Upholding the Right Position and Opposing Provocations

L-R: British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, President Harry S. Truman, and Soviet leader Josef Stalin

By Ambassador H.E. CONG Peiwu

With regard to U.S. House of Representatives Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s recent visit to China’s Taiwan region, some Canadian media reports asserted the position that Taiwan does not belong to China. Some Canadian pundits claimed that China overreacted to this matter, and some opined that Western countries should support the democracy of Taiwan. Here I would like to make a few clarifications and reiterate China’s position.

First, Taiwan has belonged to China since ancient times. This statement has a sound basis in history and jurisprudence. The Taiwan Affairs Office of the State Council and the State Council Information Office of the People’s Republic of China (PRC) published a white paper titled The Taiwan Question and China’s Reunification in the New Era, shedding light on the historical Taiwan question and the fact that both the mainland and Taiwan belong to one China.

Around the end of the Second World War, both the Cairo Declaration of 1943 and the Potsdam Proclamation of 1945 were very clear about China’s rights over Taiwan. All the Allied powers agreed that “All the territories Japan has stolen from China, such as Northeast China, Taiwan and Penghu Islands, should be restored to China”.

The 1971 UNGA Resolution No. 2758  declared the restoration of all rights to the PRC and reaffirmed the one-China principle. There is but one China in the world, and Taiwan is part of that China. As such, the Government of the PRC is the sole legal government representing the whole of China. This is a basic norm of international relations confirmed by UNGA Resolution No. 2758. It is a commitment agreed to by the USA in the three China-US joint communiqués. There is no room for ambiguity or arbitrary interpretation.

Second, China’s countermeasures are legitimate, reasonable, necessary and measured. The causes f  tension n he Taiwan Strait are very clear, and so are the merits. It is the United States hat has instigated the trouble. It is the United States that created he urrent crisis, and it is the United States that keeps escalating tensions.

In the face of deliberate provocation, the Chinese side is forced to take countermeasures. Our position is justified, reasonable and legal. Our counter-measures are firm, strong and measured. Our military exercises are open, transparent and professional. They are compliant within domestic and international laws, as well as consistent with international practices. China’s countermeasures are aimed at maintaining peace across the Taiwan Strait and creating stability throughout the region. 

Non-interference in other countries’ internal affairs is the most important international norm enshrined in the UN Charter. China’s countermeasures are also an effort to safeguard basic norms governing international relations, fairness and justice.

Third, the Taiwan question is, in essence not about democracy. It is a major issue of principle pertaining to China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. What Speaker Pelosi did is definitely not about upholding or defending democracy, but rather a deliberate provocation and infringement on China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. 

More than 170 countries, and many international organizations have reaffirmed their commitment to the one-China principle. We hope that more Canadian media pundits and visionaries begin to clearly recognize the causes and essence of the current crisis, continue to support China’s legitimate position and measures, and jointly safeguard peace in the region and across the Taiwan Strait. 

Response to Shimooka

By Alan Williams

In a recent opinion piece  regarding Canada’s intention to purchase  the F-35A, Richard Shimooka regurgitates the same arguments put forward by the Government in 2010  to support its decision to purchase the F-35A  without a competition.  Both the Government and Mr. Shimooka were convinced that it was the best jet at the best price as well as being  the best option economically. Fortunately, upon examination, Canadians discovered that, at that time,  none of those assertions were valid.

With respect to costs, in 2010 the average procurement cost for an F-35A was about $126 million  including the cost of the engine. However,  at this time Lockheed Martin was just in its fourth low rate initial production contract. Costs were significantly higher than expected and delays were occurring. More ominously, were the high life cycle costs. Its hourly costs were  estimated at over $30,000 per hour, double that of the F-18 Super Hornet.

With respect to the F-35A, in 2010 it was impossible to state that it was the best aircraft for Canada. It was still in its embryonic stage of development. At the time of the announcement, the block 1 software had not yet been completed. Timing of the future software upgrades was still in flux. No one could be assured of its capabilities.

