I posted it with some trepidation because I’m no expert on Canadian politics.
Today, my judgment was confirmed when I saw on the news, the head of the liberal opposition party, Jack Layton, telling Canadian Prime Minister Steven Harper to fire the source of the leak that interfered in the Democratic primary.
To check it out further, I contacted Canada’s NDP (New Democratic Party) and spoke with their press seccretary, Ian Capstick, who agreed, I’d nailed it yesterday, telling me, “There is no reason to trust Mr. Harper.”
Now, the beauty of Canada’s parlaiment is there’s a “Questions Period” when, for 45 minutes, in which government must respond to Opposition questions. Yesterday that meant that Prime Minister Harper had to face questions from NDP leader, Jack Layton:
"The prime minister’s office has been interfering in the democratic primaries, trying to silence Barack Obama, who simply wants to amend the NAFTA. IT is completely unacceptable for that kind of interference to take place. Will the Prime Minister fire the source of the interference, fire his chief of staff.”
Harper gives a tepid reply, avoiding the question of firing his chief of staff., replying he,
“regretted the fact that information has come out that would imply that Senator Obama has been saying different things in public than in private. The government of Canada does not condone this and certainly regrets any implication.”
View the short exchange here:
My contact at the NDP tells me that Layton was referring to Harper’s chief of Staff , Ian Brodie, who BBC identified as the source of the leak.
Harper told Parliament he was amused by the suggestion "we are so all powerful that we could interfere in the American election and pick their president for them. This government doesn't claim that kind of power. I certainly deny any allegation that this government has attempted to interfere in the American election."
Sandra Buckler, a Harper spokeswoman, denied Monday that Brodie or anyone in Harper's office leaked word of the memo or meeting.
Harper and the Canadian Embassy, meanwhile, expressed regret about how the discussions from the memo have been interpreted. Embassy officials said in a statement "there was no intention to convey, in any way, that Senator Obama and his campaign team were taking a different position in public from views expressed in private, including about NAFTA."
Bob Shrum, who has advised former Democratic presidential candidates, accused Canada's Conservatives of "actively interfering" in the U.S. election campaign on NBC's Meet the Press on Sunday.
"You've got a right-wing government in Canada that is trying to help the Republicans and is out there actively interfering in this campaign," Shrum said.
Rob Kall is executive editor and publisher of OpEdNews.com, President of Futurehealth, Inc, inventor . He is also published regularly on the Huffingtonpost.com and is a columnist with Northstarwriters.com. He is a frequent Speaker on Politics, Impeachment, The art, science and power of story, heroes and the hero's journey, Positive Psychology, Stress, Biofeedback and a wide range of subjects. He is a campaign consultant specializing in tapping the power of stories for issue positioning, stump speeches and debates. He recently retired as organizer of several conferences, including StoryCon, the Summit Meeting on the Art, Science and Application of Story and The Winter Brain Meeting on neurofeedback, biofeedback, Optimal Functioning and Positive Psychology. See more of his articles here and, older ones, here.
To learn more about me and OpEdNews.com, check out this article.
and there are Rob's quotes, here.
To Watch me on youtube, having a lively conversation with John Conyers, Chair of the House Judiciary committee, click here Now, wouldn't you like to see me on the political news shows, representing progressives. If so, tell your favorite shows to bring me on and refer them to this youtube video
My radio show, The Rob Kall Show, runs 9-10 PM EST Wednesday evenings, on AM 1360, WNJC and is archived on www.whiterosesociety.org Or listen to it streaming, live at either www.wnjc1360.com or here.
A few declarations.
-While I'm registered as a Democrat, I consider myself to be a dynamic critic of the Democratic party, just as, well, not quite as much, but almost as much as I am a critic of republicans.
-My articles express my personal opinion, not the opinion of this website.
It look to me like Clinton, OBama and McCain are all ruling-elite stooges when it comes to "free trade." No one mentions asking the people whether they want this regime which is destroying the USA and First world. and
making us abjectly dependent on a totalitarian capitalist society. The worst of worlds is emerging as a result - i.e., global oligarchy, global oligopoly, and the demise of the dollar.
