---------- Original message ----------
From: "OfficeofthePremier, Office PREM:EX"<Premier@gov.bc.ca>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2019 01:23:46 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: A little Deja Vu from the Maritimes for the
lawyers Michel Bastarache and Rob Talach
To: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>

Hello,

Thank you for taking the time to write. I appreciate hearing feedback
and suggestions from the people of British Columbia as we work
together to build a better BC.

Due to the volume of incoming messages, this is an automated response
to let you know that your email has been received and will be reviewed
at the earliest opportunity.

In the event that your inquiry more appropriately falls within the
mandate of a Ministry or other area of government, staff will refer
your email for review and consideration.

Again, thank you for writing.

Sincerely,

John Horgan
Premier




---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2019 04:59:25 -0400
Subject: Re: A little Deja Vu from the Maritimes for the lawyers
Michel Bastarache and Rob Talach
To: Snap <snapvancouver@snapnetwork.org







---------- Original message ----------
From: David Amos <david.raymond.amos333@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2019 21:23:41 -0400
Subject: A little Deja Vu from the Maritimes for the lawyers Michel Bastarache
and Rob Talach
To: SWOntario@snapnetwork.org, jeboyle@rogers.com,
marion.kelly12@hotmail.ca, SNAPVancouver@snapnetwork.org,
laura.clementson@cbc.ca, Gillian.Findlay@cbc.ca
Cc: motomaniac333@gmail.com, mbastarache@plaideurs.ca,
rtalach@beckettinjurylawyers.com, Chuck.Thompson@cbc.ca,
sylvie.gadoury@radio-canada.ca, mcu@justice.gc.ca,

Bathurst church gets cheque from insurers for sexual abuse victims

Company, diocese involved in a drawn-out court battle over who should pay victims of Catholic priests

CBC News· Posted: Dec 04, 2019 5:41 PM AT

https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies




David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos 
Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and  49 others
Methinks Jean-Yves Duclos, the CBC, the RCMP and the evil old judge Michel ​Bastarache must know that I am paying attention and writing 3 more lawsuits N'esy Pas? 



 http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2017/09/cbc-says-suppressing-unwanted-views.html 



https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/merlo-davidson-settlement-more-money-1.5386280

RCMP to get more money to settle sexual harassment lawsuit

Supplementary estimates include an extra $50 million to the settlement

Catharine Tunney· CBC News· Posted: Dec 05, 2019 6:30 PM ET




The settlement covers all women who were harassed while working for the RCMP during and after September 1974. (Valerie Zink/Reuters)

CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices







https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/justin-trudeau-cabinet-alberta-saskatchewan-1.5366626

Trudeau's cabinet picks seem designed to project stability, seriousness

In 2015, 'change' was the driving narrative. The stakes for Trudeau are higher now - and time is short.

Chris Hall· CBC News· Posted: Nov 20, 2019 3:01 PM ET



Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is at Rideau Hall today watching new and returning members of the federal cabinet take their oaths of office. (Justin Tang/The Canadian Press)

Justin Trudeau's Liberals were shut out in Alberta and Saskatchewan last month, but the provinces got a shout-out in the cabinet choices the prime minister announced today.

Lacking an MP from the region, Trudeau tried for the next best thing. He named two key ministers with ties to the two provinces, and positioned a former cabinet minister as his eyes and ears in the Prairies.

To absolutely no one's surprise, Trudeau tapped Chrystia Freeland as his minister of intergovernmental affairs and deputy prime minister.


Chrystia Freeland is sworn in as the new Deputy Prime Minister as well as the new Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, a key portfolio that will have to deal with some dissatisfied Premiers across the country. 0:43

The first of those roles is to work with the premiers — particularly prominent Trudeau antagonists Jason Kenney of Alberta and Scott Moe of Saskatchewan — to show that Trudeau not only understands the frustration of people in those provinces, but intends to respond.

Her second role is more symbolic: Freeland becomes the first deputy prime minister since Anne McLellan 15 years ago. (The parallels don't end there. McLellan represented an Alberta riding, Freeland comes from the province and has family there. Both are women. Both enjoy unfettered access to their boss.)

Second among equals

Making Freeland deputy PM signals that while Trudeau remains first among equals as prime minister, she's clearly second.

Her job is to use the diplomatic skills she honed in dealing with the Trump administration to find solutions to regional grievances, starting in the Prairies.

That doesn't mean capitulating to (for example) Moe's demand that the federal price on carbon be suspended, or agreeing to change the way equalization is calculated.

It does mean getting clear, measurable results, as McLellan did, for the oil and gas sector. It also means she takes on the task of addressing the most virulent outbreak of western alienation since the birth of the Reform Party in the early 1990s.

Former Alberta premier Alison Redford said Trudeau's cabinet must include people who are able to sustain a dialogue with the premiers.

"So I think a more robust intergovernmental affairs department under Freeland would be wonderful, with an understanding that things like energy, transportation and infrastructure all need to come together," she said.

A less confrontational approach to climate change?

Freeland will be the lead on the western alienation file, but she might be sharing the load with the new environment minister, Jonathan Wilkinson, who spent many years in Saskatchewan. His style and tone offers a direct contrast to the previous minister, Catherine McKenna — whose assertive approach to the climate change file may have played well with environmentalists but was received poorly by some provinces.

And former cabinet minister Jim Carr, recently diagnosed with cancer, will act as Trudeau's special representative for the Prairies. That role will keep him close to home in Winnipeg while giving him direct line to the prime minister on regional issues.

Four years ago, Trudeau faced a major challenge in naming his first cabinet. Most of his choices were new not only to government, but to politics as well. He said his inner circle would reflect gender parity "because it's 2015." Change was the driving narrative.

From 'change' to 'continuity'

Four years later, the change narrative has run its course. Experience is the mantra in 2019. The emphasis now is on promoting those with solid communication skills and a proven track record in government.

It all suggests Canadians might be seeing less of Trudeau over the next few years — and more of the team.

Trudeau kept nearly all of his re-elected ministers from the last government. Some — such as Bill Morneau in finance and Carolyn Bennett at Crown-Indigenous relations — continue in their old roles as a nod to stability and some of the ongoing challenges the government faces.

"What we want Canadians to see is that we are going to continue to work on their behalf to make sure that our economy is strong and that we continue to think about how we create opportunities for all Canadians," Morneau said on his way in to the swearing-in ceremony.

The others who remain in their portfolios — Marie-Claude Bibeau at agriculture, Marc Garneau at transport, Navdeep Bains at innovation, science and industry, Harjit Sajjan at defence and Lawrence MacAulay at veterans affairs — are there to signal continuity, to reinforce the idea that the government has unfinished business from the last Parliament.

But continuity was only one element informing Trudeau's choices. Other factors played a role.

The clock is running now

One of those factors almost certainly was time. Trudeau wants tangible results from his minority government — and if history is any guide, he can expect that government to last only two years.

"They key thing we know about cabinets in minority situations is that you need a cabinet with great political skills, that knows where the pitfalls are," said David Herle, who held a senior role in Paul Martin's minority government from 2004-2006.

"Most of these jobs can't help you win an election. But all of these jobs can cost you an election. If you're a minister who doesn't pay attention to detail or doesn't smell out a political problem or have the wherewithal to fight the department down from a bad idea … that can be much more demanding in a minority than a majority government."

Regional alienation has gotten 'worse', says Clark

The other factor may be national unity. Former B.C. premier Christy Clark pointed to the regional tensions in the Prairies and the re-emergence of the Bloc Québécois as a political force in Quebec as significant challenges Trudeau must somehow manage.

"I think that the most important thing this government has to do is fix the federation," said Clark.
Comparing the first four years of Trudeau's government to his father's final years in office, Clark said she thinks "it's worse this time."

"The alienation in the West is much deeper," she said. "The anger in Alberta and Saskatchewan is very, very profound."
Liberals strategists (who spoke on condition of anonymity) insisted that the goals of this government have to be more than mere survival.

They said there are measures in the Liberal election platform that could find national consensus. Provincial infrastructure priorities could dovetail with Ottawa's goal of promoting green tech and fighting climate change, they said, while moves to introduce a pharmacare system (to cover, at least initially, low-income families or those dealing with life-threatening or chronic diseases) should be broadly popular.

It's a substantial to-do list for what could prove to be a short period of time. It's why stability now matters more to the Trudeau government now than change, why cooperation needs to replace confrontation.

Because it's 2019.










CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices







https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/rcmp-sexual-harassment-lawsuit-100-million-settlement-1.5203683

New $100M settlement reached in RCMP sexual harassment case

2nd agreement covers women who worked in non-policing roles over past 45 years

Rhianna Schmunk· CBC News· Posted: Jul 08, 2019 7:51 AM PT




Lawyers Angela Bespflug, centre, Janelle O’Connor, left, and Patrick Higgerty speak to reporters during the announcement Monday of an RCMP settlement for former female employees who were discriminated against or harassed while on the job. (Ben Nelms/CBC)

hree years after settling a sexual harassment and discrimination lawsuit with female officers for $100 million, the RCMP has reached a second settlement — for about another $100 million — for women who worked for the force in non-policing roles.

The settlement was announced Monday morning by Klein Lawyers LLP, the same Vancouver law firm that handled the first settlement in 2016. The latest pact is subject to approval by a federal court.

Cheryl Tiller, who worked for the force as a stenographer in Yorkton, Sask., and is lead plaintiff, said she was sexually harassed at a retirement party for an RCMP corporal in 2007.

Tiller said a sergeant touched her in a sexual manner while other officers watched.


The Yorkton, Sask., municipal RCMP detachment is in the same building as Yorkton City Hall. The lead plaintiff on a recently settled lawsuit against the RCMP says she worked for the force in Yorkton as a stenographer when she was sexually harassed. (Google Streetview)

An emailed statement from the law firm said women who experienced gender or sexual-orientation-based harassment or discrimination while working as municipal staff, contractors and volunteers on or after Sept. 16, 1974, might be eligible for compensation.

Compensation for proven claims over the 45-year period would range from $10,000 to $222,000 each. There is no cap.

Statistically, the law firm estimates about 1,500 claims will be made to the settlement.
"This settlement is an acknowledgment of the pain experienced by women who were subjected to harassment and sexual assault while working or volunteering with the RCMP," Angela Bespflug, a Vancouver-based lawyer for the plaintiffs, said in a statement.

"No amount of money can compensate these women for the harms that they've endured, but the settlement gives a voice to their experiences."



'This settlement is an acknowledgment of the pain experienced by women who were subjected to harassment and sexual assault while working or volunteering with the RCMP,' says Bespflug, a Vancouver-based lawyer for the plaintiffs. (Ben Nelms/CBC)

Speaking to reporters on Monday, Bespflug said some of the stories she heard working on the case were "horrific."

"We want to thank the plaintiffs for their bravery in commencing this action and sharing their deeply personal stories," the lawyer said, adding her clients'"resilience was humbling."

Asked if there was any resistance to the settlement from the RCMP, Bespflug paused, and said: "It's always a lot of work to reach a settlement. This case was no different."
In a statement Monday, RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki said she was "pleased" a settlement was reached.

"While the women were not RCMP employees, they worked with us on our premises and had every right to feel safe and be treated with respect and dignity," Lucki wrote.

"Harassment and discrimination do not have a place in our organization. On behalf of the RCMP, I would like to thank the representative plaintiffs, Cheryl Tiller, Mary Ellen Copland and Dayna Roach for their courage in coming forward. I deeply regret that these women were subject to inappropriate behaviour in our workplace and apologize for the pain caused to them and their families."

More than 3,000 claims filed

In 2016, RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson apologized to female Mounties who were harassed, belittled, demeaned or assaulted in the force as he announced a $100 million compensation package at a news conference in Ottawa.

"We hurt you. For that, I am truly sorry," Paulson said.

Janet Merlo and Linda Davidson led the class action lawsuits settled in 2016. At the RCMP apology, they said it was a small but "potent" minority of men who are perpetrators.


RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson, left, wipes his eyes after hugging Janet Merlo, lead plaintiff in the class action for harassment against the RCMP, after the first $100-million settlement was announced in October 2016. (CBC)

More than 3,130 claims had been filed with the Merlo-Davidson settlement as of June 20, 2019.

"Merlo-Davidson helped pave the way for a different cultural environment within the RCMP that perhaps made this case a little more likely to settle," Bespflug said Monday.

The lawyer said the amount of each individual settlement will vary depending on the nature of the harassment endured and the impact it had on a woman's life, as decided by an assessor.

https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies




David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos 
Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and  49 others
Methinks everybody knows that Harper 2.0 became irrelevant as soon as his old buddy MacKay spoke about the election result N'esy Pas?



https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/andrew-scheer-justin-trudeau-2019-election-1.5387126

Andrew Scheer doesn't seem to be quite done fighting the election yet

Back in opposition and under pressure in his own party, Scheer suggests that Trudeau was the one who lost

Aaron Wherry· CBC News· Posted: Dec 06, 2019 5:04 PM ET



Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer speaks at a news conference the day after he lost the federal election to Justin Trudeau in Regina, October 22, 2019. (Todd Korol/Reuters)

Two men in need of redemption stood across from each other in the House of Commons on Friday.

The first man looked upon the other and declared himself disappointed to see that nothing had changed. The second man rose and made a point of showing that he would be taking a slightly altered approach, at least to this particular moment.

Between these two men — the leader of the Opposition and the prime minister — there's the question of what should change in federal politics in response to the results of the October election.

Through that election, Andrew Scheer argued, "the people sent a clear message to all of us."
"That the status quo had failed. That the approach of the previous four years just wasn't good enough," Scheer said. "Canadians want better."

Specifically, he said, Canadians rendered a verdict on the Liberal government of Justin Trudeau. The "talking heads and pundits" might be trying to dissemble the result, Scheer said, but the Liberals had lost seats and votes.

And while Trudeau hinted at changing his approach in the weeks following the election, Scheer said he sees the throne speech as too much of the same-old.


In his response to the throne speech Friday, Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer warns that politicians across the country should "not underestimate the deep alienation and anger" being felt by Canadians who live in Saskatchewan and Alberta.  0:43

"Yesterday, in the speech from the throne, [Trudeau] revealed that he hasn't learned a thing, that he hasn't changed at all," he said. "Even though the people of Canada sent a message that they demand better ... They demand a fundamentally new approach from a government that is prepared to rise to this moment in history."

Maybe Canadians did demand a new approach. But they were at least as loud in not demanding a Conservative government led by Andrew Scheer. Which is where the glaring irony in Scheer's analysis lies.

Justin Trudeau's party won 157 seats. Scheer insists that Trudeau must change his approach to government and his policies, markedly and substantively, as a result.

Scheer's party won 121 seats and Scheer is adamant that he doesn't need to change — except to the extent that his party needs to communicate better and hire better advisers.

Re-litigating October while looking ahead to April

Aside from some artful comments about the honour of occupying a seat in the House of Commons and a new focus on national unity, most of Scheer's remarks resembled a reprise of the fall campaign.

 Possibly because the campaign hasn't really ended for Scheer.

"Over the past several weeks, there's been a chorus of voices from elite corners of Canadian high society demanding that our party endorse the carbon tax," Scheer told the House on Friday. "Well, let me be clear, Mr. Speaker, we will always oppose a carbon tax because we know the real cost it imposes on the Canadian people."

Members of the Conservative Party will be asked in April whether they'd like to change leaders. Scheer apparently has decided that his best chance of surviving that vote is to put the onus on Trudeau and acknowledge his own need for change as little as possible — particularly when it comes to climate policy.

That sort of obstinacy on the major policy issue of the day could doom the Conservative leader in the next general election. That assumes, of course, that Scheer will still be the Conservative leader in May.

Has Trudeau changed his tune?

Rising to respond to Scheer, Justin Trudeau told the House that his office had written him a speech for this occasion — a "very excellent speech," Trudeau claimed — but he would not be reading it.