With respect to economic opportunities, they would certainly be plentiful. In fact, that is why I  signed the memorandum of understanding with the U.S. in Feb. 2002 committing Canada to the program. Without joining the program, our industry would have been excluded from bidding on contracts valued at $200 billion-dollars. Nevertheless, it was recognized at that time, that these industrial benefits were not guaranteed and  would pale in comparison to the level of benefits bidders would have to guarantee in a competition.

Lastly, when spending billions of taxpayers’ money, it is vital that there is transparency in the process. Furthermore, the only way to objectively ensure that the military is getting the best product to meet its needs is through a competition. The decision to sole-source in 2010  was unnecessary and the linchpin for the chaos that followed.

 Mr. Shimooka is right when he says, ”this decision set up a decade of strife”. However, he believes we should have gone through with the sole-source decision at that time. I believe we should have conducted an open, fair and transparent competition to replace our jets in a timely fashion.

Everyone's an Expert

By Michael Nickerson

You won’t believe this, but hear me out. There was this paratrooper on an actual mission who decided not to jump. Just sat there and refused to budge. Seems he’d been reading up on the safety of parachutes after a friend shared a link sent to him by a cousin of his wife’s former gardener. And boy did he find some shocking stories about failed parachutes and their effect on the human body. Erectile dysfunction, blood clots, heart damage, even death! And he also found out that it happens a lot more often than people are letting on. So he told his fellow soldiers to go be sheep if they wanted to, but he was staying put.

But wait for the kicker: after having demonstrated some serious, outside-the-box critical thinking, he didn’t receive the plaudits and promotion he so richly deserved, but was instead kicked out of the military! Can you believe that?

Well here’s hoping you employed a bit of critical thinking of your own and said bollocks before ever getting past the first sentence. Of course it didn’t happen; made the whole ludicrous thing up…sort of. See, all you need to do is to insert “covid vaccine” for “parachute” and you’re away to the races. Where once it was nonsensical it suddenly becomes common sense for far too many.

I speak of course of the vaccine hesitancy that has many Canadians with too much internet access digging in their heels and refusing “the shot.” Why? It’s a plot by Bill Gates to inject microchips into the unsuspecting public, or just another overreach by governments wanting to control the masses, or because it causes infertility, autism, or will alter your DNA. There’s even talk about swollen testicles and people turning into monkeys…I kid you not.

Now in the case of Lt.-Col. Illo Antonio Neri, an RCAF pilot with 28 years of service, it’s because he apparently managed to squeeze in medical training during his off hours. You see, in an affidavit filed while trying to get the courts to intervene and stop disciplinary action for not getting vaccinated as ordered he stated  “I do not have confidence in the government’s declaration that they are safe and effective.”  

At this point there have been almost 10 billion vaccine doses administered around the world with nary an exploding testicle. As vaccines go, these are about as safe as you can get. Will we find that at some point in the decades to come there might be long-term problems? Well anything is technically possible, but I can only wonder how Lt.-Col. Neri gets through a preflight checklist without running from the cockpit with visions of engine fires or failing hydraulics dancing in his head.

I’m going to suggest he has gotten off the ground for the last 28 years because he trusts the engineers who design his planes, and the mechanics who maintain them, to say nothing of the basic physics behind that voodoo thing called flight. Yet he, along with over nine hundred fellow members of the armed service, is risking dismissal over accepting a simple jab. 

To be fair, armed service members are way ahead of the general public when it comes to getting vaccinated, with close to 99% versus some 84% having braved the needle. However, that there is hesitancy at all speaks to a larger problem, namely how small groups of people are putting the rest of us in danger for selfish and ignorant reasons. Unvaccinated military personnel are placing themselves ahead of their fellows and their mission, defying an eminently reasonable direct order. And citizens who do the same don’t seem to care a wit about overflowing hospitals and burnt-out nurses or those who have gotten sick and died from a virus they are more likely to spread than not, to say nothing of an economy that won’t recover until this pandemic is under control. 

Yet it’s a case of “my body, my choice and to hell with the rest of you”. Armies don’t run very well with that sort of attitude, and neither do societies. But that seems to be what you get when everyone’s an expert.  

