- Mr. Harper, I Know Canada and You, Sir, Are Not Canada

Submitted: 9:43am, PDT, 13 Oct.'10 CBC News - not posted
Submitted: 12:06pm, PDT, 13 Oct.'10 CBC News

Cannon blames Ignatieff for Canada's UN vote loss, Liberal leader refuses to accept blame
Last Updated: Tuesday, October 12, 2010
http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/10/12/un-vote012.html?ref=rss&loomia_si=t0:a16:g2:r1:c0.0697062:b38308714

Stephen Harper - Some "International Player"! Step Aside and Let Ignatieff Take Over While Canada Still has Some Pride and Dignity on the International Stage.

The result of Harper, Flaherty, Cannon, "punching above their weight" in the International ring, . . . KO'd

It is ludicrous and an embarrassment on the International stage to have Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister blame Ignatieff for the loss in the vote. It is crass, totally lacking in class.

Harper, Canon and the Cons 'poor loser' attitude, in and of itself, justifies the loss. What country at the UN would want this type of petty partisanship and refusal to accept responsibility for its actions not only sitting on the Security Counsel but taking a rotation at the Presidency.

For Harper to say (thru Soudas) that Ignatieff's earlier comments had '"spread like wildfire" to diplomatic missions around the globe', is beyond ludicrous (and I strongly suspect without any factual basis whatsoever - also, as everyone is suggesting, if Ignatieff has so much more influence on the International community than Harper, then why is Harper the one running this country). Harper ought to be too embarrassed to suggest such a thing. What happened to the dignity of the office of PM for Canada. This of course is just another instance of the fundamental Harper policy of 'it is never my fault'.

Canadians have to ask a tough question: 'How much more injury ought we take from Harper and the Con's running this great and proud country of ours?'

For the record it is clear that Ignatieff was referring to Harper and the Con government when he asked the rhetorical question 'Has this government earned that place?'

Confusing 'this government' with 'Canada' demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding about the Harper regime.

Quite simply, Stephen Harper does not represent Canada, he is supported by a small sector (33%) of die-hard right wing extremists, epi-centre in Alberta and the vast majority of Canadians be dam[redacted]ed. This is a prime example of how Harper's views on International affairs not only does not represent Canada's but is implements despite the best interests of all Canadians.

Also, it is manifestly clear that the vast majority of nations were not convinced Harper and the Con's had "earned that place".

On 10 Oct.'10, I posted:

"I agree that Canada will very likely get on of the seats on the Security Counsel, since they get one every 10 years or so plus Canada's long and proud history in International Affairs before Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada took the helm.

We can only hope that the International community is writing Harper and the Con's off to a 'right wing extremism anomaly in Canada's history'
. . .
Also, perhaps the International Community is banking on that by the time Canada's turn to hold the presidency come around, we will have a moderate government in line with Canada's great traditions in the International community."

Unfortunately I was mistaken.

Lloyd MacILquham cicblog.com/comments.html