The speech had been written a day before, but Trudeau said it was important for MPs to listen to each other and he decided instead to actually listen to what Scheer had to say and respond to what he heard.

"I know that we need a new approach — we all need to take a new approach here — and I appreciate the opportunity to be able to make some remarks rather than simply reading a speech that reiterates everything that we want to do together," Trudeau said.
 

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau responds to a question during Question Period in the House of Commons Friday December 6, 2019 in Ottawa. (Adrian Wyld/THE CANADIAN PRESS)

The decision to eschew the prepared remarks was apparently taken about 20 minutes before Trudeau spoke.

There were no great surprises in what followed, but it was different from the usual Trudeau product — a little less lofty, slightly more direct. Without a script, Trudeau was nimble enough to note that Scheer had neglected to mention Indigenous reconciliation or any area of health policy in his remarks. He pointed to what he called the similarities between the Liberal and Conservative tax cut proposals. And he attempted to parry Scheer's criticism of the federal carbon price.

"If he is serious about reducing people's anxiety about the future, if he was serious about reassuring Canadians in their ability to tackle new challenges and support their families, it would be good if we were able to lay out the actual facts of what our plan for putting a price on pollution means for Canadians across the country," Trudeau said, pointing out that the average family is expected to receive a rebate that exceeds the added cost of the carbon levy.
The performance had something in common with Trudeau's showing at the National Press Theatre two days after the election. In both cases, there seemed to be just a bit less artifice on display.

Between that news conference in October and his appearance in the House on Friday, Trudeau was noticeably less prominent (with the notable exception of that cocktail reception at Buckingham Palace). And his two public forays to date have displayed a different tone.

If Trudeau's style and manner has been grating on some voters, this might be the appropriate response.

Such things may change. But Trudeau's wager might be that his party's election result had less to do with what it set out to do, and more to do with how it went about it — the brutal messes they made when they weren't being careful.

Scheer might complain that Trudeau should be changing a lot more than that. But Trudeau might believe that — at least as long as it's Andrew Scheer standing across from him — he doesn't need to reinvent himself so much as he needs to clean up his act.

 




1572 Comments






Helen MacKinnon
Andrew seems to think that the louder he rants and the harder he pushes, the stronger he appears. He is wrong.


David Amos
Reply to @Helen MacKinnon: Methinks everybody knows that Harper 2.0 became irrelevant as soon as his old buddy MacKay spoke about the election result N'esy Pas?


Ferd Roseboom
Reply to @David Amos: He never was relevant. He's the Cons' Michael Ignatieff, someone who just hasn't figured out how to play the game yet, or, as Harper put it, "Just not ready."


Richard Sharp
Reply to @Helen MacKinnon:
Have to say I’ve been preaching that Harper’s (and now Scheer’s) inherent, incessant nastiness would be their undoing because Canadians get sick of that stuff. And we put up with Don Cherry for decades!


David Amos
Reply to @Richard Sharp: Methinks whereas the Bloc rules the roost you don't have much to gloat about today N'esy Pas?
















Casey Jay
The extreme right in Canada think they can turn this country into a clone of the USA under Trump.

Good luck with that Andy. 


Franz Pökler
Reply to @Scott Bullerwell:
I am. I li vs e in Quebec. When was the last PM from Alberta? Remind me please... 


David Amos
Reply to @Franz Pökler: Methinks you will say close but no cigar but the lawyer I call Landslide Annie who is a former Deputy Prime Minister from Alberta has been advising Trudeau The Younger since the SNC/Wilson affair and just helped to pick his cabinet and his new Deputy Prime Minister N'esy Pas?



















Alex Shetsen
Conservatives are all about two things: fighting to get into power when they're not in, and tossing over the nation when they are.

They are, plainly speaking, obscene.




















Helen MacKinnon
Why are all Conservative, Republican leaders so darned unlikeable? do they realize that?


Marguerite Deschamps
Reply to @Helen MacKinnon: No they don't.


David Amos

















Jack Hill
How lucky are we?

We get to witness the last gasping breaths of a dinosaur stuck in the tar sands.




















Bill Nest
The current Con party is a regional party, much like the Bloc.


Max Power


David Amos 
Reply to @Bill Nest: Please explain why they have so many seats in Parliament


David Amos  






















Martin Clark
LOL Didn't anyone let Scheer know that AB has agreed to a carbon tax. Yup, Kenny and the UCP have reached an agreement with the Fed. Libs. Uh OH, Seems Scheer is still out of the loop. He doesn't know what Canadians want and he doesn't know even know what CONS want! He isn't listening to anyone and he isn't showing any desire to cooperate for the sake of Canada.



















Dan Carpenter
Scheer said. "Canadians want better." Yes Andy, they wanted better and therefore did not elect you and your antiquated party.


David Amos 




















Paul Bourgoin
Andrew Scheer, you should have given it your all during the election Campaign not after!
Too Little Too Late!






















Stan Smith
The conservatives would gain so much by being actually constructive right now. Not pretending. For real. They just don’t have it in them


David Amos  




















Chris Maurier
Scheer is an unapologetic narcissist that blames Trudeau for his loss and has no interest in helping the general public or his own Party.

https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies




David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos 
Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and  49 others
Methinks the Circus begins again with Kenney being the first clown to seize the spotlight N'esy Pas?



https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/calgary/ottawa-accepts-alberta-tier-plan-carbon-pricing-1.5386955

Ottawa accepts Alberta's new $30-per-tonne carbon plan for large emitters in 2020

'Made-in-Alberta' plan will apply to industry; federal carbon tax — and rebates — will apply to consumers

Robson Fletcher· CBC News· Posted: Dec 06, 2019 10:48 AM MT





Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's federal government has accepted a carbon-pricing plan for large-emitting industries developed by the government of Alberta Premier Jason Kenney. (Justin Tang/The Canadian Press, Kyle Bakx/CBC, Amber Bracken/The Canadian Press)

CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices




1657 Comments 




Malcolm Scott
"Alberta already has a carbon-pricing system that charges large emitters at a rate of $30 per tonne. It was brought in by the previous NDP government."

News Flash: Ottawa accepts NDP plan.....


David Amos



Christian Lopez
First, Kenney scrapped the NDP's carbon tax, and railed against the Fed consumer carbon tax; then he planned to implement a carbon tax of his own on energy producers in 2020. Now he's agreed to the Fed's consumer carbon tax which he vehemently opposed along with Scheer, Moe and Ford. Does any of this make sense? The Cons just don't seem to know what they're doing. In Scheer's first appearance in the new parliament, he was screaming that the Fed carbon tax must be scrapped, while at the same time his best buddy Kenney was accepting the Fed tax for AB. Was Scheer left out of the loop on this?




















Adrian Williams
Taxing natural gas, the cleanest fuel of all and the reason we can live in these very cold climates is plain stupid

















Tyler J
We should applying triple the carbon tax on imports.




















David Sampson
Good, now Alberta can stop campaigning on behalf of Scheer, the election is over, Scheer lost. Time for Alberta to get it’s ducks in a row.























Tara Sundberg
Most of the people complaining will be getting back more than they spend. It's astonishing how ill informed people insist on being.

Meanwhile those of us who care about the future are making small and big changes to ensure a safe environment for our children. You're welcome.
























Sydney Mines
Ottawa accepts Alberta's new $30-per-tonne carbon plan. 
Congrats to former Premier Notley.
Your thoughts Premier Kenny.





















Glen Robert
While we are paying a carbon tax companies can import goods from heavy emitting countries and they are assessed no carbon tax























David Smythe
There you go Alberta. You now have a Jason Kenney Carbon tax + the wasted money fighting it in the courts.

https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies




David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos 
Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and  49 others




https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/cse-recruitment-vacancies-1.5378493

As its powers grow, cyber intelligence agency looks to fill hundreds of job vacancies

'We have a lot of vacancies because we're growing massively,' says CSE's top recruiter

Catharine Tunney· CBC News· Posted: Nov 30, 2019 4:00 AM ET




An analyst looks at code in the malware lab of a cyber-security lab. The Communications Security Establishment says it's struggling to find qualified staff. (Jim Urquhart/Reuters)


Canada's foreign signals intelligence agency says it's struggling to find Canadians to fill vacancies as it grows its presence online.

The Communications Security Establishment (CSE) grew another head last year when it launched the Canadian Centre for Cyber Security.

The centre leads the government's response to cyber security events, defends Ottawa's cyber assets and provides advice to Canadian industries, businesses and citizens on how to protect themselves online. An average day can see the hub's team block more than 100 million malicious infiltration attempts.

Those responsibilities ramp up the pressure on CSE to hire the best hackers and codebreakers Canada's universities can supply. A number of internal CSE employees also shuffled over to the centre to get it up and running, creating vacant positions.
"We don't necessarily know all our needs right now. We have a lot of vacancies because we're growing massively," said Bruno Gervais, supervisor of the Communications Security Establishment's recruitment team. He made a presentation at a career fair in Ottawa Friday aimed at recruiting people in the intelligence and security fields.

"We don't have enough technical candidates for a number of positions we have. This is a bigger challenge."

Gervais said CSE needs to hire about 150 full-time employees next year and roughly 300 students to fill those gaps.



The secretive Communications Security Establishment (CSE) is headquartered at a complex in Ottawa. (Sean Kilpatrick/Canadian Press)


To work for the CSE, an applicant has to be a Canadian citizen and pass a top secret clearance process, and cannot have a criminal record. The stringent background check alone can take more than a year to complete.

The CSE's first pitch session Friday morning was packed, with roughly 150 people jammed into limited seating and dozens of others standing in the back to hear the recruiters' pitches.

The audience was split between students and grey-haired veterans. Some wore suits. Others sported hoodies and bedhead.

Low hiring ratio

Gervais said that for every 100 applications he gets, only one will make it through the process — two if he's lucky.

The CSE isn't alone in its struggle to hire new recruits.

Canada's spy agency, the Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS), has flagged issues with recruitment and retention, while the Royal Canadian Mounted Police has also cited its need to hire more cyber experts.

Both agencies also had booths at this year's career fair, along with the Financial Transactions and Reports Analysis Centre of Canada (FINTRAC, which deals with financial intelligence) and Public Safety Canada.

"There's a lot of competition. All the Googles, Facebooks, Amazons and all these startups. The demands are really high. The universities are kind of adjusting right now," said Gervais.
"Most of the companies have the same problem right now, not just in the government. The fact that we're looking for Canadian citizens doesn't help because there's a lot of non-Canadians in all these programs in universities."

The CSE has tried to get creative with its recruitment strategies. In the fall it partnered with an Ottawa-based company that runs recreational "escape rooms"; those who escaped the demo room on time and cracked a bonus puzzle got a chance to meet with a CSE recruiter.

"We still have a problem letting people know who we are," said Gervais. "The biggest barrier for us is people don't know who we are."









Commenting is now closed for this story.


David Amos
Cyber intelligence??? Too Too Funny Indeed 




https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nato-summit-trump-article-5-mutual-defence-1.5378235

NATO marks 70 years with mutual suspicion and insults

Doubt in the era of Trump: will the U.S. step up when the chips are down?

Evan Dyer· CBC News· Posted: Dec 01, 2019 4:00 AM ET




U.S. President Donald Trump attends a meeting of the North Atlantic Council during a summit of heads of state and government at NATO headquarters in Brussels July 11, 2018. (Geert Vanden Wijngaert/The Associated Press)


After weeks of watching supposed allies trade allegations of betrayal and of insulting each others' troops, delegates to the NATO Summit in London this week might be wondering who their friends are these days.

But bitter as the recriminations have been, there's an even bigger cloud hanging over the summit: doubts about the fundamental principle of trust upon which NATO was built 70 years ago.

For decades, the 29 countries making up NATO have been reassured by the treaty's ironclad guarantee of mutual defence in Article Five of its founding charter: "an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all."

But in the era of U.S. President Donald Trump, governments now have doubts about the United States' commitment to Article Five. The mutual defence clause has only ever been invoked once — by Canada on behalf of the U.S. in the immediate aftermath of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

The 158 Canadian soldiers and seven Canadian civilians who lost their lives in Afghanistan died upholding Article Five. The NATO alliance only works when members trust that others will answer when the call comes.

Military analyst Dave Perry of the Canadian Global Affairs Institute said NATO allies still trust the U.S. military, American institutions and the individual Americans they work with in the alliance.

"The concern is really about a president who keeps demonstrating, over and over again, that he has a very different view of how America should be relating to its allies," he said.

"The American president has left the impression at times that he's got better relations with the Russian president than he does with some of the heads of NATO allies in Europe or even Canada."

A legacy of disloyalty

Ivo Daalder, president of the Chicago Council on Global Affairs, was the U.S. permanent representative on the NATO Council for four years under President Barack Obama.

He said President Trump has undermined the alliance by sowing doubts about America's intentions.

"He has said many times that NATO is obsolete. He refused for the first six months of his presidency to reaffirm Article Five, and has called into question whether the United States should continue to be a member of NATO if the allies are not willing to spend more on defence," he said.

"It's those kinds of questions that lead allies to say, 'If the chips are down, will the U.S. be there?' And there's less confidence about that today than there used to be."



Kurdish forces withdraw from an area near Turkish border with Syria, overseen by the Russian forces, near the town of Amuda, Sunday, Oct. 27, 2019. (Baderkhan Ahmad/The Associated Press)


Daalder said Trump has undermined that trust through both his words and his actions.

"President Trump has taken a number of steps, including abandoning his Kurdish allies in Syria, that would call into question his commitment to alliance relationships," he said.

Perry agrees that the betrayal of the Kurds sent a shiver through the Western alliance.

"It's not just that the United States bailed out on the Kurds, because I think we've seen a version of that movie before. It's the no-notice way of doing it, and the fact that the president would make these kinds of decisions not only capriciously, but also appearing to have totally ignored any advice that he did bother to solicit," he said.

"The president's whims are increasingly being translated into tangible outcomes. People have been speculating for several years that the president will send some tweets, but then the 'grown-ups' will prevail. I think the Syria example shows that the 'grown-ups-prevailing' narrative may be coming to an end."

Fighting with France

While some European leaders expressed their doubts in private, France's President Emmanuel Macron made his public in a recent interview with The Economist. In it, Macron said NATO was suffering "brain death" and openly questioned Article Five.

Daalder said the French leader's concerns about the United States' reliability as an ally may be affected by his own ambitions to lead Europe.

"My reading of President Macron's latest statements are back in this Gaullist perspective that France needs to lead Europe," he said. "I'm gratified that the reaction to that from allies within Europe has been to say, 'Don't call into question the fundamental nature of the alliance with the United States, and indeed with Canada,' while at the same time trying to say how can we do more ourselves within a European context."
 

Turkey's President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, right, shakes hands with French President Emmanuel Macron during the G-20 summit in Osaka, Japan June 28, 2019. (The Associated Press/Presidential Press Service)


On Thursday, Macron defended his harsh language and expanded on it.

"The questions I have asked are open questions that we haven't solved yet — peace in Europe, the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty, the relationship with Russia, the issue of Turkey," he said.

 "Who is the enemy?

"So I say, as long as these questions are not resolved, let's not negotiate about cost-sharing and burden-sharing, or this or that. Maybe we needed a wake-up call, as they say in English. I'm glad it was delivered, and I'm glad everyone now thinks we should rather think about our strategic aims."
But the U.S. does want to talk about cost-sharing; in fact, the Trump administration announced unilaterally this week that it intends to cut its contribution to NATO's total budget from 22 per cent to 16 per cent. Other members, including Canada, will have to pick up the slack.

Feuding with Germany

It's a feature of NATO that the closer its members are to Russia, the more likely they are to meet the desired threshold of spending at least 2 per cent of GDP on defence.

Bulgarian Prime Minister Boyko Borissov, while visiting President Trump in the Oval Office on Monday, made a point of noting that his country spends 3.1 per cent of its GDP on defence.

"You should tell that to Germany," Trump huffed.

Trump has singled Germany out for failing to spend enough on the alliance, although his administration also is pressuring Canada.
 