Veterans Mental Health Benefits – Improvements At Last

By Michael Blais CD

Good news, readers. I am pleased to note there will be positive amendments to the Veterans Health Care Regulations implemented this year in respect to Mental Health Benefits. On April 1st, 2022 , policies will be revised to ensure that Veterans Affairs Canada (VAC) has the capability to provide expedient mental health support to those who are coping with service-related trauma and are seeking assistance from VAC.

The current regulations stipulate that the department cannot provide direct support to the individual until after the veteran’s application has been properly processed, adjudicated, and a favourable decision has been rendered with the requested treatment options formally approved.

Until now, veterans have been confronted by an administrative nightmare, exacerbated by a stressful, time consuming, delay-incurring period wherein the veteran fulfills VAC’s requisites in order to substantiate their claim with the appropriate referrals from doctors, psychiatrists and/or psychologists.

It is very often the case that several months will pass before appointments with mental health professionals can be undertaken and the doctor, psychologist or psychiatrist complies with VAC’s documentary requirements thereby allowing the individual’s file to be formally processed.

Some delays are further exacerbated through persistent departmental staffing deficiencies and processing backlogs resulting in consequential delays of approvals, service delivery and the provision of appropriate benefits.

During the 2019-2020 assessment period, in 76% of the cases reported,VAC failed to meet the department’s delivery service standards (of 16 weeks) for veterans submitting their first application.

Privately VAC officials have admitted that they are aware of some veterans among us who have waited over two years for mental health benefits.

Objectively, our collective understanding about military-related mental trauma has evolved in quantum leaps in the aftermath of the war in Afghanistan. The impact of hundreds of Afghanistan veterans seeking assistance as they deal with very complex forms of mental trauma has forced those changes.

Veterans advocates have successfully lobbied for a variety of reforms, including a successful campaign on many levels to which the current government has been responsive through creating programs which have inarguably improved the quality of life for both the traumatized veteran, and their dependants.

However, tragic experience has defined just how vital it is to ensure formal intervention is applied in a timely manner and that the administrative delays resulting in deferment of support until a decision has been rendered, can have profound, or even catastrophic consequences.

The current restrictions as defined within the Mental Health Benefits regulations deny expedient support to the veteran until the veteran’s claim has been positively adjudicated and the treatment request is approved by the department.

This will change for the better as of April 1, 2022.

As of this date, veterans will have access to specific treatment benefits “that have been attributed to military service and pertain to disorders for anxiety, depression, trauma and stress” commencing upon the date which the application is received by VAC.

Veterans who have submitted claims that are currently in the backlog queue will be eligible for VAC’s Mental health benefits as of April 1st. Should the source of the individual’s trauma be deemed non-service-related by the mental health professionals, the veteran will be provided a two year period in which to secure resources beyond the VAC’s sphere of influence.

VAC will continue to provide mental health benefits until this period ends and these funds will not have to be reimbursed by the individual due to an adverse ruling. Veterans who have been “dishonourably” discharged yet have still endured mental trauma applicable to their military service will not be excluded.

These changes are outstanding.

Veterans residing beyond Canada’s borders, however, will be excluded. This is fundamentally unfair and willfully detrimental to these ex-pat veterans’ health, well being and quality of life. It is my long held belief that there must be total equality in recognition of national sacrifice.

Restrictions on access to medical cannabis until a claim has been formally approved will also pose a significant obstruction to a veteran’s well being and thereby create a second standard of support which is bereft of consideration for the veteran. This policy is simply focused on moderating the department’s expenses rather than on the provision of effective medication.

Hopefully, we shall not have another generation of pharmacuetical-addicted veterans when a far less dangerous, yet seemingly equally effective resource in the form of medical cannabis (particularly non-psychoactive CBD), has been provided to our veterans suffering from mental trauma for years?

Mark the date: April 1st, 2022. If your application is somewhere in the cue, reach out to VAC should they fail to notify you of the changes.  

