due to Liberal neglect?

Not that you care, of course.

Edited October 1, 2008 by Argus

[Argus]

Anyway, the Liberals got Bob Rae (not Ignatieff of course since Ignatieff also supported the invasion of Iraq at the time) to announce this tidbit some FIVE years after the fact. At the time, Harper wasn't PM and he wasn't even leader of a the Conservatives.

The purpose of this exercice is to accuse once again Harper of being in bed with those awful, dishonest, despicable Americans. Well, Rae has caught Harper in bed with... an Australian.

I think we should ask Bob Rae if he got permission to use Ralph Goodale's patented phony self-righteousness during those interviews. I mean, maybe Goddale said it was okay. Maybe they even practiced the dissaproving scowl together in the mirror and rehearsed how to phrase his voice to give that oh-so-indignant tone, but I think we should make sure.

[Argus]

Who was in bed with Bush.

If I was a tory staffer I'd be researching Bob Rae speeches to see how many times his attitude was in lockstep with Fidel Castro. I bet there are a lot of similiarities to their world views.

[peter_puck]

The Liberal guy responsible for stealing the name "Green Shift," I wonder if he was fired?

Or was he asked to resign?

Are you serious ? Do you think the Liberals came up with the name green shift by looking through a directory of tinny companies and saying "ah ha! , there is a name we can steal.? Do you think it is possible that people will confuse a company with a political idea ?

I think that lawsuit is political anways. "Green shift " has been used as a political term before. There is a real international company named Green Shift.

That lawsuit is like the inventor of the toliet (John Crapper) suing the earlier Reform/Conservative alliance when its initials were CRAP.

[myata]

It's irrelevant, there was no copyright, nor was Harper presenting this as his doctoral thesis. Therefore there is nothing wrong with using verbage which is relevant to the topic. This is a ploy by the Liberals to remind people of the speech which now can be used out of context as its five years old and much knowlege has been gained since then.

Wow. Parrotting another, foreign politician (even if the text was prepared by a minion, surely 100% coincidence of the "ideas" between the two speeches could not escape Harper - if he's fit to do anything political that is) - a "ploy by Liberals"?

For the lack of anything more original maybe, this seems to be the motto of the moment with the Harper's crowd. Very credible. And, "how's it taken out of context", beg to ask? The context was very clear: Canada's participation in the Iraq aventure. Harper was 100% on board; and he could not even find his own, original arguments to support his position. What an independent, laudable international performance! We can only expect more, and better still, of the same, should he gets reelected.

[Smallc]

Are you serious ? Do you think the Liberals came up with the name green shift by looking through a directory of tinny companies and saying "ah ha! , there is a name we can steal.?

No, but maybe they should have looked through a directory and the whole thing could have been avoided.

[jdobbin]

And I think you need to look at what's credible or not. What's downright sleazy opportunism (for lack of a better word) for the shameless mad scramble of a drowning party and just.

Dion's call for Harper to be "expelled" is quite pathetic. His sense of judgement is quite clouded.

At a time when the economy is facing such uncertainty, the Liberals me-first mentality comes to the fore. They'd rather waste time with this plagiarism that was committed by a speechwriter 6 years ago than concentrate on what's crucial and frightening to us all NOW!

And I said I cared less about the plagiarism other than it indicated that Harper wanted to go to Iraq.

At least give credit to the NDP for taking the high road on this (at least that's what the NDP lady named Saab was trying to do on CPAC. She tried to bring the debate back to the present).

The NDP above the fray? What channels have you been watching? Not seen any of their commercials?

What? Not someone else's work? Just because the name consists of only two words, that isn't work?

Tell that to the poor businesswoman who came up with that name for her company.

Think you left out the work uncited. Her website and company was cited the moment it was posted.

Well Elizabeth May says the Liberals Green Shift was COPIED FROM THE GREEN PARTY'S Green Plan! That's another one that I just remembered!

Really? Word for word?

The Liberals have been quite prolific with their infringement and copyings these last few months, haven't they?

And the issue of this plagiarism has been settled. The culprit explained, apologised and resigned.

Should have been fired for embarrassing Harper.

I personally don't care a whit about the copied speech other than what the speech meant: It meant Harper would have taken Canada to Iraq to fight.

[jdobbin]

If I was a tory staffer I'd be researching Bob Rae speeches to see how many times his attitude was in lockstep with Fidel Castro. I bet there are a lot of similiarities to their world views.

Sure. They used to roommates with Joe Stalin and Kin Jong Il.

[Topaz]

You have not one single clue regarding what contribution Harper did or did not make to this speech, but that hasn't, for a second, stopped you from blowing more diahrea all over the internet. Apparently only about five or six sentences out of 97 were actually lifted from Howard's speech anyway.

Unlike the Liberals, who deprived the military of equipment, and then sent them out on a dangerous combat mission where they knew some would die. Liberal Defense Minister Bill Graham was even going around warning various offices and agencies to expect body bags, and that this was not like missions in the past. Yet they didn't even give them proper uniforms for the mission. How many Canadians have died in Afghanistan due to Liberal neglect?

Not that you care, of course.

Yes you're right about the Libs and the cut backs to the military BUT something had to give because of the debt and the Lib chose the military and because they did that Harper would not had a surplus plus another 3 Billion in a fund within defence. Canadians will die in ANY war no matter who sent them there.

[Topaz]

As usual, the US pick this up and told the story on the networks and its gone around the world to other countries.

[Peter F]

You have not one single clue regarding what contribution Harper did or did not make to this speech, but that hasn't, for a second, stopped you from blowing more diahrea all over the internet. Apparently only about five or six sentences out of 97 were actually lifted from Howard's speech anyway.