Kent Welton,
OligarchyUSA.com
by
Kent Welton (56 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 41 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 12:37:24 PM
First off, you like living like this Rob? Bless you.
Freaking amazing. Nothing surprises anymore. IMHO, it has been decided that the US, Canada and Mexico shall be joined. What better way than to speak and begin the dialogue as if there is a social and political connection between the three.
On Feb 14th, an agreement was signed to allow Canadian and U.S troops to be allowed into each others country in case of "civil emergency". Harper was silent on the signing agreement. (see below)
SPP meetings, complete with 25 mile radius military protection of the attendees, video reports of Canadian military infiltrators into the protestors of the 'talks' ranks are available on youtube. (see below)
This is all so telling not in the effect it has or hasn't on Obama or Hillary or the nonsense that passes for 'spin'. No, what is telling is that the conversation is being made now to define the interwoven nature of our countries by ignoring the soverignty of each country. Again, It is not about anything more that bringing the '3' one step closer by speaking in tongues.
Start your engines and welcome to the NAU 500.
peace
by
mikel paul (11 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 442 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 1:10:54 PM
I don't know why people get so exercised by the idea of a North American union. The desire to annex Canada was a major reason for the War of 1812. Then we took half of Mexico in 1848. Now we just want to finish the job.
by
Gregg Gordon (26 articles, 47 quicklinks, 15 diaries, 199 comments)
on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 12:00:08 AM
I am not against any cooperation between countries. I do not fear communication, nor the varied positives that can be attained through trade and sharing of resoruces and knowledge. What I do find reprehensible is the collusion to make agreements below the radar without congressional oversight, meetings that are first denied, then admitted to, for-show press meetings that answer straw men issues.
With this latest signed agreement sharing our military forces in such ambiguous and worrisome terms, I am very concerned that it is not as you humorously suggest just a continued land grabbing expedition for the U.S., but truly another puzzle piece of the movement towards an end to our soverign Constitution as well as Canadas and Mexicos. The fact that it is being spoken of and agreements are being made without constitutional and congressional oversight, not to mention that we the people are for the most part utterly left out, is appalling to me.
I welcome your thoughts as I know a closed book is not my goal. I would love to hear your views on my over sensitivity on this.
I have watched the forming of the EU and the beginning of the APU. Much of what is happening looks to be against the will of many of the peoples of these affected countries. 7 times the E.U. has been voted down by vote. It still happened. It is a bit unnerving that the will of the folks in Europe was and is not being followed. In there somewhere is my doubt this is above board.
peace
by
mikel paul (11 articles, 1 quicklinks, 7 diaries, 442 comments)
on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 11:15:17 AM
No good neighbour interferes in the elections or primaries of another party. It just isn't done. Yes America seems to have been remiss in this respect in the past (Venezuela, Panama, Chile, etc.etc.) but two or more wrongs do not make a right. Canada's government has no business commenting or arranging the outing of confidential information (true or not) relating in any way to the U.S. primaries and Mr. Harper and his right wing enablers should be roundly chastised for doing so.
by
Archie (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 1271 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 1:24:47 PM
And how did Mr. Harper get elected in the first place?
Surely Bush/Cheney & Co help to elect their allies. Absolutely. Deibold and ES&S are in wide play in Canada, especially in metropolitan areas and they certify their machines following US certification standards (which means there are no standards or protections for voters JUST LIKE HERE).
Harper is a neo-con through and through. He probably has Rove on voice dial.
"Karl!"
by
Kathlyn Stone (42 articles, 227 quicklinks, 27 diaries, 663 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 3:39:18 PM
So does Obama really represent any meaningful change? The buzz words are progressive - but the devil will be in the details.
We vote once every 4 years with a two year "change is in the air" campaign, then let's see who gets taken and who gets the free ride.
And while the "change is in the air" campaign distracts the sleeping giant into thinking if we only wait until the next President... meanwhile the evil doers in power continue to accelerate the trashing of our country while the stooges in Congress and the Senate - do absolutely nothing.