Valour in the Presence of the Enemy

By Michael Blais CD

Canadians acknowledge military valour with three potential decorations. Candidates for the Medal of Military Valour are chosen due to “an act of valor or devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy.”  The Star of Military Valor, second on the tier, would be awarded “for distinguished and valiant service in the presence of the enemy”. The Victoria Cross, the supreme level of recognition, is awarded for “the most conspicuous bravery, a daring or preeminent act of valor or self sacrifice or extreme devotion to duty in the presence of the enemy.”

In the presence of the enemy is the central theme. To date, ninety nine Canadians have been awarded the traditional Victoria Cross. None have been deemed worthy since the Conservative government created the Canadian Victoria Cross in 2008. That was at a time of our nation’s history when Canada was sustaining casualties in Afghanistan at a rate unseen since the Korean War. The political theatrics surrounding the public announcement led to high expectations from Canadians that the 100th recipient of the V.C and thereby also the first Canadian Victoria Cross would be determined during the course of the war in Afghanistan. However, the Conservatives deemed that the requisite levels of “conspicuous acts of valour” were not met and thus rendered the Canadian VC a headline without substance. While the war in Afghanistan may have not concluded as many Canadian pundits envisioned, this should not detract from the fact that several Canadian soldiers selflessly performed incredible acts of bravery, courage and self sacrifice, wherein the heroic acts of one individual saved the lives of many.

The Afghanistan War is over, the government of that era has been replaced and past excuses pertaining to VC deferment under the guise that another, greater act of glory could yet be committed, are as lame as the treatment our war wounded received from VAC when returning from Afghanistan. Fortunately, many of the adverse issues affecting the health and well being of Canada’s war traumatized have been redressed by the current Liberal government. While there continues to be contentious issues in respect to expedient adjudication, service delivery and competent staffing levels, there have been important policy changes which have improved the quality of life of our Afghan veterans who were adversely affected by the deepty reviled New Veterans Charter.

The time now has come for the Liberal government to redress the political failure thus far to award the Canadian Victoria Cross. It is time for the veterans’ community to rally behind the efforts of General (ret’d) Rick Hillier and the non profit organization Valour in the Presence of the Enemy. This initiative is supported by every former Task Force Commander who led troops in the Afghanistan war. These former officers have taken the lead, conducting due diligence research on each of the recipients of the Star of Valour citations to determine who, if anyone, fulfilled the criteria to warrant the Victoria Cross. As a result, they have selected Private Jess LaRochelle, First Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment and they are now advocating that the government review Private Larochelle’s Star of Military Valour citation. Their intent is to include new information that would fulfill the necessary prerequisites for the Victoria Cross. Subsequently this would result in the awarding of the medal to Private Larochelle through royal decree.

Private Jess LaRochelle, First Battalion, The Royal Canadian Regiment

On October 14, 2006, Private Larochelle of the 1st Royal Canadian Regiment Battle Group was manning an observation post when it was destroyed by an enemy rocket in Pashmul, Afghanistan. Although he was alone, severely injured, and under sustained enemy fire in his exposed position at the ruined observation post, he aggressively provided covering fire over the otherwise undefended flank of his company’s position. While two members of the personnel were killed and three others were wounded in the initial attack, Private Larochelle’s heroic actions permitted the remainder of the company to defend their battle positions and to successfully fend off the sustained attack of more than 20 insurgents. His valiant conduct saved the lives of many members of his company.

What is not mentioned in the citation is some vital information which elevates the case for awarding LaRochelle the Victoria Cross. Larochelle’s injuries from the rocket attack were substantial; his back was broken, one of his eyes was blinded through a detached retina, he was deafened in his right ear, and he was briefly concussed. When he regained consciousness, he was confronted with a scene from hell. Two of his regimental brothers were lying dead beside him. three were seriously wounded. The Observation Post (OP) was under sustained attack by over twenty insurgents. He discovered the GPMG he had been manning had been destroyed. Further compounding the situation, the platoon LAVs delegated to provide Fire support for the unit’s flank and the OP were both non serviceable due to weapon stoppages. Larochelle was alone, seriously wounded, half blind, half deaf, yet he chose to fight. He gathered the OP’s 15 M72’s, exposed himself repeatedly to enemy fire while engaging the advancing insurgents with rocket fire so effective the enemy attackers were forced to withdraw. Also noteworthy that Larochelle’s section was short-handed at the time of the attack. He had volunteered to man the OP and after the attack, he remained on the field of battle for twelve hours despite his injuries. He only reported to the medics after he was returned to Kandahar Airfield. After brief medical treatment, he volunteered to carry one of his fallen comrades during the ramp ceremony. Two years later, shrapnel was still egressing from his skin. Ultimately, Private Larochelle’s injuries were deemed career ending. The physical and mental consequences of his acts of heroism resulted in a medical release.