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, left, and U.S. President Donald Trump pose for a photograph prior to a bilateral meeting on the sideline of a summit of heads of state and government at NATO headquarters in Brussels July 11, 2018. (Markus Schreiber/Associated Press)


In the run-up to the NATO summit, the U.S. and Germany have been feuding over another topic familiar to Canadians: Huawei.

Like their Canadian counterparts, Germany's leaders are wrestling with whether to permit the Chinese company to bid on contracts to build its 5G networks. Berlin has been subjected to a pressure campaign by Washington to ban Huawei as a potential security risk.

On Sunday, German minister Peter Altmaier recalled during a TV debate that it was the Americans — not the Chinese — who were caught spying on Germans through the PRISM program exposed by Edward Snowden in 2013.

Pointing out that Germany had not boycotted the U.S. companies that facilitated that spying, Altmaier reminded Germans that "the U.S. also demands from its companies that they pass on information."

Back in 2013, when German Chancellor Angela Merkel personally reproached President Obama about the bugging of her phone, he apologized and promised to make changes to the program.

U.S. Ambassador Richard Grenell said Altmaier's remarks were "an insult to the thousands of American troops who help ensure Germany's security and the millions of Americans committed to a strong Western alliance."

Turkey: With friends like these….

Meanwhile, Turkey continues to behave more like an adversary than a member of the NATO alliance, doubling down on its arms purchases from NATO's main strategic rival Russia — and threatening other members with sending jihadists captured in Syria back to their European countries of origin if their governments don't stop complaining about Turkey's actions in Syria.

Turkey has depended on President Trump to shield it from U.S. retaliation over its attack on Kurdish enclaves in Northern Syria, which infuriated both Republicans and Democrats. At the same time, it has counted on Trump to block enforcement of a U.S. law that requires Washington to impose sanctions on Turkey for installing Russian-made S-400 air defence systems.
On Thursday, Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu castigated Macron for hosting a delegate from the Kurdish YPG last month.

"He is already the sponsor of the terrorist organization and constantly hosts them at the Elysée. If he says his ally is the terrorist organization ... there is really nothing more to say," said Cavusoglu.

"Right now, there is a void in Europe. [Macron is] trying to be its leader."

'You are brain dead'

Macron shot right back, arguing Turkey's attack on the Kurds was at cross-purposes with NATO's mission to defeat the Islamic State.

"One cannot say on one hand that we're allies, and consequently demand our solidarity, and on the other hand put one's allies in the face of a military offensive delivered as a fait accompli that endangers the action of the coalition against the Islamic State," he said.

And on Friday, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan upped the stakes again, accusing "some countries that are accustomed to not taking risks and always winning" of being unable to "tolerate Turkey's efforts to protect its own rights, laws, borders and sovereignty. Most particularly, the latest comments of French president are the examples of this sick and shallow understanding.
"[Macron] says NATO is experiencing a brain death. I'm addressing Mr. Macron from Turkey and I will say it at NATO: You should check whether you are brain dead first."

Pardoning war criminals

As if the rancour wasn't enough, Perry said that President Trump is sowing new doubts by pardoning convicted war criminals.

"For all its warts, the U.S. has long been an upholder of the laws of armed conflict. For him to be intervening in that process of maintaining order and discipline is extraordinarily troubling," he said, citing Trump's recent decision to intervene in a disciplinary case against a Navy SEAL accused of war crimes in Iraq.

"From allies' perspective, it's another piece falling on top of the Syria withdrawal. It's increasingly uncertain what the United States stands for. You're not as sure now what it means to contribute to an American military operation as you would have been even a year ago."


 



 
Commenting is now closed for this story.






Alex Matheson
Is it just me or has this world become a much uglier place since Trump became president. If he wins again in 2020 what will that mean for the rest of us? Nothing good I'm afraid.  
 

David Amos
Reply to @Alex Matheson: Methinks Trump is just the latest in along line of puppets working for the taxman. The Yankees lost their independence from British banksters on December 23, 1913 with the enactment of the Federal Reserve Act. 100 years later Obama and his cohorts renewed the malicious contract N'esy Pas? 
















Garry Cyr
The US is a mess. Can't wait for Trump and his Republican hacks, especially McConnell and Nunes, to be tossed out.  
 

David Amos 
Reply to @Garry Cyr: Trust that I am no fan of Trump but I have questioned the existence of NATO since the Iron Curtain was no more. That said I must ask how many Canadians working for NATO were killed before Trump was elected? How many have died since? 















Grace Oliver
Didn't take long for Trump to destroy his country's reputation and damage the alliances of the West.
Putin must be delighted with his investment.


David Amos   

https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies




David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos 
Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and  49 others
Methinks Higgy and everybody else knows why I was not surprised to read this stuff or why accounting professor Matthew Wegener did not have the first clue as to why I called him just now N'esy Pas?



https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/12/still-fighting-nb-power-and-aecl-enter.html


https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nbpower-aecl-still-fighting-1.5393207

Still fighting: NB Power and AECL enter mediation in long-running Lepreau dispute

Utility's efforts to recover $1 billion in cost overruns on Point Lepreau refurbishment continue

 

Robert Jones· CBC News· Posted: Dec 12, 2019 6:00 AM AT




Former NB Power president David Hay promised in 2008 the refurbishment of the Point Lepreau nuclear generating station would be done 'on time and on budget,' but that didn't happen.

Like a disgruntled homeowner chasing a contractor years after a disappointing renovation, NB Power is still pursuing Atomic Energy of Canada Limited for compensation over its refurbishment of the Point Lepreau nuclear generating station nearly a decade ago.

But there are no signs any of the roughly $800 million New Brunswick claims it is still owed for the error-plagued job will be arriving anytime soon.

"NB Power is currently in the process of discussions with AECL, the objective of which is to reach a fair compromise of the remaining claims arising out of the refurbishment," the utility reported in a disclosure to the Energy and Utilities Board earlier this month.

"The process is being pursued with the assistance of a mediator."
AECL, a federal Crown corporation, was hired by NB Power as the contractor to overhaul Point Lepreau beginning in 2008, as the plant was nearing the end of its initial 25-year lifespan.

The ambitious renovation had never been attempted on a Candu-6 reactor before, but AECL considered it feasible and developed plans to replace, upgrade or renovate key nuclear and non-nuclear components inside Lepreau to extend its life a further 25 to 30 years.

The work was expected to take 18 months and cost NB Power $1.4 billion but became mired in a number of problems and eventually took three years longer than expected. Those delays pushed costs $1 billion over budget.

Lepreau's poor performance

In addition, the plant has not performed as well as expected following the overhaul.

In its first seven operational years since coming back online in November 2012, the rebuilt reactor has run at an average of 82 per cent capacity, well below the 91 per cent level NB Power predicted for those early years during hearings in 2013 on that issue.

That's a production shortfall so far of about $250 million worth of electricity.

NB Power has also had to spend more than $500 million on capital improvements at Lepreau since the plant came back online, in part to try to improve its spotty post-refurbishment reliability.


 The biggest mistake during the refurbishment occurred 10 years ago this month, when tubes were pulled from the station's calandria and the holes they rested in were scraped clean with wire brushes instead of being polished. Scratches left behind caused air leaks around new tubes. (Photo submitted)

There are signs those heavy investments are helping, but the question of who should be financially responsible for the delays and cost overruns of the original refurbishment are still not resolved and have dragged on longer than the refurbishment itself.

NB Power will not say how much compensation it is seeking from AECL but acknowledges in its new disclosure to the Energy and Utilities Board that the two sides are not close to an agreement.

Insurance money

NB Power has even suggested AECL may try and wring money out of the utility by laying claim to part of a settlement NB Power reached with Lepreau insurers in March 2018.

In its update to the EUB, the utility wrote: "There remain substantial areas of dispute between NB Power and Atomic Energy of Canada Limited (AECL) related to the contract price for the retubing agreement, AECL's liability to NB Power for liquidated damages for failure to meet AECL's schedule guarantee, other damages which NB Power claims against AECL as a result of AECL's performance of the retubing and refurbishment work, and potential claims by AECL against NB Power relating to amounts recovered by NB Power as a result of the settlement."

NB Power has still not disclosed how much insurance companies paid it in 2018 under policies it held in relation to the refurbishment troubles.

But one estimate pieced together from public information by UNB accounting professor Matthew Wegener suggested it was close to $160 million.


UNB accounting professor Matthew Wegener estimated from public records NB Power received close to $160 million from insurance companies to settle refurbishment claims. That would leave $840 million in cost over runs to be recovered. (Graham Thompson/CBC)

That would leave $840 million in cost overruns to be collected for full compensation, which has been the official demand of three straight New Brunswick governments headed by premiers Shawn Graham, David Alward and Brian Gallant.

On Wednesday, the office of Natural Resources and Energy Minister Mike Holland did not immediately respond to a question about whether that remains the New Brunswick government's official position.

NB Power says, if it cannot reach an agreement with AECL on who owes what through mediation, it will move on to the next step.

"If this process is not successful, the alternative under the project agreements is to embark upon an arbitration process," it wrote.
 

 



16 Comments  
Commenting is now closed for this story.




David Raymond Amos
Surprise Surprise Surprise  













Greg Miller
NB Power in the news again and as usual IT'S BAD NEWS!


David Raymond Amos











Fred Brewer
Big or small, nuclear is a terrible option. Always over budget and late. Radioactive waste storage has still not been resolved. Of all the options on the table, nuclear is the most expensive and the most dangerous.


















David Peters
Shouldn't the contractor be chasing the one they did work for? Why did NB Power pay the additional Billion?

Once again, ratepayers/consumers have no choice or protection in this equation.


David Raymond Amos

David Peters
Reply to @David Raymond Amos:
The only counter to a monopoly is to outlaw it and then break it up.


David Raymond Amos 

David Peters
Reply to @David Raymond Amos:
Lot's of secrecy surrounding the $ involved in energy generation. But, aren't we talking about a public utility? Why the secrecy?


David Raymond Amos 















David Raymond Amos
Methimks Higgy and everybody else knows why I was not surprised to read this stuff or why accounting professor Matthew Wegener did not have the first clue as to why I called him just now N'esy Pas?

"On Wednesday, the office of Natural Resources and Energy Minister Mike Holland did not immediately respond to a question about whether that remains the New Brunswick government's official position."









David Raymond Amos
Higgy and Harper know this is not rocket science

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/weston-ottawa-basically-paying-snc-to-take-aecl-1.1078128

Weston: Ottawa basically paying SNC to take AECL

Greg Weston· CBC News· Posted: Jun 29, 2011 10:17 PM ET


CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices

 

https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies



David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to@DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631and  47 others
Methinks it interesting that Matthew Wegener a professor of accounting at UNB came up with the same figure I did last year but in a much different fashion N'esy Pas?


https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/04/top-secret-point-lepreau-insurance.html




 #nbpoli #cdnpoli   




https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/nb-power-point-lepreau-insurance-settlement-cost-1.5089232

Top-secret Point Lepreau insurance settlement details leaking

 

NB Power deal over nuclear plant refurbishment may be worth $159M, according to inadvertently released figures

What is supposed to be a top-secret settlement between NB Power and insurers over problems encountered during the troubled Point Lepreau nuclear plant refurbishment appears to be worth just under $160 million, according to various financial details inadvertently released by the utility.
NB Power is not confirming the amount, claiming it is still a company secret.

But there are signs the Lepreau settlement, reached last year, is worth slightly less than half the $320.1 million the utility said it was owed when it filed a lawsuit against insurers in 2012 for non-payment of its claim over damages and delays.

"We cannot provide a specific number," said Marc Belliveau, a spokesperson for NB Power, in an email to CBC News about the settlement amount.

"We continue to believe that keeping this information confidential is in the best interest of customers as we continue to work through the remaining litigation."
NB Power has been trying to keep details of the Lepreau insurance settlement under wraps as it pursues additional compensation from Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. It was the main contractor during the refurbishment of the nuclear plant that ultimately ran three years behind schedule and went $1 billion over budget.

But Matthew Wegener, a professor of accounting at the University of New Brunswick's Saint John campus, says NB Power has not been as disciplined redacting information about the settlement from its budget documents this year as it was last year and doubts AECL will have a hard time piecing together precise settlement details if it chooses.

Wegener's own estimate from a review of public information is that the settlement is worth around $159 million, although he says that could be refined with deeper analysis of available information.

"It's not overly difficult, just time-consuming," said Wegener.

"It depends on how much certainty you want. Just to get that estimate, really it only took me a couple of hours."

Last year, NB Power announced it had settled a claim with insurers for part of the refurbishment delays caused when workers used wire brushes that left scratches on critical components of the reactor that were supposed to be polished.

The scratches caused problems as the reactor was being reassembled and eventually took about a year to be resolved.

NB Power made a damage claim with insurers for $65.1 million over the scratches and a further $255 million claim for the delays caused by repairing them.

The redactions [this year] within their budgets are not really sufficient to be concealing anything.

- Matthew Wegener, UNBSJ accounting professor

The legal fight dragged on for six years but last April the utility announced it had settled the claims. However, the utility would not say what it received, insisting the information was too sensitive to be released publicly.

"Immediate public disclosure of the terms of settlement would be directly and substantially detrimental to NB Power's opportunity to reach a favourable resolution of remaining claims between NB Power and AECL," NB Power lawyer John Furey told the EUB at a hearing hearing in Saint John.

Furey said if Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd. found out what NB Power won from insurers it could affect how much the utility can ultimately wring from the company — or worse — might encourage AECL to make a claim against NB Power for part of the insurance money for itself.

Settlement details were shared with EUB members, financial experts and the public intervener, but were otherwise sealed.

Several hearings dealing with the settlement were held behind closed doors, with those in attendance subject to confidentiality agreements. Transcripts of those hearings remain secret.

NB Power's income, balance sheet and cash flow statements were also rewritten to account for the financial impact of the settlement, but 30 of 66 financial entries were blacked out in the public version to prevent anyone from piecing amounts together.

However, this year many of those blacked out values have been disclosed in the utility's latest application for a rate increase and Wegener says it is much easier to track how settlement money hit NB Power's accounts.

"The original redactions were pretty effective," said Wegener

"The redactions [this year] within their budgets are not really sufficient to be concealing anything."

No lawsuits filed yet

Public intervener Heather Black has seen the settlement, but will not speak about it because of the non-disclosure agreement she signed last year. She also would not comment on whether NB Power has failed to protect the secrecy of settlement details in this year's budget submission.

"I am still bound by the confidentiality undertaking and can't give you any insight without potentially violating it," she said in an email to CBC News.

From publicly available accounts Wegener looked at, he says the information appears to show the insurance settlement involved a $48.5 million payment for direct damage to the plant caused by the scratches and a $102 million payment for startup delays caused by them.

In addition, he says based on those numbers there would have been another $9 million in settlement funds shared between legal fees and a payment to P.E.I.'s power company Maritime Electric, which owns just over four per cent of Lepreau's output and expenses.

Wegener says his $159 million estimate of the insurance settlement could be off slightly, but the fact it can be made at all shows how much information that was secret last year has leaked into public view this year.

Belliveau acknowledges some previously secret information about the settlement has become public in NB Power's financial reporting, but says that was inevitable and expected.

NB Power continues to "engage in negotiations" with AECL for compensation for cost overruns on the Lepreau refurbishment even though the job finished more than six years ago. The utility says it has not filed any lawsuits over the issue yet and any amount it is seeking to recover is "privileged and protected from disclosure."

https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies




David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and 49 others
Methinks Anthony Rota should move the sneaky lawyer to the wee little room under the stairs ASAP. JWR has had lots of time to review her files and the letter I got from Heather Bradley nearly 4 years ago N'esy Pas?