Change? Please.
by
August Adams (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 458 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 1:33:44 PM
Any Canadian citizen who shows even a passing interest...
in developments to the south of their border should come to understand that the deteriorating economy, degraded liberty and regressive social contract here in the U.S. is a pattern for what will eventually befall them in turn. Unless they really like what they see, I'm sure they will cast their votes to head it off.
They should just be careful not to cast them on Diebold, ESS or Sequoia Systems.
by
John Sanchez Jr. (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 1266 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 1:37:08 PM
Very incite full piece of investigative reporting Rob. From the position of a Canadian patriot and friend of the American people, there is no question that we need a renegotiated trade agreement that is people centered rather than corporate centered. NAFTA was a corporate driven deal and has proved to be the foundation for the coming Security and Prosperity Partnership (SPP) agreement.The SPP is a Corporate bill of rights that will supersede the constitutions (or what is left of them) and any human rights and social legislation of both -- make that all three as we must include Mexico, our good neighbour to the south -- of our countries. It is curious to me that this coming deal is being opposed in the US by the right from it’s sovereignty restricting issues when it make the multinational corporation the sovereign entity which is a benefit to the power elite. It should be opposed and vociferously by the left for its production of economic slavery for the American people to the corporation.Of coarse all this may be mute as I believe that as long as you folks have an unaccountable and unverifiable electronic voting system, it is unlikely that a president will be chosen that is not bought and paid for by the corporate masters.
by
John Hill (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 5 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 1:44:23 PM
Although Barack Obama's primary economic advisor, Austan Goolsbee, disputes the interpretation of his meeting with Joseph DeMora (an employee of the Canadian consulate in Chicago) and Georges Rioux (the Canadian consul general in Chicago), the memorandum written by Mr. DeMora about this meeting and which was based on notes taken by Mr. DeMora, indicates that Mr. Goolsbee was trying to soft-pedal any anti-NAFTA statements made by Mr. Obama as campaign rhetoric. Despite the media hype, this development is not surprising because both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton have tried to be on both sides of the NAFTA debate, but it is disappointing to watch Mr. Obama behaving somewhat like a typical politician in the tradition of Ms. Clinton. I oppose the "free trade" agreements made by the United States because these trade agreements have been structured in a manner that is primarily beneficial to corporations (especially multinational corporations) and international investors, and these trade agreements have been detrimental to the interests of most workers (particularly in the United States). Nevertheless, this morning I voted for Barack Obama in the Vermont Presidential Primary, and I expect Barack Obama will be the Democratic nominee for President, and I plan to vote for Barack Obama in November, and I expect Barack Obama will become President on January 20, 2009. When I voted for Barack Obama, I did so with my eyes open because I do not think Barack Obama has any intention of pursuing substantive changes to NAFTA.
by
Blaine Kinsey (10 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 43 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 2:59:01 PM
Quoting form Jack Layton to support your case, you will be laughed out of your office straight into the lunatic asylum in Canada!
Jack Layton is a ultra socialist knee-jerk anti-American bigot who supports the Taliban conquest of the Canadian army fighting there. In Canada, even left-wing newspapers call him Taliban-Jack. He is further left than Dick Cheney is to the far right. He is a well-known loud-month brain-challenged joke in Canadian politics, head of the NDP party who has only a few seats in Parliament. He makes his living yelling at everybody in Question Period because nobody pay attention to him. Above all, he is 99.5% anti-American - he even hates Ralph Nader, which his own press secretary finds strange.
Do me a favor. Don't ever quote Jack Layton again and save your reputation.
by
TomK (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 232 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 3:52:36 PM
would call Jack Layton an "ultra socialist knee-jerk anti-American bigot." He's not even socialist-lite. He's about point-oh-five degrees left of centre. And he's not anti-American; he's anti-Anschluss.
by
delia (0 articles, 1 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 112 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 5:36:08 PM
The real thrust of this tale was that someone from the Obama camp assured Canadian officials that the candidate had no intention of altering the NAFTA agreement. Now it seems Rob is implying, not that Obama may have said one thing to the American public and another to the representative of the Canadian government, but that, somehow, th ereal villian is a right wing Canadian leader who is attempting to influence the election.
