The Latest Addition To The Harper Enemies List

... apparently are army chaplains who speak truth to power.

Although technically she wasn't fired, (she offered her resignation, which was accepted), Rev. Sandra Tankard incurred the displeasure of both her local Legion and her Conservative MP, Greg Rickford:

The Royal Canadian Legion in Kenora, Ont., accepted the resignation of its chaplain on Monday, after some members and the local Conservative MP complained her remarks about Veterans Affairs and Afghanistan War veterans at a Remembrance Day service were too political.

During the Nov. 11 legion service, Rev. Sandra Tankard spoke out about concerns that veterans who fought in Afghanistan are not getting proper care, and then talked about cuts to Veterans Affairs.

Here is the offending comment, a very small part of an eloquent speech Tankard gave during her Remembrance Day service:

Our Government has continued to cut funding to the Ministry of Veteran’s Affairs, including removing Service Offices.

Like many other members of the Royal Canadian Legion, I claim my right to dissent against this action, both with my voice and a letter to my MP and with the promise of my vote to the party that would restore that funding to the people and programs it has supported!

After the service,

Tankard said local Conservative MP Greg Rickford approached her directly and expressed his "displeasure" about her remarks.

Asked what others could learn from her experience, Rev Tankard observed, rather wryly and with some restraint,

"perhaps it is that the freedoms we have to speak are not necessarily as vibrant as they once were."

Undoubtedly that is a sentiment Canadians from many walks of life would heartily concur with.

He's So Much More Than Just a Prime Minister. He's a Real Bastard

"This government — which swaggers around in fatigues, pretending to be a friend of the Canadian Forces — has a lot to answer for..." - Colin Kenny

Stephen Harper is a well-rounded bastard. If bastardy was an Olympic sport, he'd be a decathlete. He's a lying bastard. He's a manipulative bastard. He's a sneaky bastard. He's a mean old bastard. He's a rotten bastard, rotten to the core. He's a stubborn bastard. He's a selfish bastard. He's an incompetent bastard. He's an arrogant bastard. He's a thoroughly nasty bastard. Did I mention he's a bully and a blowhard?

Liberal senator Colin Kenny shows how Harper fits the bill on bastardy in his outrageous and hypocritical treatment of the Canadian Armed Forces and Canada’s “muscular” foreign policy.

Canada’s defence budget as a percentage of GDP peaked at two per cent under the Trudeau government. It went into steady decline under the Chrétien Liberals, looked like it would expand long-term when the Harper government came to power, then plummeted.

According the World Bank, it dropped from 1.4 per cent in 2009 to one per cent in 2013. Based on indications that the government is going to continue to tighten military spending, that downward spiral is likely to continue.

Canadians don’t expect their governments to spend as much on their armed forces as countries such as Russia (4.2 per cent of GDP) or the U.S. (3.8 per cent). But when non-combative countries such as Norway (1.4 per cent), Denmark (1.4 per cent) and Sweden (1.2 per cent) are spending more, you know you have a government that’s putting the squeeze on our military.

...Canadians already have a small military — and it just keeps shrinking. Not in numbers, because the government knows the optics of reducing personnel, juxtaposed with repeated failures to replace essential equipment, would confirm that the government isn’t much interested in the military at all.

But when you maintain personnel numbers while ordering cuts of 20 per cent in operations and maintenance expenditures, you’re creating a dysfunctional organization that can’t do what it is supposed to do.

Never has a government talked such big talk about investing in its military while allowing it to erode so dramatically.

Canada’s navy, for instance, is going to be without a lot of essential ships after this government has left the scene.

The same applies to key aircraft for the air force.

It’s nice to hear strong words condemning Putin’s perfidy in Ukraine. But they ring a bit hollow when they mask not-so-nice weakness in this country’s capacity to back them up.

Sideshow Steve Harper is a goddamned liar. Everybody knows it, none better than those closest to him. Back before his fall from grace, back when he was one of Steve’s BFFs, Harper mentor Tom Flanagan told a gathering of Saltspring Islanders that it was standard operating procedure for this prime minister to say whatever he figures people want to hear, assure them his government is doing or will do this or that, and then do nothing or sometimes do just the opposite. That’s a lying bastard the likes of which we’ve never seen reigning over Parliament Hill.

MoS, the Disaffected Lib

Urban Camouflage for Canada's Soldiers?

The past dozen or so years have left most of us familiar with the pixelated camouflage pattern, pioneered in Canada, and worn by many nations’ soldiers in Afghanistan and Iraq. The Americans are now going back to a more traditional camouflage for their combat uniforms. Canada, however, is not. We already have three variants of the pixelated pattern – a rich green pattern for temperate forests, the desert tan we see so often and a white/grey winter-Arctic camo.

It turns out there’s a fourth pixelated pattern under development, an urban camouflage that our warriors can use presumably in our cities. The pattern is supposed to emulate conditions in Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal.

It’s called CUEPAT, Canadian Urban Environment Pattern, and it’s designed so that your little warfighter can be concealed in our cities.

The requirement is to have an urban pattern which works in the unique requirements of Canada’s three major metropolitan areas, Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal. The current CBR (Chemical Biological, Radioactive) individual protective equipment (IPE) used by the Canadian military is provided in a woodland or desert camouflage. A camouflage suited to the Canadian urban environment is required when the military operates in urban terrain.

The military issued this specification: “Determine design parameters for an advanced Canadian urban environment camouflage patter (focus on Vancouver, Toronto and Montreal urban settings). Consider ...unique colour blends that would improve the users concealment in a range of urban environments.”

Do we really want our own military to be focusing on concealing our soldiers in our cities? To what end, exactly? What’s the threat that they perceive warrants an urban camouflage capability? Northern Gateway, perhaps? Like the American military, do they foresee mass uprisings and civil disobedience that will have to be countered with military intervention? I don’t think I’m okay with this, are you?