 #nbpoli#cdnpoli






https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/jody-wilson-raybould-ministerial-office-1.5394079

Jody Wilson-Raybould is refusing to move out of her entire ministerial office suite

The Commons reserves the space for ministers. Wilson-Raybould calls the dispute 'petty'

David Cochrane, Jorge Barrera· CBC News· Posted: Dec 12, 2019 4:00 PM ET



Jody Wilson-Raybould addresses supporters after winning the riding of Vancouver Granville as an Independent on Oct. 21, 2019. (CBC)


Jody Wilson-Raybould is refusing to vacate the entire suite of Parliament Hill offices she was assigned as a cabinet minister, despite the fact that she is now an Independent MP and is no longer entitled to the space.

Wilson-Raybould and her small staff currently occupy a series of six offices equipped with a private bathroom on the fourth floor of the Confederation Building in Ottawa — a suite she was assigned when she was a minister and had a larger staff complement.

Such office suites are in short supply. The Liberals requested the use of the ministerial suite now occupied by Wilson-Raybould for one of their newly appointed ministers. Wilson-Raybould has yet to leave.

"It seems a little bit petty to me," Wilson-Raybould told CBC News. "It makes no sense to remove me from my MP office. So I don't understand why they're wanting to do it."

'I'm just trying to find a reasonable solution'

Wilson-Raybould moved into these offices in 2018 as the Centre Block was being emptied in preparation for a decade-long renovation.

She said she disagrees with the description of her offices as a "suite", saying she has the use of two adjacent MP offices without a connecting door. She said she has volunteered to give up one of them as long as she can stay in the other.

"So I'm not trying to prevent somebody from having been out in the cold without an office. I'm just trying to find a reasonable solution," she said.

Wilson-Raybould said she invited Algonquin Elder Claudette Commanda to bless the offices after her swearing-in following the October election. She said she had received no "formal notice" at that point that she was required to move out, adding she got the notice on Dec. 5.

"They are trying to," Wilson-Raybould told CBC News when asked whether Commons administration was trying to move her out of the offices. "But my amazing elder Commanda came and cleansed my office. So I'm hopeful they'll see the appropriate thing to let me stay in my office."

Parliament Hill offices are reassigned after each election, with priority based on party standings. As an Independent, Wilson-Raybould would be among the last MPs given a chance to choose an office.

After winning the 2015 election, the Liberals allowed MPs to keep their existing offices where possible. Wilson-Raybould was allowed to stay in the ministerial suite after she resigned from cabinet during the SNC-Lavalin controversy.

But things have changed since the election. Wilson-Raybould is a non-minister occupying what's classified as a ministerial suite, so the Liberals expect her to move out so that a cabinet member can move in.

'I dare them to even consider doing that'

Sources say Minister of Northern Affairs Dan Vandal is supposed to take over the office from Wilson-Raybould. Vandal is a Métis member of Parliament who represents a Winnipeg riding.

"We don't know her logic or her rationale," said a senior Liberal source.

Commanda said the ceremony to cleanse and bless the office also included a prayer for Wilson-Raybould to keep her office space.

"We prayed for the protection that she will remain in that office space," said Commanda. "She is settled there and that is where the work needs to take place … If anybody expects her to move, that is not right."

Commanda said Wilson-Raybould wanted to respect the fact Ottawa sits on unceded Algonquin land and she wanted an Algonquin elder to conduct the ceremony to help her prepare for the opening of Parliament.

 "She did the right steps having the ceremony and the prayer so she would be walking in a good way and commencing work in a good way," she said.



Cheryl Casimer speaks to the press at the provincial legislature in Victoria, Thursday, Oct. 24, 2019. (Chad Hipolito/THE CANADIAN PRESS)


Wilson-Raybould's supporters made the office dispute an issue at last week's meeting of the Assembly of First Nations.

"I heard they were going to try to boot you out of your office," said Cheryl Casimer of the First Nations Summit in B.C. during a ceremony honouring Wilson-Raybould. "I dare them to even consider doing that. That's your space, you created that space, you've earned that space. I'm glad to hear it was blessed."
House of Commons administration declined to address the issue. Instead, Heather Bradley, the director of communications for the Speaker, sent out a statement outlining the policy for assigning office space.

"There is a long established process of office allocations based on party standings. After an election, the allocation of offices starts with the government, to review their allocations and make changes as required," Bradley said in an email.

"The same process is repeated with the Official Opposition and then the third, fourth and fifth party, should one exist."

Once the recognized parties have been dealt with, Bradley said, the leftover offices are offered to Independent members based on their years of seniority in the House of Commons.



 



2559 Comments 



David Raymond Amos
Methinks Anthony Rota should move the sneaky lawyer to the wee little room under the stairs ASAP. JWR and Anthony Rota have had lots of time review to the letter I got from Heather Bradley nearly 4 years ago after I had argued the former Attorney General's minions in Federal Court twice N'esy Pas?

"House of Commons administration declined to address the issue. Instead, Heather Bradley, the director of communications for the Speaker, sent out a statement outlining the policy for assigning office space."

https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies




David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and 49 others
Methinks the Green Party may discover the rent supplement subsidy of Chucky Leblanc's fancy apartment in Fat Fred City cut after all their attacks on Dorothy Shepard and her minions over his CPP funds N'esy Pas?


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=45c_3naO-B8


 #nbpoli#cdnpoli



https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/lisa-ryan-homelessness-rent-subsidies-dorothy-shephard-1.5392355

Cuts to housing subsidies shortsighted, advocate for homeless says

Move takes away 70 apartments from affordable housing picture, but minister says she has no choice

Vanessa Blanch· CBC News· Posted: Dec 13, 2019 6:00 AM AT




Lisa Ryan of the Greater Moncton Homelessness Steering Committee fears the province's cut to rent supplement subsidies will irreparably damage its relationship with landlords. (Vanessa Blanch/CBC)


An advocate for the more than 150 people in Moncton who are homeless is worried the provincial government's decision to cut up to 70 affordable housing units between now and April 1 will do lasting harm.

Lisa Ryan, co-ordinator of the Greater Moncton Homelessness Steering Committee, called the decision to temporarily cut rent supplement subsidies disappointing and shortsighted.
Each rent supplement represents one affordable apartment.

"Housing is the solution to homelessness," Ryan said. "Housing is the solution to preventing individuals and families from entering into homelessness."

Trying to cut costs

Social Development Minister Dorothy Shepard confirmed on Tuesday her department has not been renewing rent supplements across the province in a cost-cutting effort to trim between 65 and 70 of the agreements until the new budget begins.

Shepard said it's "unfortunate," but the cuts were necessary to offset the $2 million her government spent on emergency shelters in Fredericton and Moncton.

"It's been a substantial unbudgeted line item just this past year," the minister said.

Under the rent supplement subsidy program, landlords receive the bulk of their rent from the the province, while the tenant pays the remainder, which equals 30 per cent of their income.

New Brunswick provides 4,367 rent supplements to landlords across the province.

In Moncton, Saint John and Fredericton, about 500 people are currently homeless.

When New Brunswick signed a $299.2 million agreement with Ottawa under the National Housing Strategy, there was hope new affordable apartments would be built quickly.

However, according to the 2019-2022 New Brunswick Action Plan, the goal in the first three years of the agreement is to create just 151 new rental units.


Dorothy Shephard, New Brunswick's minister of social development, said the province is cutting 65 to 70 rent supplement subsidies because it had to spend $2 million on emergency shelters in Moncton and Fredericton. (Shane Magee/CBC)


With a shortage of affordable housing, and no new building projects yet announced under the National Housing Strategy, the only other immediate option to create more housing is a rent supplement from the provincial government.

Ryan fears that once the 65 to 70 apartments have been cut from the inventory of affordable housing in New Brunswick, it will be impossible to get them back.

• I've never felt shame like this in my life': 500 homeless, 5,000 await affordable housing  
• High-end housing squeezes out people who need it most

"Those units will be rented and landlord engagement isn't very high right now with the rising costs of rent in Fredericton, Moncton and Saint John," she said.

With low vacancy rates across the province, Ryan said, it's not realistic to think the apartments will still be available on April 1 when the funding is reinstated.



Provincial money was used to open emergency shelters in Fredericton and, above, in Moncton. The House of Nazareth in Moncton received $480,000 in federal and provincial funding to buy the building on Albert Street. (Shane Magee/CBC)


Recent community meetings held in Saint John identified rent supplements as the preferred method of ensuring people have a safe place to live this winter.

In an email, Greg Bishop of the Human Development Council said community members have asked the province to reverse the plan to cancel rent supplements in the region, and to also provide an additional 40.

Calls for housing, not shelters

With fewer affordable housing options, Ryan said people will have no choice but to stay in emergency shelters.

"We know that a loss of housing means longer shelter stays and with longer shelter stays come a lot of issues," she said.

"It's important that we understand that shelters do not end homelessness."

The idea of stability happening through a shelter system is just not true … it doesn't happen.

- Lisa Ryan

In her interview, Shepard said while the goal is always a home for people, the  government simply doesn't have the resources to meet the need, and shelters are the best option.

"The shelter helps stabilize individuals to get them into their own home," she said.

While Ryan agrees there is a need for emergency shelters, where people stay for seven to 14 days, she believes the minister's assertion that shelters stabilize people is incorrect.

Ryan said in Moncton, people are spending as long as six months in shelters which are "underfunded and understaffed."

"You can watch the resiliency of the individuals slowly fade the longer that they're in their situation because it's chaos — it's chaos."

Karen Brooker has been homeless in Moncton since August. She has been staying in a shelter and says she has no hope of finding affordable housing. (Vanessa Blanch/CBC)


Karen Brooker, 58, has been staying in an emergency shelter in Moncton since August. She has been searching for an apartment she can afford on her $763 monthly disability cheque but said it's proven to be an impossible task.

She suffers from post traumatic stress disorder and said it's difficult to cope with the "constant drama" at the shelter.

"All kinds of drama in the shelter when people are using drugs and people are flipping out because they don't get their own way. I'm grateful just to have a bed to sleep in and a roof over my head … I just know it's not a life I want to live."

Ryan has seen people living in shelters "stigmatized by the community" and said the focus must be on creating housing, not more shelter space.

"The idea of stability happening through a shelter system is just not true," Ryan said. "It doesn't happen."

'With prosperity comes more money'

Ryan said the goal is for shelter beds to steadily decrease because people are being moved into affordable housing units with support.

Cutting rent supplements to pay for larger shelters is not what the Greater Moncton Homelessness Steering Committee asked for.

"Shelters do not need to be increased. We need an increase in housing. We need an increase in wrap-around supports."

We cannot build prosperity on the backs of our most vulnerable, our impoverished people in New Brunswick.
  




8 Comments  



David Raymond Amos
Methinks the Green Party nobody else should be surprised if Chucky Leblanc discovers the rent supplement subsidy for his fancy apartment in Fat Fred City is cut after all his attacks on Social Development Minister Dorothy Shepard and her minions over his CPP funds N'esy Pas? 


 

https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies




David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and 49 others
Methinks Higgy and his mindless ministers figured out that most Maritimers would agree with the common sense of a cardiologist at the Dr. Georges-L-Dumont hospital and had better take his advice ASAP N'esy Pas?



https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/vitalite-health-network-nursing-home-transfer-1.5391005



 #nbpoli#cdnpoli



https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/long-term-care-assessment-hospital-senior-nursing-home-bed-1.5392061

Province makes changes to get seniors out of hospitals, into nursing homes faster

Department of Health will take over assessments from Social Development to 'streamline' process

CBC News· Posted: Dec 13, 2019 7:00 PM AT




Health Minister Ted Flemming said other changes he'd like to see to improve 'patient flow' in hospitals include offering procedures during evenings and weekends, and more discipline surrounding discharge times for patients. (Michel Corriveau/Radio-Canada)

CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices



22 Comments  




Mark Worden
This is long overdue. Congratulations to Ted Flemming for leading the change on this.




David Raymond Amos
Methinks Higgy and his mindless ministers figured out that most Maritimers would agree with the common sense of a cardiologist at the Dr. Georges-L-Dumont hospital and had better take his advice ASAP N'esy Pas?

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-brunswick/vitalite-health-network-nursing-home-transfer-1.5391005 

Vitalité Health doctors urge transfer of nursing homes to health system

Nursing homes are now the responsibility of Social Development

CBC News· Posted: Dec 10, 2019 5:20 PM AT



A staff shortage at the Campbellton Nursing Home has left beds empty. They can't be used to alleviate overcrowding at the Campbellton Regional Hospital caused by people waiting for long-term care. (Facebook/Campbellton Nursing Home)

Nursing homes should be managed by the health-care system, not the Social Development Department, say doctors with the Vitalité Health Network.

"All our hospitals in New Brunswick are overloaded," Dr. Luc Cormier said in a statement released by Vitalité's Medical Staff Organization.

The organization said it supports Vitalité's call for transferring the management of long-term care homes to the Health Department.

Hospitals in the Vitalité and Horizon networks have said too many of their beds are being taken up by elderly patients who don't need hospital care but are waiting for places in long-term care. The situation causes long waits elsewhere in the health-care system.

It's fairly unanimous that we truly believe that we can help improve the transfer of patients to longer-care and nursing homes.

- Luc Cormier, Vitalité Medical Staff Organization

"We need to find a better way to manage all the traffic," said Cormier, who is president of the Beauséjour zone of the staff organization.

"And a part of the solution is perhaps merging our different policies, mechanisms, so it's seamless as much as possible for seniors."

Nursing homes in the province are now the responsibility of the Department of Social Development.
Cormier, a cardiologist at the Dr. Georges-L-Dumont hospital in Moncton, was joined by the presidents of three other zones in the Medical Staff Organization.

He said the transfer of nursing homes to the health authorities would allow better management of the number of beds available in hospitals.

He said at least 20 per cent of patients in Vitalité hospitals are on the waiting list for nursing homes. That represents about 60 or 70 beds that could be used for patients.

"We, on our end, do identify some reasons or some potential mechanisms to try to improve access to long-term care," Cormier said. "We know our seniors deserve better."

Some beds at nursing homes in the province are left empty because of staffing shortages, Cormier said, and that's one of the problems he wants to help solve.

Right now, patients can wait up to a year for a room in a nursing home, but the health networks want to help mitigate that, he said.


Luc Cormier, the Beauséjour zone president of Vitalité Health Network’s Medical Staff Organization, said patients can wait up to a year for a room in a nursing home. (Radio-Canada)

Among physicians, he said, "it's fairly unanimous that we truly believe that we can help improve the transfer of patients to longer-care and nursing homes."

He said it's a matter of co-ordination between hospitals and nursing homes.

"If all the policies are fairly transferrable because it's within the same Department of Health, for example, well then we know that the continuity of care will be better once they transfer back to the nursing home but also find mechanisms to try to relieve the hospitals of the overload of patients," he said.

CBC News asked to talk to someone at the Social Development Department.


 

https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies




David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and 49 others



https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/12/parents-of-canadian-soldier-killed-in.html 
 


 #nbpoli#cdnpoli



https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/afghans-will-not-be-surprised-by-documents-alleging-u-s-failures-in-war-says-activist-1.5392120





The Current

Afghans will not be surprised by documents alleging U.S. failures in war, says activist

Orzala Nemat has lived under both Taliban rule and the U.S.-led war

 

CBC Radio· Posted: Dec 11, 2019 1:59 PM ET 

 

A Canadian soldier deployed in Afghanistan, 2006. Ottawa withdrew from the country in 2014. (Canadian Press)

Documents that allege top U.S. officials tried to hide the disastrous war efforts in Afghanistan would not surprise Afghans, according to a woman who leads development in the country.

"I didn't need them to say that — I could see and witness the failure part of this intervention, and also the success part of it," said Orzala Nemat, director of the Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit, an independent research institute in Kabul.

"Probably it is more shocking and surprising for the families of the troops who served in Afghanistan, and more shocking and surprising for … the taxpayers whose money is being kind of channelled to Afghanistan for different purposes," Nemat told The Current's Laura Lynch.

Thousands of pages of documents obtained by the Washington Post reveal that the U.S. government, across three White House administrations, misled the public about failures in the 18-year war in Afghanistan, often suggesting success where it didn't exist.