On the face of things I could infer that Rob himself is attempting something rather similar.....If indeed a member of the Obama camp spoke as is reported, and did so in his candidate's name then the facts seem clear enough, Obama lied, again.........Tim, Tim Gatto, where are you guy, you have received yet another vindication.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 5:50:26 PM
Real simple. US right wing prefers to run against Hillary. They get right wing friends in Canada to write a memo then leak it- one that makes the candidate they prefer less to look bad.
Ardee, are you a Neocon? Do you WANT to see another right winger in the whitehouse. Is that what you're about?
Me, I don't like right wingers in the US or in Canada. That's consistency.
by
Rob Kall (857 articles, 3983 quicklinks, 343 diaries, 1821 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 10:10:10 PM
but not from you Kall! You have got a great deal of nerve and no aptitude at all for propaganda. In two days you shifted the thrust of this story from an Obama aide assuring Canada that Senator Obama was committed to NAFTA and globalism to a plot by right wing Canadians to throw the election to Senator Clinton. Thats really a stretch and a descent into falsehoods that wont pass muster.
For Tony Wade. When you get your head out of your rectum and your ego off the ceiling you might then be fit to speak with the adults. But certainly not until then.
by
ardee D. (6 articles, 4 quicklinks, 1 diaries, 2377 comments)
on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 6:48:36 AM
Right after Obama (& Hillary) said they will opt out of NAFTA unless re-negotiated, Obama chief economic advisor Goolsby (a Harvard professor) asked for a meeting with Cdn officials in the Chicago embassy, which he got. Cdn officials listened as Goolsby directly reverses Obama's NAFTA position, saying it is all politics. When Cdn federal politicians were forced to discuss the extraordinary Obama/Clinton NAFTA statements in Parliament, the Chicago embassy officials forwarded the Goolsby conversation back to Ottawa, which became public. That's it for the Canadian side - they were dragged into this, first by Obama statement (without prior consultations with NAFTA partners), then by his chief economic advisor's action. If Goolsby did this without Obama's knowledge, Obama should say so and remove him. He did not. But If Goolsby went under Obama's direction, the Obama is a lier and a sneeky political operator. Either way, Obama credibility must suffer - due entirely of his own making.
by
TomK (0 articles, 0 quicklinks, 0 diaries, 232 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 10:41:56 PM
The Canadian embassy in Chicago initiated the meeting. A canadian who took the notes clearly misinterpreted Ghoolsby's remarks (to cast it in the best light), the notes went to the embassy in Washington, D.C., and from there to Ottawa where they were leaked.
by
John Sanchez Jr. (6 articles, 0 quicklinks, 12 diaries, 1266 comments)
on Tuesday, March 4, 2008 at 10:55:55 PM
Its nice to see that some politicians are held accountable
Its nice to see an open forum where politicians can be held accountable for their actions and are forced to respond openly about them, as well as politicians with the spine to call those actions out.
by
Ben Kall (1 articles, 16 quicklinks, 5 diaries, 35 comments)
on Wednesday, March 5, 2008 at 12:55:50 AM
I submit this information as someone who hopes and expects that Barack Obama will become our next President, but I also think Mr. Obama's record as a U.S. Senator has been much less progressive than his campaign rhetoric. The economic advisor to Barack Obama who is at the center of this controversy is Austan Goolsbee (I also misspelled his name two days ago), and he is a professor at the University of Chicago (not Harvard Univ.), but his political views are more progressive than those of the deceased University of Chicago icon, Milton Friedman. The Canadian embassy in Washington indicated that Canadian consular officials in Chicago initiated the contact with Mr. Goolsbee, but it is disingenuous of Obama campaign spokesman, Bill Burton, to state that Mr. Goolsbee's attendance at the meeting was unrelated to Mr. Goolbee's status as Mr. Obama's primary economic advisor. Although Mr. Goolsbee disputes the interpretation of his meeting with Joseph DeMora (an employee of the Canadian consulate