Perhaps you have a point there, Argus. I'll get back to you on that...

Unlike the Liberals, who deprived the military of equipment, and then sent them out on a dangerous combat mission where they knew some would die. Liberal Defense Minister Bill Graham was even going around warning various offices and agencies to expect body bags, and that this was not like missions in the past. Yet they didn't even give them proper uniforms for the mission. How many Canadians have died in Afghanistan due to Liberal neglect?

Not that you care, of course.

I agree. Liberals couldn't give a shit either. But I havn't seen the con's falling over themselves to fix things either. Hell, they can't even come up with 1000 troops, or helicopters, and are still quite pleased to extend the mission on and on and on.

Both the Libs and the cons are perfectly content with committing our troops to missions they are not equipped/manned for.

If it was up to me, the boys and girls wouldn't be there...so you're wrong. I obviously do care.

[bush_cheney2004]

As usual, the US pick this up and told the story on the networks and its gone around the world to other countries.

Well, the world can't wait for dog sled delivery from Toronto! Just ask the CBC's Mallick!

[myata]

The plagiarism part itself is so outrageous that it rightfully deserves an international scandal. Drawing international policy of the Official Opposition by a foreign script cannot be a triffle affair - in a country that values its sovereignty and independence that is.

But even more important is that this incident just illustrates what Harper's government has been putting into practice ever since it was elected into power. I.e tiptoeing the line of neoconservative Bush's administration as close as one possibly could. Every major international decision by this government has echoed US position point to point. As a result Canada has completely lost its independent international position, and has been relegated to a member of the US led pack. Not even a major member at that, with other having more beef (Britain), or louder shout ("new democracies").

If we now let ourselves be corralled into supporting more of this, by the boogies of economy, crime, etc, we fully deserve our major, important and honourable role in whatever future adventures that will be invented by the world liberation crowd.

[Argus]

Sure. They used to roommates with Joe Stalin and Kin Jong Il.

Is Rae an admirer of them, too?

Mind you, many Liberals seem to be admirerers of Castro. Pierre Trudeau was one, and his sons apparently share that admiration.

[Alta4ever]

Perhaps you have a point there, Argus. I'll get back to you on that...

I agree. Liberals couldn't give a shit either. But I havn't seen the con's falling over themselves to fix things either. Hell, they can't even come up with 1000 troops, or helicopters, and are still quite pleased to extend the mission on and on and on.

Both the Libs and the cons are perfectly content with committing our troops to missions they are not equipped/manned for.

If it was up to me, the boys and girls wouldn't be there...so you're wrong. I obviously do care.

It does take time to rebuild a military it doesn't just happen over night. The have to creat more training space, take some of the higher ranks out of regular service to act as teachers and trainers. When new equipment is purchased it takes time for the order to be filled by manufacturers. Then before the equipment can go into general service the manufacturer has to send a specalist to train the military how the new peice of equipment. After the Specalist is done then those who received the training have to put together a training program and train the rest of the Canadian military. We have seen the begining of this process but it is far from complete.

As for the current deployment Canada made a commitment to NATO, we were asked to participate, the then liberal government decided to send troops there. We can't just cut and run from ther responsiblity. BY 2011 we will have been in the combat role long enough and it will be time for us to be moved out of thaty combatr role, and another nation in NATO to pick it up. You do have to remember it take many years to rebuild a nation properly, it took almost 20 years in Japan, with no terrorist opposition. It may take longer to do for Afgansistan, but as long as their government wants us their we must stay, as it was us as a part of NATO who took on this reponsiblity, and all countries invovled must see it through.

[Moonbox]

Harper's aide plagiarized a speech fairly heavily. Fair enough. Nobody's disputing this.

Now, my question would be how does this compare to how Dion plagiarized entire sections WORD FOR WORD in his campaign platform from the Suzuki Foundation?

Or his copyright infringement with the Green Shift?

Bob Rae is an ass. He's the biggest schmoozer in Ontario political history and I'd LOVE to hear what he has to say about the ACADEMIC PROFESSOR leading his party who plagiarized entire paragraphs word for word from the Suzuki Foundation. Seriously. Nothing is held as despicable in the academic community than plagiarism, but apparently Dion has no qualms with that.

Here are some passages by the way:

Dion:

"In Canada, air pollution causes thousands of premature deaths, tens of thousands of hospitalizations, and hundreds of thousands of days absent from work and school annually. The Ontario Medical Association issued a report in 2005 saying that every year 5,800 Ontarians will die prematurely because of smog related illness..."

Suzuki Report:

"Across Canada, air pollution causes thousands of premature deaths, tens of thousands of hospitalizations, and hundreds of thousands of days absent from work and school annually....The Ontario Medical Association (OMA) estimated that there were 5,800 premature deaths due to air pollution in Ontario alone in 2005."

Dion has since pulled all of these off his websites (for obvious reasons) but no citations were ever mentioned crediting the Suzuki foundation.

You decide if that's plagiarism and if Bob Rae is not completely and totally full of diarhea.

Edited October 1, 2008 by Moonbox

[myata]

Bob Rae is an ass.

Do we have any references, anything, confirming this, or we have to take you on your word? Including the foul language?

[Alta4ever]

Do we have any references, anything, confirming this, or we have to take you on your word? Including the foul language?

He sited the proof for you in that post if you don't agree with it , disprove it.

[blueblood]

Do we have any references, anything, confirming this, or we have to take you on your word? Including the foul language?

Probably a few hundred thousand in Ontario, carefull moonbox, myata will be banging the plagiarism drum

"This other person said Rae is an ass, and you copied him verbatim."

[myata]

He didn't cite anything as proper citing includes reference to the source of the citation (as learned in junior high - my two cents).