Abandoned shoes belonging to victims after a bomb attack are pictured at a Shiite cultural centre in Kabul, Dec. 28, 2017. (Shah Marai/AFP/Getty Images)

The Pentagon released a statement Monday, saying there has been "no intent" by the department to mislead Congress or the public.

Nemat said the military intervention should not have happened, adding that the perpetrators behind the Sept. 11 attacks were not found in her country.
"Sending your sons and daughters for military service in Afghanistan was not really worth it," she said.

"No Canadian deserves to be killed here."

'This story has both sides'

While the documents paint a grim picture of the fight against the Taliban, Nemat said the impact on life in her country has been more nuanced.

"We cannot conclude 18 years of intervention with a complete failure, or complete success story," said Nemat, who has lived under both Taliban rule and the U.S.-led war and its aftermath.

"This story has both sides."
After joining the war effort in the fall of 2001, Ottawa withdrew from Afghanistan in 2014, but spent billions and lost more than 160 lives over a 13-year campaign.


After a 12-year mission, a simple flag-lowering ceremony on Wednesday marked the end of Canada's military involvement in Afghanistan 3:23

While the cost of the war has never been fully accounted, it's estimated that Ottawa spent up to $20 billion on military operations, development assistance and aid.

Throughout the war, funds were siphoned away by corrupt officials, but Nemat said steps were being taken to improve accountability and transparency.
She said development efforts yielded results, adding that the fight against the Taliban was "not a war to be fought by bombs, by airplanes," but rather development and investment in infrastructure and education.

"I am able to today live and work in this country ... we have thousands of women working and serving in government, we have hundreds and thousands of girls going to school," she said.


Grade 4 girls learn to read and write in Pashto at an all-girls school on March 23, 2010, in Nangarhar province, Afghanistan. (Julie Jacobson/Associated Press)

She added that improvements in education has turned the younger generation "into very conscious citizens, in comparison to the past."

Increasingly, she sees more "courage from the younger generation, to stand against corruption, for women's rights and human rights or justice, and for better forms of governance."

---

Written by Padraig Moran, with files from The Associated Press and CBC News. Produced by John Chipman, Max Paris and Samira Mohyeddin.





54 Comments




David Raymond Amos
Perhaps folks who truly care about this issue should read Paragraph 83 of Federal Court File Number T-1557-15 then ask the "Powers That Be" in Canada and the USA some serious questions



https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies




David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @CraigMWhitlock @CBCPolitics @realDonaldTrump @globeandmail @CTVAtlantic

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cFOKT6TlSE

Fundy Royal, New Brunswick Debate – Federal Elections 2015 - The Local Campaign, Rogers TV

https://www.facebook.com/events/7640944404/?active_tab=discussion





Sunday, March 12, 2017 at 2:30 PM – 5 PM







https://www.patstogran.com/press.html


http://www.therebelgorilla.com/


https://twitter.com/PatStogran/with_replies?lang=en


http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2017/06/need-i-say-that-i-was-not-impressed.html

Saturday, 3 June 2017

Need I say that I was not impressed that Pat Stogran my pick of the litter for NDP leader Quit?

After I watched his video I am relieved that such a snob has given up. For the record I had a long talk with one of his campaign assitants one day and he welcomed emails from me. Yet snobby Patty Baby did not have the decency or balls to answer emails or return phone calls just like every other politician on the planet.

Scroll down to see some of what both he and I know



http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/pat-stogran-quits-ndp-leadership-race-1.4145044

 

Afghan veteran says insiders blocked his candidacy and called for reform of party

The Canadian PressPosted: Jun 03, 2017 3:20 PM ET




He also said the party has put "major obstacles" in place for candidates trying to grow the party's base from the grassroots.

Stogran is a former military officer who served in Afghanistan and said serving for the greater good was his "calling in life."

• NDP leadership debate brings 2 new candidates to the race
  
• Former vets ombudsman considers NDP leadership bid, criticizes 'elite' Liberals and Tories

But he said, "As I enter my golden years, I came to the conclusion that my love for family far outweighs my love for politics, especially selfish, incompetent politics."

Stogran said the NDP will never form a government until the party itself is reformed and he doesn't see any possibility of reform.

He said he resigns with "huge sadness" from the race, and thanked his supporters and campaign team who stood behind him in his effort "to defeat politics incorporated."

There are now five official candidates in the race to succeed current leader Tom Mulcair, who didn't survive a leadership review.




 http://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2019/02/methinks-harper-jagmeet-singh-dominic.html

Thursday, 7 February 2019

Methinks Harper, Jagmeet Singh, Dominic Cardy and the ghosts of Jack Layton and Paul Dewar remember this old email from 2006 about the War in Afghanistan N'esy Pas?

---------- Original message ----------
From: "Anderson-Mason, Andrea Hon. (JAG/JPG)"<Andrea.AndersonMason@gnb.ca>
Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 06:29:52 +0000
Subject: Automatic reply: YO Jagmeet Singh do you think Dominic Cardy
or the ghosts of Jack Layton and Paul Dewar remember this old email
rom 2006 about the War in Afghanistan ?
To: David Amos <motomaniac333@gmail.com>

Thank you for your email. Your thoughts, comments and input are
greatly valued.  You can be assured that all emails and letters are
carefully read, reviewed and taken into consideration.
If your issue is Constituency related, please contact Lisa Bourque at
my constituency office at
Lisa.Bourque@gnb.caLis >  or  (506) 755-2810.
Thank you.


Merci pour votre courriel. Nous vous sommes très reconnaissants de
nous avoir fait part de vos idées, commentaires et observations. Nous
tenons à vous assurer que nous lisons attentivement et prenons en
considération tous les courriels et lettres que nous recevons.
Si c’est au sujet du bureau de circonscription,  veuillez contacter
Lisa Bourque  à  Lisa.Bourque@gnb.caLis


Subject: RE: Portions of wiretap tapes to impeach George W. Bush
and put a stop Harper's motion tommorrow
Date: Thu, 18 May 2006 13:49:47 -0400
From: "Dewar, Paul - M.P."Dewar.P@parl.gc.ca
To: "David Amos"motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com

    Hi David. My name is James and I have been asked to send this
message onto you from Paul…

Dear Mr. Amos,

    Thank you for informing me of your concerns regarding Canada 's role
in Afghanistan after February 2007.

    The NDP voted against this motion because we believe it is the wrong
mission for Canada . It does not reflect the peace-making values
that Canadians want to see our forces undertake on the world stage.
This forced motion essentially ties our aid and development funds to
war-making, and we cannot support that.

    It is quite clear that Harper's Conservatives aren't interested in
due diligence. They're interested in dragging us further into a
US-style combat role and away from our traditional peace keeping role.
Much like the Liberals before them, the Conservatives have failed to
tell Canadians:

    - What the chain of command and control will be for this mission.

    - What the definition of success will be for our troops.

    - What our exit strategy will be.

    Many Canadians have written me wanting answers and it is our duty
as representatives of our constituents, to get answers before
committing to any new missions overseas. As any soldier knows, time
spent on reconnaissance is never wasted.

    New Democrats recognize that Canada does have a role in assisting
Afghanis in rebuilding their country. Afghanistan is the largest
recipient of Canadian overseas development aid and we fully support
the continuation of that funding - outside of this mission.

    Thank you again for the time and effort you have taken to share your
thoughts with me, and for bringing your opinion on this matter to my
attention.

Sincerely,

Paul Dewar, MP Ottawa Centre



From: David Amos [mailto:motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com]
Sent: May 16, 2006 8:13 PM
To: Allen, Mike - M.P.; rcastrocalvo@yahoo.com; irislana@hotmail.com;
Angus, Charlie - M.P.; Atamanenko, Alex - M.P.; Bell, Catherine -
M.P.; Bevington, Dennis - M.P.; Black, Dawn - M.P.; Blaikie, Bill -
M.P.; Charlton, Chris - M.P.; Chow, Olivia - M.P.; Christopherson,
David - M.P.; Comartin, Joe - M.P.; Crowder, Jean - M.P.; Cullen,
Nathan - M.P.; Davies, Libby - M.P.; Dewar, Paul - M.P.; Julian,
Peter- M.P.; Marston, Wayne - M.P.; Martin, Pat D. - M.P.; Martin,
Tony -M.P.; Masse, Brian - M.P.; Mathyssen, Irene - M.P.; Nash, Peggy
M.P.; Priddy, Penny - M.P.; Savoie, Denise - M.P.; Siksay, Bill -
M.P.; Wasylycia-Leis, Judy - M.P.; Emerson, David - M.P.
Cc: Simms, Scott - M.P.; Russell, Todd - M.P.; Manning, Fabian -
M.P.; Hearn, Loyola - M.P.; Doyle, Norman - M.P.; Byrne, Gerry - M.P.;
McGuire, Joe - M.P.; MacAulay, Lawrence - M.P.; D'Amours,
Jean-Claude - M.P.; Hubbard, Charles - M.P.; Murphy, Brian - M.P.;
Thibault, Robert - M.P.; Savage, Michael - M.P.; Regan, Geoff - M.P.;
Keddy, Gerald - M.P.; Eyking, Mark - M.P.; Cuzner, Rodger - M.P.;
Brison, Scott - M.P.
Subject: Portions of wiretap tapes to impeach George W. Bush and put a
stop Harper's motion tommorrow
Tuesday, May 26, 2009

Hey

    Before all the Parliamentarians argue and then vote to support
further Canadian deaths in one of George W. Bush's Wars for Global
Control for the benefit of his corporate cohorts perhaps, you
should at least listen to the attachments if you do not wish to bother
to read what Billy Casey and the Bankers got on May 12th. If I can
assist in preventing the demise of just one more Canadian warrior in a
malicious foreign war, all of my work will have been worth it EH?

    If everyone ignores me as usual, I will not be surprised. At least
I will sleep well with my conscience tonight because I know I have
done my very best to stop the nonsense since early 2002 long before
the War in Iraq began. None of you deserve to sleep well at all
because you all supported Harper's orders to send our people to war
even before the 39th Parliament sat this year. As far as I am
concerned the blood of four very honourable soldiers can be found on
your hands. Shame on all of you for not even bothering to honour
our dead by lowering the flag on the Peacetower. As long as I have
been aware and could consider myself a Proad Canadian, I thought we
were peacekeepers rather than poorly paid hired guns for crooked
corporations, corrupt politicians and their wicked Yankee bible
pounding buddies.

    Veritas Vincit
    David Raymond Amos
 

    FEDERAL EXPRESS February 7, 2006

    Senator Arlen Specter
    United States Senate
    Committee on the Judiciary
    224 Dirksen Senate Office Building
    Washington, DC 20510

    Dear Mr. Specter:

    I have been asked to forward the enclosed tapes to you from a man
named, David Amos, a Canadian citizen, in connection with the
matters raised in the attached letter. Mr. Amos has represented to me
that these are illegal FBI wire tap tapes. I believe Mr. Amos has been
in contact with you about this previously.

    Very truly yours,
    Barry A. Bachrach
    Direct telephone: (508) 926-3403
    Direct facsimile: (508) 929-3003
    Email: bbachrach@bowditch.com



Date: Thu, 11 May 2006 00:00:53 -0700 (PDT)
From: "David Amos"motomaniac_02186@yahoo.com
Subject: Jumping Jimmy Flaherty's jump boots versus Crosbie's old
mukluks in a liberal Senate
To: Grant.GARNEAU@gnb.ca, Russell_Feingold@feingold.senate.gov,
duffy@ctv.ca, tomp.young@atlanticradio.rogers.com,
Governor.Rell@po.state.ct.us, Robert.Creedon@state.ma.us,
 Brian.A.Joyce@state.ma.us, Kandalaw@mindspring.com,
 kmdickson@comcast.net, trvl@hotmail.com, patrick.fitzgerald@usdoj.gov,
 fbinhct@leo.gov, oldmaison@yahoo.com, dan.bussieres@gnb.ca,
 michael.malley@gnb.ca, EGreenspan@144king.com,
 josie.maguire@dfait-maeci.gc.ca, alicia.mcdonnell@state.ma.us,
 info@pco-bcp.gc.ca, ted.tax@justice.gc.ca, Cotler.I@parl.gc.ca,
 racing.commission@state.ma.us, dwatch@web.net, freeman.c@parl.gc.ca,
 flaherty.j@parl.gc.ca, graham.b@parl.gc.ca, arthur.a@parl.gc.ca
 CC: nwnews@cknw.com, davidamos@bsn1.net, BBACHRACH@bowditch.com,
  david.allgood@rbc.com, mackay.p@parl.gc.ca, stronach.b@parl.gc.ca,
  moore.r@parl.gc.ca, thompson.g@parl.gc.ca, toews.v@parl.gc.ca,
  day.s@parl.gc.ca, casey.b@parl.gc.ca, mlevine@goodmans.ca,
  brae@goodmans.ca, steve.moate@utoronto.ca, sarah.mann@rci.rogers.com,
  rep@karenyarbrough.com, dc@thepen.us, paul.neuman@asm.ca.gov,
  info@afterdowningstreet.org, gearpigs@hotmail.com,
  alltrue@nl.rogers.com, Matthews.B@parl.gc.ca

Deja Vu Anyone? Anyone?

    That's what John Crosbie wore in 1979, the last time a budget
brought down a Canadian government in a minority-Parliament situation.
It proved to be a bad omen, given that the Conservative government of
the day foundered on Crosbie's document.

    The mukluks proved to be symbolic of Joe Clark's short-lived
administration -- overconfident and blind to convention. As Crosbie
observed in his memoirs, Clark "decided to govern as though we had
a majority, a decision that was as arrogant as it was presumptuous."

    By RANDY BURTON —
    Saskatoon Star-Phoenix

    May 10th, 2006

    Prime Minister Stephen Harper,
    Franky Boy McKenna,

    ETC ETC ETC 




https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thecurrent/the-current-for-dec-11-2019-1.5391116/dec-11-2019-episode-transcript-1.5393091


The Current

Dec. 11, 2019 episode transcript

Afghans will not be surprised by documents alleging U.S. failures in war, says activist

LL:Hello, I'm Laura Lynch and you're listening to The Current.
[Music: Theme]

LL:Still to come, how an island in Nunavut is helping NASA plan a mission to Mars. But first, a Washington Post investigation reveals troubling details about the war in Afghanistan.

LL:U.S. Presidents Bush, Obama and Trump have all tried to win the war in Afghanistan. But the words of those presidents are in stark contrast to a trove of documents published by The Washington Post. It's being compared to the Pentagon Papers that reveal the failures of the war in Vietnam. The documents show top officials warned there was no clear plan in Afghanistan. Some even believe the war was already lost. The documents also include revelations about Canada's role in the country. The CBC's senior defence writer Murray Brewster has been looking into this. He joins me from our Ottawa studio. Hello.

MURRAY BREWSTER:Good morning.

LL:Murray, what did you make of what you saw in the documents?

MURRAY BREWSTER:For anyone that's covered Afghanistan as a journalist or someone who has been intimately involved from the military development capacity or even politics? A lot of what we're reading here, the individual details. It doesn't surprise many people who have been closely associated with the war. What I believe is significant is to see it laid out in a huge compendium in just in all this detail. I think what's significant about what we're seeing is that for the first time, I think there is now a stirring of conscience in the United States where they have begun to ask themselves very serious questions about why they have been at war for 18 years.

LL:These were the results of interviews that were compiled by the Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction with the odd name of SIGAR. Who did they speak to?

MURRAY BREWSTER:They spoke to a vast array of United States officials, officials with NATO, both military and civilian political staffers. And there's it's a mixture of interviews, but also material that they've gleaned notes from conferences. Among the documents you're going to see, some of the names are blanked out. There are redactions, et cetera, where SIGAR was attempting to get these people to go on the record to talk about it. One of the things that I found incredibly fascinating were some of the lessons learned, interviews that were conducted, particularly with the the senior military officials. And as someone who sat and interviewed many of these senior military officials, it's interesting to hear how pessimistic and unguarded they were in those interviews in comparison to some of the times that I've spoken with them.