MoS, the Disaffected Lib

An F-35 Update From The Mound Of Sound

The Mound of Sound sent along this note, followed by his guest post on the F-35:

I thought an update on the F-35 would be appropriate after reading Bill Sweetman’s latest piece in Aviation Week. He writes that this warplane’s Canadian backers are desperate to convince us that we don’t need to put the F-35 through an actual competition.

Canadian supporters of the F-35 marginally stealthy, light attack bomber are so convinced that the F-35 would trounce its rivals in an actual, head-to-head competition that they argue fiercely we should have no such competition.

Aviation Week says we're being conned.

F-35 backers point to various foreign orders as proof that the Lockheed bomber is a world-beater but the truth is that the Joint Strike Fighter has never flown against the other aircraft on the market. Why not? Partly because the problem-plagued warplane is so far behind schedule. Partly because it can't out-turn, out-climb, outrun or out-distance its opposition. What paltry advantage it may eke out in stealth is more than offset by its lack of the Holy Grail of aerial combat, Supercruise - the range-extending ability to achieve sustained, supersonic speeds without fuel-guzzling afterburner.

Aviation Week's Bill Sweetman discussed the F-35's mythical stealth in an article entitled, "Smoke and Mirrors":

To suggest that the F-35 is VHF-stealthy is like arguing that the sky is not blue - literally, because both involve the same phenomenon. The late-Victorian physicist Lord Rayleigh gave his name to the way that electromagnetic radiation is scattered by objects that are smaller than its wavelength. This applies to the particles in the air that scatter sunlight, and aircraft stabilizers and wingtips that are about the same meter-class size as VHF waves.

The counter-stealth attributes of VHF ...were known at the dawn of stealth, in 1983, when MIT's Lincoln Laboratory ordered a 150-ft.-wide radar to emulate Russia's P-14 Oborona VHF early warning system. Lockheed Martin's Fort Worth division should know about that radar - they built it.

VHF-stealth starts with removing the target's tails, as on the B-2, but we did not know how to do that on a supersonic, agile airplane, when the (F-35) specifications were written.

Sweetman adds that the threats of the mid-90s that the F-35 was designed to thwart are, like the F-35 itself, a thing of the past.

The threats of the late 2010s will be qualitatively different. Old VHF radars could be dealt with by breaking the kill chain between detection and tracking: They did not provide good enough cueing to put analog, mechanically scanned tracking radars on to the target. Active, electronically scanned array (AESA), high-power VHF radars and decimeter- and centimeter-wave trackers are more tenacious foes.

We would do well to remember that America did not invent stealth technology. The mathematical formulae for angles and ratios were the brainchild of a Russian mathematician. American defence experts had the paper translated and they were off to the stealth races. The point is that stealth is not some magical technology as we're often given to believe. There are no 'invisible' airplanes and never will be. What that means is that, in evaluating warplanes, stealth should be given its due but no more, and we cannot overlook sacrifices it requires in cost and performance. When it comes to the F-35, you're shelling out a lot and giving up a lot for the sake of a far less than invincible technology.

After Cutting Through The Sanctimonious Rhetoric

...it is apparent that, like most governments, the Harper regime has been quite content to recruit, exploit and ultimately abandon those who, in good faith, joined the armed forces to support a 'muscular adventurism' that has both tarnished and diminished Canada's standing in the real (i.e., excluding the U.S.) international community.

Ample evidence of this abandonment is to be found in the words of those veterans and military widows who gathered on Parliament Hill just prior to Remembrance Day, words that paint a stark picture of bureaucratic indifference and red tape that flies in the face of reassurances from the government, which says the care of military families is a top priority.

Retired master corporal Dave Desjardins, who was "proud to serve his country" and is paralyzed from the waist down, had the following to offer:

“What I’m not proud of, however, is how our government officials and senior military leadership can look directly into the camera (and) speak to the Canadian public about honouring our veterans at this time of year with implied conviction when they’ve clearly turned their back on us and continue to demonstrate (that) on a daily basis,” said Desjardins.

He challenged Veterans Affairs Minister Steven Blaney to look him in the eye “and tell me you really care.”

You can read the complete sad story, posted in today's Star, here.

The Latest On The F-35

While the militaristic Canadian Conservative regime, led by flyboy fan Steve and aggressively supported by his Defence Minister, the dishonourable member from Central Nova, continue to champion the acquisition of the F-35 as Canada's next big toy, it is apparent to almost all who keep themselves informed that the plane is both inappropriate for our needs and experiencing huge cost overruns in its pre-production phase. Those are facts that no Harper-led denials and progaganda can change.

The latest information about the plane from a rational source suggests a surprisingly inexpensive alternative to what will become a financial albatross if the Harperites get their way. You can read Peter Morton's thoughts here.

Guess Who Doesn't Support Our Troops?

If you guessed Stephen Harper's Conservative Party, you are correct. While dear leader and company pull out all of the rhetorical stops about supporting the troops when it serves their ideological purpose, they are decidedly niggard when it comes to helping them when they are no longer fodder in distant lands.

The most recent insult to those brave men and women (I don't dispute their valour, only the cause that so many gave their lives for) comes from that national disgrace, Calgary West MP Rob Anders (yes the same Anders who embarrassed all of us when he voted against making Nelson Mandela an honorary citizen, decrying him as a communist and a terrorist) when he dozed off while vets were making a committee presentation on homeless vets. Caught in his act of somnolence, he lashed out at the vets, calling them “NDP hacks” and supporters of Vladmir Putin.

Just another of the many reasons Harper and his troops are unfit to govern.

You can read the entire sad tale about Conservative hypocrisy and demagoguery here.