LL:I'm sure that's true. How prominently did Canada figure in the interviews?

MURRAY BREWSTER:Well, there were a number of documents, I'd say about three dozen documents that referenced Canada. The documents are divided in two. There's about 2000 documents there divided into bins. And they're looking at corruption, looking at the overall war strategy, but looking at NATO as well, NATO's involvement. And that's where you find most of the references to Canada is in NATO and in the timeframe roughly of 2006, 2007, where there seems to have been a lot of talk either by U.S. officials who were watching the deteriorating situation in 2006 in southern Afghanistan very closely or by military officials, notably General Sir Sir David Richard, who was the commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan at that time. He did an interview with cigars representatives.

LL:He's British. I remember interviewing him myself and thinking of him as a fairly plain talking man. But he revealed things in his interviews with this reconstruction report that we hadn't heard before. What did he reveal about the situation in Kandahar and Helmand during his command?

MURRAY BREWSTER:He was very blunt and very plain spoken, and he talked about how there were not enough troops on the ground. And one of the things that I found incredible was that he recounted a conversation that he had with. The then U.S. defence secretary, Donald Rumsfeld, where he said directly to the U.S. defence secretary. There are not enough troops on the ground because Donald Rumsfeld was gobsmacked at the increase in violence in 2006. And essentially, Richard said that we don't have enough resources and we don't have enough troops on the ground. And Rumsfeld blew him off, basically dismissed him and said that I don't agree with you. Let's move on. General, and that's significant for Canada, because at that point in the war, Canadian troops were under daily assault by a resurgent Taliban and there were casualties. We were suffering at that time as a nation, our first major casualties in terms of killed and wounded almost on a daily basis. And it led up to in the fall of 2006, the Operation Medusa, where because the Taliban had dug in west of Kandahar City and they had to be removed. And it was just a spiral of violence. And it shocked not only the Canadian public, but the Canadian government. The Canadian government was looking for reinforcements, was looking for NATO to send help to southern Afghanistan. And here with Donald Rumsfeld was essentially blowing that off.

LL:Why?

MURRAY BREWSTER:He was blowing it off. I think for a couple of reasons. The first is that the Americans were fully engaged in Iraq at that point. Iraq had completely spiralled out of control. And the U.S. pouring more of its or most of its attention and money and its troops into Iraq to stabilize the situation there. That's the first thing. But also to the Bush administration was subscribed to a notion that wars could be fought with lightly light forces. Not a lot of like heavy I guess big army is the best way to describe it, forces where you have a large amount of troops going into an area to suppress it. And it took several years for not only the Bush administration, but for commanders, including Canadian commanders, to come around to the idea that they needed an incredible amount of of reinforcements to stabilize the situation in Afghanistan.

LL:Now, on Monday, our defence minister Harjeet Sajjan, who served in Afghanistan, was asked about these revelations. He had this to say.
LL:Murray, what do you make of that response?

MURRAY BREWSTER:Well, let me just put it this way: I think it took the Canadian military a while to make that logic leap. The minister's talking about how, you know, once they had figured it out, well, it took them an incredible amount of time to figure it out. It took them a couple of years to do that. But also to what the documents show is that Canada knew that it did not have not only enough troops on the ground, but enough financial resources to help stabilize the situation. It's one of the things that sir that Gen. Richards mentions in his debrief to SIGAR is that Canada and Britain did not have enough financial resources. Because you see, when you go into a conflict and when you try to stabilize an area during a counterinsurgency war, you have troops that go in to clear the area. But then they're followed up by development projects, reconstruction to be able to win hearts and minds if we have to use that well-worn phrase. And there was an acknowledgement by Richards in these documents that Canada and Britain, which was in Helmand Province adjacent to Kandahar, did not have enough resources to be able to do that. And that contributed to the deterioration of the situation and the the extension of the war. And it Richards noted that it was only the United States that had the resources and the ability to be able to go into a certain area and be able to put enough troops on the ground. And then then stabilized with by putting by rebuilding roads, rebuilding bridges, by getting the power stations working again.

LL:Alright, Murray, much more to talk about, but we're going to have to leave it there for now. People can see more reading your stories online today at cbc.ca. Thanks so much, Murray.

MURRAY BREWSTER:You're welcome.

LL:Murray Brewster is the CBC's senior defence writer. He was in our Ottawa studio. Retired Colonel Pat Stogran can relate to the revelations in the Afghan papers. He was a key commander during Canada's move into the volatile Kandahar province in 2006, and he later became Canada's first Veterans Ombudsman. Pat Stogran joins me from Ottawa. Hello.

PAT STOGRAN:Good morning.

LL:What was your reaction to what these papers have revealed about the U.S. led war in Afghanistan?

PAT STOGRAN:I hesitate to say a bit of jubilation because it really validated the bad feelings I had when I left the Canadian Forces to become the Veterans Ombudsman. Really, what they're reporting is the feeling that I had about the way the Canadian operation had gone. And I had been a key planner in the move from Kabul and the start up of operations in Kandahar. So, you know, it basically confirms the situation, as I remember it all those many years ago.

LL:Well, you were there. What was Canada's strategy for winning the war in Afghanistan?
PAT STOGRAN:Yeah. To suggest, as the minister did, that we learned about capacity building during the operation. I was my staff down in Kingston. I was demanding an organization known as the Job that had it later became Expeditionary Force Command headquarters. So I had a lot of planning staff there and I had been there myself and as a commander with all the Apollo. And I saw the profound impact that our troops had by building schools, by that's what we were doing in our spare time. By drilling wells, by building the capacity of the locals to sustain themselves. We were one with the community.

LL:The papers also reveal a major gap between what U.S. leaders were saying about the war amongst themselves and what they were telling the public. So how truthful was the Canadian leadership about successes and failures?

PAT STOGRAN:Oh, it was smoke and mirrors. In fact, I was quoted in an article saying just that. The level of frustration amongst some of the officers at national defence headquarters was palpable. But really, it was it started off. They rolled their shirt sleeves up and we're showing off, you know, how good our soldiers are at combat operations, right. For Mountain Thrust, Operation Mountain Thrust was shortly after we touched down there and it was built by the Americans. The biggest search and destroy operation since operation started in Afghanistan. And that was really setting the wrong tone for what we should have been doing in that country.

LL:Do you think then that Canada accomplished anything in Afghanistan?

PAT STOGRAN:No, I don't think we accomplished anything in Afghanistan. But when I went back in 2010 after my ombudsman's tour, I just wanted to be able to compare where we were at to what I had seen in 2002. And they didn't even remember the Canadians that I went to the villages, that we were one with the community and they'd forgotten about us because we were just another force in NATO. So all of the goodwill that our troops had, you know, with the drilling of the wells, the integrating with the community around. I think there were seven or eight villages and part of the city of Kandahar. I recognize things were different in 2006, but the minister hit the nail on the head. We should have been focussed on capacity building. It shouldn't have been there as the troops referred to it, like a Taliban kind of operations. They even had a Canadian term mowing the grass. It was ridiculous.

LL:I wonder then you when you see this trove of documents released and the frankness of the exchanges and this attempt to sort of record and learn from the past, should Canada be doing this as well?

PAT STOGRAN:Or, ma'am, we should have a public inquiry into this just to make sure that Canadians understand the current security situation in the world and they don't get hoodwinked by the government into sending our sons and daughters into harm's way without a plan. You know, we talk about exit strategies on operations like this. The exit strategy is when it becomes politically distasteful. We down tools and run. So we should define success from the outset. What are we exactly? Are we sending our troops in there to accomplish and not only troops. Remember, it was a whole of government operation.

LL:Pat Stogran, thank you for your time.

PAT STOGRAN:Well, thank you for your interest in the story.

LL:Pat Stogran is a retired colonel in the Canadian military and Canada's first Veterans Ombudsman. He was in Ottawa. If Canada paid a heavy price in Afghanistan, the toll on the Afghan people has been immense. Tens of thousands of civilians have been killed and wounded by the war. Even today, a powerful bomb exploded near the U.S. Bagram Air Base north of Kabul, wounding a number of Afghan civilians. My next guest has experienced life under Taliban rule and the U.S. led war. Orzala Nemat is the director of the Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit, and that's an independent research institute in Kabul. And that's where we've reached her today. Hello.

ORZALA NEMAT:Hello Laura.

LL:What were your thoughts when you first heard that the U.S. had been misleading the public about the war in Afghanistan?

ORZALA NEMAT:To be honest, I was not very surprised because I didn't need them to say that. I could see and witness the failure part of this intervention and also the success part of it. So in a way, it's not surprising, but probably it is more shocking and surprising for the families of the troops who served in Afghanistan as more shocking and surprising for people who are basically the taxpayers with whose money is being kind of channelled to Afghanistan for different purposes. So for me as an Afghan, as someone who experienced the Taliban ruling and also the post Taliban domination or the post 2001 context, as we call it, it is not entirely surprising because we are witnessing and we've raised our voices, as you know, civil society, as women's rights activists about how parts of this intervention are extremely problematic and are not serving the purpose.

LL:Do you have any sense of how people in Afghanistan are reacting to all of the revelations in the papers?

ORZALA NEMAT:People in Afghanistan are not really like it's not like catching the media. So far, probably this probably wouldn't be the reaction of people that, OK, like we anyway knew that the war is a failure of the war side of it. The violence side, that side of it. If I can list the following to your other persons that were interviewed earlier. I mean, this program, the coin of strategy, in my opinion, was an absolute failure. War on terror, a complete failure. Winning hearts and minds, as it was mentioned. I can say it was extremely problematic because when I say that as a development practitioner at the time, I find it extremely problematic that the military will use development as a tool to win hearts and minds. So these were things that we hope will not be repeated in any other future experiences like Afghanistan or the lessons that needs to be learned.

LL:And just just for listeners who may not know that the term coin means counterinsurgency. A whole generation grew up under the U.S. war on terror in Afghanistan. What are you hearing from young people these days?

ORZALA NEMAT:Well, the young people say, look, we remember everything from this period, but we also have a good knowledge thanks to this, thanks to the interventions and development sector in this period of past 18 years. We've been educated enough to read the history, to know also what was the situation before 18 years. So people, the younger generation have a very good knowledge of historical context. Thanks to the educational support that they have received over the past 18 years. And that turned them into very conscious citizens in comparison to the past. And what happens now is increasingly is to see more accountability and to see more courage from the younger generation, to stand against corruption for women's rights and human rights or justice. And for, you know, better forms of governance and examples are evident in the parliament, in the Afghan civil society and even in the government and in government, despite the challenges that we have with the government in Afghanistan and challenges are there can be a long list of it that I can say, but we can see that it is mostly led by a younger generation and average age is somewhere between 35 to 40 for the people serving as key leadership of the government.

LL:Right. And you are the director of Afghanistan's largest think tank. That wouldn't have been possible under Taliban rule. So what you just said and your presence in this job, does that suggest that there have been improvements as a result of the US led presence in Afghanistan?

ORZALA NEMAT:Well, yes, but I tell you this, we cannot conclude an 18 years of intervention with a complete failure or complete success story. This story has both side. One side of it, as I mentioned and I mention this now, I was mentioning as an activist from the grassroots movements of home based literacy classes back in and the time of the war, I'm talking about, you know, October, November, 2001. I was saying then that military solution was not a solution to this conflict, and I'm saying it now. 18 years on that what I was claiming them as a young Afghan from the grassroots was right. It is proved right because this war is not a war to be fought by bombs, by aeroplanes, by dismantling or eliminating some forces. It's a war that requires development, that requires interventions and poverty reduction requires intervention and building infrastructures, education, providing more opportunity for a country that is deprived because of the war prior to US led war that started here. So miniaturization is an absolute failure side, but this intervention of the past 18 years has lots of advantages that thanks to which I am able to today live and work in this country, thanks to which we have thousands of women working and serving in government. We have hundreds and thousands of girls going to school. The schools infrastructures are there and it's unprecedented in comparison to any other time in the history of Afghanistan. The number of schools in the country, across the country, particularly in rural areas, is unprecedented. However, when it comes to quantity, when it comes to train teachers, we have a long, long way to go. So there are positive elements. There are some signs of success that you can see in this past 18 years. But of course, there are also failures.

LL:So for people in Canada who are reading about these new papers and who may be asking themselves whether this war was in vain, what's your response?

ORZALA NEMAT:My response is that parts of this should have not happened. The military parts should have not happened. No Canadian deserves to be killed here just because they've attacked some people on this side. The sources of terrorism in Afghanistan was not hidden here. The sources were elsewhere, which was not sought at. And so for that reason. That's part of it. Sending your sons and daughters for military services in Afghanistan was not maybe worth it, but then sending your money to rebuild this war ravaged country. Thank you for your money and think tanks to your financial assistance and the development sectors. Now we are much better placed than any other time before.

LL:I'm sure that some Canadians are listening to you now, but they also still worry about the spectre of corruption in Afghanistan and whether their money actually goes where it's supposed to go. What do you say to that one?

ORZALA NEMAT:Unfortunately, corruption is a phenomenon that is the result of massive level of financial intervention without any accountability. The sources of corruption are not only national. It is national as well as international. I would mechanisms for accountability are so weak internationally that opens a space for corruption. So my message to Canadians is that at least the Afghan people are taking more strong steps toward keeping their governments, their non-governmental organizations more and more accountable. More community-based system of accountability is a solution to tackle the massive issue of corruption. And that requires some level of conditionality in the funding and support that Canadians and other international partners are providing to Afghanistan, whether they are private sector, NGOs or government.

LL:Alright. We will leave it there. Thank you.

ORZALA NEMAT:Thank you.

LL:Orzala Nemat is the director of the Afghanistan Research and Evaluation Unit, an independent research institute based in Kabul. She is in Kabul, Afghanistan.
[Music]






https://twitter.com/DavidRayAmos/with_replies







https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2019/12/13/essential-documents-afghanistan-papers/?arc404=true








David Raymond Amos‏ @DavidRayAmos
Replying to @DavidRayAmos@Kathryn98967631 and 49 others
Perhaps folks who truly care about this issue should read Paragraph 83 of Federal Court File Number T-1557-15 then ask the "Powers That Be" in Canada and the USA some serious questions 


 https://davidraymondamos3.blogspot.com/2015/09/v-behaviorurldefaultvmlo.html
 


 #nbpoli#cdnpoli



https://www.cbc.ca/radio/thehouse/parents-of-canadian-soldier-killed-in-afghanistan-say-a-memorial-is-more-important-than-an-inquiry-1.5395336

Parents of Canadian soldier killed in Afghanistan say a memorial is more important than an inquiry

'Nobody wants to hear that their child died in a pointless war': Sally Godard

CBC Radio· Posted: Dec 14, 2019 4:00 AM ET




Canadian soldier Nichola Goddard, was the first female member of the Canadian Forces to die in combat. 'Nichola died believing she was doing her job and I guess that's what we hang onto. It would be great to blame all kinds of people, but I don't think we can do that. She chose to go to Afghanistan. She believed in the mission, she believed that they were helping,' said her mother, Sally Goddard. (Submitted by Sally Goddard)

The parents of the first Canadian woman killed in combat in Afghanistan say recent news reports about U.S. military officials misleading the public about the war should encourage steps to ensure those who died in the war are properly remembered.

Sally and Tim Goddard told CBC's The House on Thursday that they don't believe a public inquiry is needed in the wake of Washington Post stories that show the extent to which senior U.S. military and diplomatic officials knew the mission lacked clear objectives, troop deployments were inadequate and a democratic government in Afghanistan could not survive without western military support.

Those disclosures have sparked calls for a proper accounting of Canada's role in the war.

But the Goddards said they would prefer to look ahead, not back. They want the federal government to cut through the "Gordian knot" of bureaucracy to ensure a long-overdue monument to Canada's mission is built.
Sally and Tim Goddard, whose daughter Captain Nichola Goddard was the first Canadian woman to be killed in combat, reflect on what the Afghanistan Papers reveal — and what they want the Canadian government to do about it. 12:15

Capt. Nichola Goddard of Princess Patricia's Canadian Light Infantry was killed on May 17, 2006, during a firefight in the Panjwaii area west of Kandahar, Afghanistan.

Sally Goddard said each family of a fallen soldier has a place to go to remember their loved ones, but Canadians need a communal place to pay their respects — and time is running out.

"It's 14 years almost since Nichola was killed. We're getting older and so are the parents of the fallen and I think the monument [going] up sooner rather than later would be terrific," she said.

Site for federal monument finally approved

In June, the National Capital Commission finally approved a site for the monument to Canada's mission in Afghanistan. The project has faced several setbacks due to disputes over previously proposed locations.

The approved location is across the street from the Canadian War Museum and behind the National Holocaust Monument. Design work is expected to start in the coming months and the memorial's unveiling is scheduled for 2023 — nine years after it was promised by former prime minister Stephen Harper.

A cenotaph built by troops in Kandahar was later transferred to the Department of National Defence's headquarters in Ottawa, but it is not readily accessible. Members of the public may visit it, but they must register 48 hours in advance.

It was rededicated in August, months after the Canadian Forces were criticized by families and the public for dedicating the cenotaph in May with only senior officials present. Chief of Defence Staff Gen. Jonathan Vance later apologized for the situation.

Tim Goddard said he just wants the government to get the monument built.

"I just don't understand why somebody can't just say, 'Do it,'" he told The House.

Call for public inquiry

He added a monument would be more meaningful to his family than an inquiry — which is what Pat Stogran, Canada's ex-veterans' ombudsman and the former commanding officer of the first Canadian soldiers in Afghanistan, called for this week.

"We should have a public inquiry to make sure that Canadians understand the current security situation in the world and they don't get hoodwinked by the government into sending sons and daughters into harm's way without a plan," he told CBC Radio's The Current.
"I'm not sure about the usefulness of an inquiry," Tim Goddard said.

"A retroactive review of what happened isn't going to change anything, it's not going to bring anybody home. What we're seeing now, five years after we finished the active combat role, is the lack of a plan for transition, the lack of a plan for looking after people who are coming out of the armed forces with PTSD, who are homeless.

"We don't have a plan for that, so putting in a lot of money and effort into looking at why we did things back in 2002, 2003, 2004, I think I'd rather see that money spent on doing things now."

'She believed in the mission'

The so-called "Afghanistan Papers"— the trove of documents released to The Washington Post — include notes and transcripts of interviews with key players in the 18-year-old conflict in Afghanistan.

They show those in charge of the effort consistently misled politicians and the public about how the war was going and suggested a democratically elected government in Afghanistan could not survive without military support.

For many survivors of the war, the reports also call into question whether the deaths of 165 Canadians in Afghanistan were in vain.

Sally Goddard said her daughter died defending what she believed was right.

"Nobody wants to hear that their child died in a pointless war," she said.

"Nichola died believing she was doing her job and I guess that's what we hang onto. It would be great to blame all kinds of people, but I don't think we can do that. She chose to go to Afghanistan. She believed in the mission, she believed that they were helping."



122 Comments




David Raymond Amos
Perhaps folks who truly care about this issue should read Paragraph 83 of Federal Court File Number T-1557-15 then ask the "Powers That Be" in Canada and the USA some serious questions



https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/trump-makes-surprise-thanksgiving-trip-to-afghanistan-voices-hope-for-ceasefire-1.5377083

Trump makes surprise Thanksgiving trip to Afghanistan, voices hope for ceasefire

Trip marks U.S. president's first visit to Afghanistan since taking office in 2016

The Associated Press· Posted: Nov 28, 2019 3:32 PM ET



U.S. President Donald Trump eats dinner with U.S. troops at a Thanksgiving dinner event during a surprise visit at Bagram Air Base in Afghanistan on Thursday. (Tom Brenner/Reuters)

U.S. President Donald Trump paid a surprise Thanksgiving visit to Afghanistan, where he announced the United States and Taliban have been engaged in ongoing peace talks and said he believes the Taliban wants a ceasefire.

In his first trip to the site of America's longest war, Trump arrived at Bagram Air Field shortly after 8:30 p.m. local time Thursday and spent more than two and a half hours on the ground, serving turkey, thanking the troops and sitting down with Afghan President Ashraf Ghani.

As per tradition, reporters were under strict instructions to keep the trip a secret to ensure his safety in the country. About 12,000 U.S. forces remain in Afghanistan.

Travelling with Republican Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming and a small clutch of aides, including his acting chief of staff, press secretary and national security adviser, Trump appeared in good spirits as he was escorted around the base by heavily armed soldiers, as the smell of burning fuel and garbage wafted through the chilly air. Unlike last year's post-Christmas visit to Iraq, the president's wife Melania Trump did not make the trip.

Trump's first stop was a dining hall, where he sat down for a meal. But he said he only tasted the mashed potatoes before he was pulled away for photos.

"I never got the turkey," he told the troops. "A gorgeous piece of turkey."


Trump speaks to the troops during the visit. (Olivier Douliery/AFP/Getty Images)

During his visit, Trump said the U.S. and Taliban have been engaged in peace talks and insisted the Taliban want to make a deal after heavy U.S. fire in recent months.

"We're meeting with them," he said. "And we're saying it has to be a ceasefire. And they don't want to do a ceasefire, but now they do want to do a ceasefire, I believe ... and we'll see what happens."

The trip came after Trump abruptly broke off peace talks with the Taliban in September, cancelling a secret meeting with Taliban and Afghan leaders at the Camp David presidential retreat after a particularly deadly spate of violence, capped by a bombing in Kabul that killed 12 people, including an American soldier.


Trump meets with Afghanistan President Ashraf Ghani at Bagram Air Base. (Tom Brenner/Reuters)

That ended a nearly yearlong effort by the U.S. to reach a political settlement with the Taliban, the group that protected al-Qaeda extremists in Afghanistan, prompting U.S. military action after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. U.S. and international forces have been on the ground ever since.
It was not immediately clear how long or substantive the U.S. re-engagement with the Taliban has been.

Taliban spokesperson Zabiullah Mujahid said the Taliban's stance is unchanged. He said the United States broke off talks and when it wants to resume the Taliban are ready.

2,400 U.S. service members killed

Trump ran his 2016 campaign promising to end the nation's "endless wars" and has been pushing to withdraw troops from Afghanistan and in the Middle East, despite protests from top U.S. officials,

Trump's Republican allies in Washington and many U.S. allies abroad. For months now, he has described American forces as "policemen" and argued that other countries' wars should be theirs to wage.

Tens of thousands of Afghan civilians and more than 2,400 American service members have been killed since the war began 18 years ago.


U.S. President Donald Trump had said he would be spending Thanksgiving at his club, Mar-a-Lago, in Florida. Instead, he visited the troops at Bagram Air Field. (Olivier Douliery/AFP/Getty Images)

Just last week, Trump flew to Dover Air Force Base in Delaware to oversee the transfer of remains of two officers killed when their helicopter crashed as they provided security for troops on the ground in Logar Province in eastern Afghanistan. The Taliban still controls or holds sway over about half of the country, staging near-daily attacks targeting Afghan forces and government officials.

The U.S. and Taliban had been close to an agreement in September that might have enabled a U.S. troop withdrawal.

Trump meets with Afghan president

Trump said he was proceeding with a plan to reduce U.S. troop levels to about 8,600, telling reporters we're "bringing down the number of troops substantially."

Still, he said, the U.S. will stay in the country "until we have a deal or we have total victory."
Trump also met briefly with Ghani, the Afghan president. Ghani thanked the Americans who have made the "ultimate sacrifice" in Afghanistan and assured Trump that Afghan security forces are increasingly leading the fight.

"In the next three months, it's going to be all Afghanistan," Ghani said.

Taking pains to keep trip secret

Ghani also praised Trump for the October mission that killed Islamic State of Iraq and Syria (ISIS) leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.

The Afghan leader also said, as Trump himself has, that the al-Baghdadi mission was even more significant than the 2011 mission targeting al-Qaeda founder Osama bin Laden. The bin Laden mission was ordered by then-president Barack Obama.
"President Trump, people talked a lot about bin Laden, but what you did to eliminate al-Baghdadi, who was an organizer and not a talker, is a much great accomplishment," said Ghani, in remarks to U.S. troops before Trump's departure.

The White House took pains to keep the trip a secret after Trump's cover was blown last year when Air Force One was spotted en route to Iraq by an amateur British flight watcher.

Decoy airplane

Cellphones and other transmitting devices were confiscated for the duration of the trip from everyone travelling aboard Air Force One. And Thanksgiving-themed tweets were teed up to publish ahead of time from Trump's account to prevent suspicions arising about the president's silence.

A small group of reporters was told to meet Wednesday night on the top floor of a parking garage and transported in black vans to Andrews Air Force Base. Meanwhile, the president was secretly flying back from Florida, where reporters had been told he'd be spending Thanksgiving at his Mar-a-Lago club.


Air Force One sits on the tarmac at Palm Beach International Airport in Florida on Wednesday. (Yuri Gripas/Reuters)

The plane he'd flown to Florida — the modified 747 painted in the iconic white and blue of Air Force One — remained parked on the tarmac at West Palm Beach Airport to avoid revealing the president's movement.

About 9:45 p.m. local time Wednesday, the president boarded a nearly identical plane concealed in a hangar at Andrews Air Base, taking off and landing under the cover of darkness, with cabin lights dimmed and window shutters drawn.

'We thought it'd be a nice surprise'

White House press secretary Stephanie Grisham said plans for the visit had been in the works for weeks.

"It's a dangerous area and he wants to support the troops," Grisham told reporters before Trump landed. "He and Mrs. Trump recognize that there's a lot of people who are away from their families during the holidays and we thought it'd be a nice surprise."
Shortly after midnight, Trump and his entourage departed from Afghanistan.

The president told the troops he was honoured to spend part of his holiday with them.

"There is nowhere I'd rather celebrate this Thanksgiving than right here with the toughest, strongest, best and bravest warriors on the face of the earth," Trump said.









https://www.cbc.ca/news/world/us-afghanistan-report-1.5390467

U.S. government has misled public throughout Afghanistan deployment: report

Washington Post obtained thousands of pages of documents quoting officials over many years

The Associated Press· Posted: Dec 10, 2019 8:38 AM ET



U.S. Resolute Support (RS) forces guard the site of a car bomb explosion in Kabul on Sept. 5. Documents obtained by the Washington Post reveal deep frustrations about the U.S.'s conduct in the war in Afghanistan. (Rahmat Gul/The Associated Press)

The U.S. government, across three White House administrations, misled the public about failures in the war in Afghanistan, often suggesting success where it didn't exist, according to thousands of pages of documents obtained by the Washington Post.

The documents reveal deep frustrations about the U.S.'s conduct during the war in Afghanistan, including the ever-changing U.S. strategy, the struggles to develop an effective Afghan fighting force, and persistent failures to defeat the Taliban and combat corruption throughout the government.

"We were devoid of a fundamental understanding of Afghanistan — we didn't know what we were doing," Douglas Lute, a three-star army general who served as the White House's Afghan war czar during the Bush and Obama administrations, told government interviewers in 2015.

The interviews were conducted as part of a Lessons Learned project by the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction over the past several years. SIGAR has produced seven reports from the more than 400 interviews and several more are in the works. The Post sought and received raw interview data through the Freedom of Information Act and lawsuits.

The documents quote officials close to the 18-year war effort describing a campaign by the U.S. government to distort the grim reality of the war.
"Every data point was altered to present the best picture possible," Bob Crowley, an army colonel who served as a counterinsurgency adviser to U.S. military commanders in 2013 and 2014, told government interviewers, according to the Post. "Surveys, for instance, were totally unreliable but reinforced that everything we were doing was right and we became a self-licking ice cream cone."

The Pentagon released a statement Monday saying there has been "no intent" by the department to mislead Congress or the public.

I'm glad this report is out, and I hope this becomes an eye-opener to the American people and that the U.S. government begins to change its attitude now toward Afghanistan.

- Hamid Karzai, former Afghanistan president

U.S. Department of Defence (DoD) officials "have consistently briefed the progress and challenges associated with our efforts in Afghanistan, and DoD provides regular reports to Congress that highlight these challenges," said Lt.-Col. Thomas Campbell, a department spokesperson. "Most of the individuals interviewed spoke with the benefit of hindsight. Hindsight has also enabled the department to evaluate previous approaches and revise our strategy, as we did in 2017 with the launch of the president's South Asia strategy."

SIGAR has frequently been vocal about the war's failures in reports going back more than a decade, including extensive questions about vast waste in the nearly $1 trillion spent on the conflict.

The Post said John Sopko, head of SIGAR, acknowledged the documents show "the American people have constantly been lied to." SIGAR was created by Congress in 2008 to conduct audits and investigations into waste of government spending on the war in Afghanistan.

Gillibrand calls for new hearings

Democrats on Capitol Hill were quick to endorse the story's findings.

California congressman Ted Lieu tweeted: "The war in Afghanistan is an epic bipartisan failure. I have long called for the withdrawal of U.S. troops from that quagmire. Now it appears U.S. officials misled the American public about the war. It is time to leave Afghanistan. Now."


Ro Khanna, also serving in a California district in the House, said in a tweet that "775,000 of our troops deployed. 2,400 American lives lost. Over 20,000 Americans wounded. 38,000 civilians killed. Trillions spent. [Donald] Rumsfeld in 2003:

I have no visibility into who the bad guys are."'

New York Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a member of her chamber's armed services committee, called for new hearings in the wake of the report.

"The committee owes it to the American public to hold hearings to examine the questions raised by this reporting and provide clarity with respect to our strategy in Afghanistan, a clear definition of success, and an honest and complete review of the obstacles on the ground," she wrote in a letter to the Republican chair of the committee, Oklahama's Jim Inhofe.

'What could we do?': Karzai

Afghanistan's former president said Tuesday that Washington helped fuel corruption in his nation by spending hundreds of millions of dollars over the past two decades without accountability.
Hamid Karzai said the documents obtained by the Post confirm his long-running complaints about U.S. spending.

The documents also describe Karzai, Afghanistan's president for 14 years, as having headed a government that "self-organized into a kleptocracy." Karzai has denied wrongdoing but hasn't denied involvement of officials in his government in corruption.


Former Afghan president Hamid Karzai speaks during an interview with The Associated Press, in Kabul. Karzai's final years in power were characterized by a fractious relationship with the United States. (Altaf Qadri/The Associated Press)

Karzai became Afghanistan's president after a 2001 U.S.-led invasion ousted the Taliban government.

The documents obtained by the Post portray U.S. governments lying about successes and hiding failures. After 18 years and over $1 trillion dollars in U.S. taxpayer money spent on the war, the Taliban is now at its strongest and controls or holds sway over half the country.

Karzai said the U.S. spent hundreds of millions of dollars in its war on terror, with the money flowing to contractors and private security firms, and that this fostered corruption.

"What could we do? It was U.S. money coming here and used by them and used for means that did not help Afghanistan," Karzai said.

He argued that there was no accountability.

"I'm glad this report is out, and I hope this becomes an eye-opener to the American people and that the U.S. government begins to change its attitude now toward Afghanistan," he said.

Michael Kugelman, deputy director of the Asia Program at the U.S.-based Wilson Center has said,

"I'm not sure I'd go so far as to say that the U.S. used corruption as a tool, but it has long been suspected — and these new documents make quite clear — that U.S. officials have thrown huge amounts of money at Afghanistan knowing full well that this would lead to more corruption than development or peace."

Speaking from Ottawa in response to the report, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan defended Canada's military and development record in Afghanistan.

Sajjan, who did three tours of Afghanistan as an intelligence liaison and later as an adviser to American commanders, said Monday he personally saw progress throughout his time there.
Canada's mission in Afghanistan, which was based for the most part in Kandahar province, ended in 2014.





https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/afghanistan-sajjan-kandahar-1.5390850

Canadian soldiers made 'progress' in Afghanistan, Sajjan says in response to grim U.S. war report

The situation in Afghanistan was 'very, very complex,' defence minister says

Murray Brewster· CBC News· Posted: Dec 10, 2019 1:21 PM ET



Canadian and American troops on a joint patrol in late June 2011, one of the last conducted by Canadians during the Afghanistan war. (Murray Brewster/The Canadian Press )

Kandahar was made a better place by Canada's military presence, Defence Minister Harjit Sajjan said following The Washington Post's publication of documents that suggest successive U.S. administrations saw the Afghanistan war as unwinnable.

Sajjan, who did three tours of Afghanistan as an intelligence liaison and later as an adviser to American commanders, said Monday he personally saw progress throughout his time there.

Sajjan defended Canada's military and development record — but on Monday ducked the question of whether the Conservative government of the day knew how deeply pessimistic some of the allies had become about the war's conduct and prospects for success.


Harjit Sajjan as a serving combat officer in Afghanistan. (Twitter)

The troops on the ground, Sajjan said, were fully aware of the challenges they faced.
"One thing I assure you, our understanding of our situation was extremely high," he said, adding the Canadian army's view was shared with its "partners."

Sajjan did not say who those partners were — whether they were elements of the Canadian government or represented allied nations.

The U.S. Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction, known as SIGAR, conducted a study that looked at the core mistakes made by Washington during the war. SIGAR conducted over 600 interviews with former commanders and decision-makers to compile its report.

Following a three-court fight under the United States' freedom of information law, The Washington Post obtained over 2,000 of the SIGAR documents, including notes, transcripts (some of them redacted) and audio recordings.

A war without a strategy

What emerged was a stark portrait of how the administrations of former U.S. presidents George W. Bush and Barack Obama lacked a clear war strategy — and how their mistakes prolonged what became the longest war in American history.

Sajjan was asked whether he saw the conflict as unwinnable.

"We can't boil it down to very simple things like that," he said, arguing that the situation in Afghanistan was "very, very complex."

Throughout its dozen years in Afghanistan, Canada lost 158 soldiers to combat, accidents and suicides. Dozens more Canadian veterans have taken their own lives since the end of the mission in 2014.

It has been estimated that Ottawa spent up to $20 billion on military operations, development assistance and aid related to its mission in Afghanistan, which was based for the most part in the province of Kandahar. But there has never been a full and complete accounting of the war by the federal government or parliamentary watchdogs.
Sajjan appeared Monday to dismiss the published reports about the SIGAR study, and by extension the interviews with U.S. officials it contains. Many of those officials expressed frustration, exasperation and despair over the management of the war.

"I'll be honest with you, if somebody was to read it in, see it in a certain way, I'm not surprised because it is very complex," Sajjan said.

"But if somebody who's been on the ground and saw the progress, and the work, the ups and downs over the years, I think {they] would understand that this is very, very complex, but the work that has been done on the ground has had a significant impact."

Public doubts

Despite Sajjan's confidence, the former Conservative government of prime minister Stephen Harper did publicly express doubts about the goals of the conflict and the absence of a clearly defined path to victory.

"We are not going to ever defeat the insurgency," Harper told CNN's Fareed Zakaria in an interview in March 2009. "Afghanistan has probably had — my reading of Afghanistan history — it's probably had an insurgency forever, of some kind."

The Obama administration was newly elected in 2009 and was in the process of pouring tens of thousands of troops into Afghanistan — a troop "surge" meant to stabilize the country.

"If President Obama wants anybody to do more, I would ask very hard questions about what is the strategy for success and for an eventual departure," Harper told Zakaria that spring.



CBC's Journalistic Standards and Practices





https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/afghanistan-washington-post-war-kandahar-parliament-1.5390552

What went wrong in Afghanistan? Our MPs don't seem to be in a hurry to find out

If joining the war was a mistake, Liberals and Conservatives have to wear it together

Aaron Wherry· CBC News· Posted: Dec 11, 2019 4:00 AM ET



Canadian soldiers help a comrade, center, get on a helicopter after he was injured in an IED blast during a patrol outside Salavat, in the Panjwayi district, southwest of Kandahar, Afghanistan, Monday, June 7, 2010. (Anja Niedringhaus/Associated Press)

The House of Commons spent Tuesday debating a Conservative proposal to establish a special committee of MPs to study Canada's ongoing "diplomatic crisis" with China.

Whatever the actual merits of that proposal, the timing of it at least underlines another significant matter in Canadian foreign policy that could use some accountability.

On Monday, the Washington Post published the first of its stories based on newly revealed U.S. government documents that raise profound questions about the execution and results of the war in Afghanistan and the massive nation-building effort that surrounded it.

Even though Canada played a major combat role in that mission, not one MP raised the Post's reporting during question period in the Commons on Monday or Tuesday.

But if the current dispute with China deserves special attention from Parliament, surely the 13 years this country spent fighting an actual war in Afghanistan deserves at least as much scrutiny.

It's not hard to see why the Conservatives would jump at an opportunity to launch a prolonged inquiry into the Trudeau government's differences with China. Two Canadians are effectively being held hostage by Beijing and there are no simple solutions.

No points to score

Committee hearings (for as long as they last) would provide a regular forum for poking and prodding government ministers, second-guessing the government's handling of the situation and dwelling on the lack of a resolution. There are partisan points to be scored here.

But both Liberals and Conservatives would find it much harder to score points over Canada's intervention in Afghanistan — which began under a Liberal government and was then enthusiastically embraced by a Conservative government. In 2006 and 2008, Conservative and Liberal MPs voted together to extend the mission. The Canadian military's involvement ended in 2014, before the current government came to office.



Master Cpl. Daniel Choong (left), Cpl. Harry Smiley (centre) and Cpl . Gavin Early (right) take down the Canadian flag for the last time in Afghanistan on Wednesday March 12, 2014, bringing an end to Canada's 12-year mission there. (Murray Brewster/Canadian Press)

So there's little to no short-term political incentive for any of the parties to push for parliamentary hearings now. Even the NDP would stand to gain little, although its former leader Jack Layton was an early mission sceptic.

But the Post's investigation of the war raises questions that should transcend partisan manoeuvring ahead of the next federal election.
Though the Post's reporting is focused on the U.S. government's handling of the American campaign, its conclusions — that the war lacked clear direction and purpose, that the American government misled the public about the war's progress, that the effort to establish a new government in Afghanistan was misguided and quickly corrupted, that billions of dollars in aid and development money were mishandled — should trouble every country involved in that war.

Where are the 'lessons learned'?

Maybe there were no such shortcomings in Canada's contributions to the military and development campaigns. But here we are, five years after the Canadian mission ended, and we still have no comprehensive public examination of that mission and its successes and failures. That omission is now harder to ignore.

More than 40,000 members of the Canadian Forces served in Afghanistan. One hundred and sixty-five Canadians — 158 soldiers and seven civilians — died there and 2,000 were wounded. In 2008, the parliamentary budget officer estimated that the mission could cost as much as $18 billion, including military operations, aid and development, caring for veterans of the conflict, and diplomatic efforts.

Steve Saideman, a professor and researcher at Carleton University, was able to obtain an internal Canadian report on "lessons learned" in 2017. But that report, which covers the period from 2008 to 2011, is only 10 pages long — "a shallow cut at best," in Saideman's words.


Pte. Glen Kirkland, seen here in a wheelchair, was one of five soldiers injured in a direct fire explosion in Afghanistan on Sept 4, 2008. Here he's seen attending a ramp ceremony for fallen comrades in Khandahar. (Tobi Cohen/Canadian Press)

A year ago, Chrystia Freeland ordered an internal review of Canadian aid spending in Afghanistan, which at that point totalled $3 billion. According to Global Affairs Canada, the results of that review are expected in the new year.

Few acts of the federal government over the last 20 years, if any, were more consequential than its decision to join what became a 13-year military and development mission in Afghanistan. So it follows that few federal decisions, if any, are more worthy of study and scrutiny.

When it was still going on, the mission in Afghanistan was the subject of loud and often acrimonious debates in this country — including a prolonged dispute over the Canadian Forces' handling of Afghan detainees. Liberals, New Democrats and Bloc Québécois MPs eventually united to force Stephen Harper's minority government to provide Parliament with internal documents related to the detention and transfer of detainees.

In the absence of easy points to score, it's hard to imagine MPs summoning that kind of collective curiosity now. But Parliament now includes a chamber that's supposed to be above the pursuit of political points.
By virtue of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's reforms, the Senate is supposed to be an independent and non-partisan institution. It's a chamber filled with accomplished Canadians who should be preoccupied with dispassionately reviewing legislation and studying important matters of public policy — and empowered with all the authority and resources that the upper house of Parliament possesses.

If any public institution is capable of a thorough study of Canada's war in Afghanistan, surely it should be this new Senate.

There will come a day when Parliament is asked to consider another military mission like Afghanistan. The resulting debate inevitably will be heavy with a sense of responsibility and appeals to principle.

When those future MPs gather to consider such life-or-death decisions — or hold the government to account for the consequences — will they be drawing on a clear understanding of what happened the last time Canada tasked its soldiers with fighting a war and building up a country?





https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/afghanistan-washington-post-pentagon-taliban-1.5391685

U.S. documents describe an Afghan war on the cheap that cost Canada dearly

Everyone tried to fight the war on a shoestring. Soldiers - and Afghans - paid the price.

Murray Brewster· CBC News· Posted: Dec 11, 2019 4:00 AM ET


A Canadian soldiers with 1st RCR Battle Group, The Royal Canadian Regiment, climbs over a wall as he patrols with his unit to find Improvised Explosive Devices or IEDs in the Panjwayi district, south west of Kandahar, Afghanistan on June 6, 2010. (Anja Niedringhaus/The Associated Press)

It was a long ago — and perhaps long-forgotten — conversation among allies that neatly but indirectly summed up Canada's experience in the Afghan war.

Buried deep within the trove of documents released as part of The Washington Post's investigation of America's longest-running war is an account of a conversation between the now-former commander of NATO forces in Afghanistan and the U.S. defence secretary at the time.

"In 2006, Donald Rumsfeld asked me why things were deteriorating in the south," retired British general Sir David Richards said.

"And I said we don't have enough resources ... and Rummy said, 'General what do you mean?' I said: 'We don't have enough troops and resources. And we've raised expectations.'
"He said, 'General, I don't agree. Move on.'"

The conversation still speaks volumes about the myopic way in which the Afghan conflict was planned and conducted by the Bush administration, which believed wholeheartedly in the theory that nasty little wars against guerillas and terrorists did not require large numbers of troops.


British General Sir David Richards (left) and U.S. General Martin Dempsey listen to opening comments during a meeting of NATO Military Chiefs of Staff at NATO headquarters in Brussels on Wednesday, Jan. 18, 2012. (Virginia Mayo/The Associated Press)

The "south" to which Richard referred includes the Kandahar and Helmand provinces where Canadian and British troops were, at the time, locked in a death-struggle with a resurgent Taliban. It was a particularly brutal spring, summer and fall, with dozens of soldiers killed as the Canadian army fought its first major battle with insurgents, known as Operation Medusa.

There are several references to Canada in the 2,000 pages of interviews, notes, transcripts and audio recordings that make up the U.S. Office of the Special Inspector General for Afghanistan Reconstruction's (SIGAR) probe into the key mistakes made by Washington during the war. The documents were released after The Washington Post fought a series of court actions over three years under U.S. freedom of information law.

Fighting a war 'as cheaply as possible'

The records, taken together, paint a searing portrait of the mistakes made by both the Bush and Obama administrations and show how the war lacked a clear strategy.

One of those mistakes — the lack of troops — cost Canadians dearly.

In its early years, the Afghan conflict was war on the cheap and there's a lot of blame to go around, said a defence expert.

"Pretty much every country sent the smallest size [contingent] they could, hoping it would do the trick. And then they had to reinforce over time, realizing they had not sent enough," said Stephen Saideman, director of the Canadian Defence and Security Network and a professor at Carleton University. He wrote the book on the conflict: NATO in Afghanistan, Fighting Together, Fighting Alone.
"This was a British problem, a Canadian problem, a Danish problem, a German problem, a Dutch problem, on and on ... If you take a look at what each country did, they tried to solve it as cheaply as possible."

Ian Brodie, who was chief of staff to former prime minister Stephen Harper in the early part of the Conservative government mandate, said that when the need for more troops became clear, Canada pressed hard for reinforcements and was rebuffed at the NATO Leaders Summit in Riga, Latvia in 2006.

"We were disappointed that nothing came out of the NATO summit," he said. "This helped Prime Minister Harper decide to set up the Manley panel a year later and that did get two things — an end date for the mission and more U.S. troops"


A Canadian soldier calls in an airstrike Saturday, Sept. 2, 2006 during the first day of Operation Medusa in the Panjwaii area west of Kandahar, Afghanistan. (Canadian Press)

Following the summit. Harper established a blue-ribbon, non-partisan panel that recommended Canada remain in combat until 2011 — as long as NATO delivered reinforcements.

Richards, who went on to become Britain's chief of defence staff, said in his interview with SIGAR that the Canadian contingent and others had too few troops to hold the areas that had been cleared of the Taliban, and lacked sufficient aid and development cash to stabilize and reconstruct those regions.

'Over-optimistic plans'

"The U.S. had the best resources for post-clearing stabilization, but the rest of us didn't, especially the Canadians," Richards said, pointing to a Canadian road building project — known as Route Summit — which ran through the Operation Medusa battlefield.

It took months to build and he recalled being given "over-optimistic plans to flood the area with support" after the battle was finished.

That was before the fiscal reality set in for the Canadians.

"They were embarrassed they couldn't do more," said Richards, who noted that local Afghans were watching the project with close interest.

"Panjwai residents wanted to believe what we had promised, but they had been told all along that aid was coming, but it never came, so the Taliban slowly came back in to exploit it.
"It didn't win hearts and minds because it was all a bit too late."

Retired Canadian colonel and former veterans ombudsman Pat Stogran said that myopic view of Afghanistan was not restricted to Washington — and many in the Canadian military and political establishments were simply following American direction.

'We were just flopping around'

He said that, after his return home as Canada's first battle group commander in 2002, he warned that the Taliban enjoyed respect and support among rural Afghans.

Stogran said he was ignored. He said he decided to retire when Canada returned to Kandahar in 2006 with no clear strategic campaign plan, other than to open up NATO's mission in the southern portion of the country and then leave after a year.

"We were just flopping around," he said.

Canada lost 158 soldiers to combat, accidents and suicides in Afghanistan. Dozens more veterans have taken their own lives since the end of mission in 2014.
It has been estimated the federal government spent up to $20 billion on military operations, development assistance and aid. But there has never been a full and complete accounting of the war by the federal government or parliamentary watchdogs.

The current commander of the Canadian Army, Lt.-Gen. Wayne Eyre, said he believes there should be some form of national reflection on the war — but added that five years after the last Canadian troops left Afghanistan is still too soon to draw any conclusions.

"What we did was, we provided space for the Afghan people, the Afghan government to find their solution," said Eyre, who deployed twice to the war-torn nation. "What they did, what they are doing and what they will do with that space is their choice."

One of Stogran's successors, retired major-general Denis Thompson, admitted to being a bit mystified by all of the commotion. He said much of what Post has reported has been out there in political and military circles for a long time.

"A lot of the incongruities, misunderstandings and lack of resources were certainly in the public domain," said Thompson, who was task force commander in 2008-09. "It's just that someone has put it altogether and put it in a mainstream publication and not buried it in a military journal somewhere."
Stogran agreed, adding that now that the Americans have begun to ask why their war has lasted
almost two decades, Canadians should do the same — because they're getting even fewer answers.

"I have long believed there should be a public inquiry into how the war was prosecuted in this country," he said.