Is this the definition of Victoria Cross recipient? I believe so.

If you concur, you can help. You can be part of the solution by engaging your MP and the Prime Minister of Canada on two levels. We must understand this will be a political decision and if we are to prevail in this noble effort,  we must collectively win the hearts and minds of the Prime Minister and the parliament of Canada. We must all do our part in outreach and awareness. Once you’ve sent your emails, reach out to friends and family to encourage them to be force multipliers by adding their correspondence. Finally, add your name to the parliamentary petition -E3636- Valour in the Face of the Enemy, where over 11000 Canadians have already signed.

Every name counts, so let us rally to the patriot call and unite under General Hillier’s leadership to collectively fight to ensure Private Jess Larochelle, 1RCR is recognized as the first recipient of the Canadian Victoria Cross.

https://petitions.ourcommons.ca/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-3636

Pro Patria – For Country! 

March in the Accused… Military Sexual Assault.

Mike Blais

Recent revelations in respect to the Canadian Armed Forces Military Sexual Misconduct file have done little to improve the overall situation. Instead they have exacerbated the existing schism between those who have been sexually victimized while serving, the flaws in the military justice system and the institutional obstacles which the current government has had to confront in attempting to enact meaningful reforms.

First up on the proverbial docket, the Canadian Forces National Investigative Service (CFNIS) investigation into General (ret’d) Jonathan Vance, the first Canadian Chief of the Defence Staff to be accused of inappropriate behaviour and sexual misconduct. During the CFNIS investigators' formal inquiries, evidence was uncovered which allegedly revealed Vance's attempt to subvert the testimony of his accuser. As a result, a single charge of Obstruction has been laid against Vance by the Crown prosecutors. The government, acknowledging limitations within the military justice system, will continue to pursue the charges through the civilian courts.

Remarkably, the primary CFNIS investigation into General Vance’s alleged sexual misconduct continues. Which begs the logical question; why have charges in respect to Vance’s conduct been delayed? Surely if the CFNIS has sufficient evidence to warrant a charges of Obstruction, they must have sufficient evidence to warrant criminal charges in respect to the allegations of the sexual misconduct which Vance was allegeedly attempting to conceal? This becomes more perplexing when one considers that Vance’s accuser has told her story on national news programs and in testimony before nationally televised appearances before a parliamentary committee?  

Can the CFNIS not pick up their pace? Do these seemingly inexplicable delays in due process not deepen the levels of distrust which the troops have for the military justice system when allegations of misconduct have been levied against senior officers? Do these unreasonable delays not foster the stigma of police incompetence, exacerbate fears that justice is being corrupted by the “Old Boys” network or multi-level Chain of Command intrusions? Do these unrealistic delays not foster the perception that the CFNIS is as inept as the military prosecutors? Do the delays not make the military prosecutors seem lenient and eager to cut a deal with judges when the public record defines how consistently they have collectively failed to grasp the seriousness of the situation.

One major case in point is that of Admiral Art McDonald. Just six weeks after Admiral McDonald replaced Vance as Chief of Defence Staff, he stepped aside from the CDS post to allow a CFNIS investigation into his own alleged sexual misconduct to proceed without the interference of the Chain of Command. Admiral McDonald has repeatedly professed innocence and despite months of terrible publicity, allegations of witness intimidation, parliamentarian theatrics and political opportunism, the CFNIS concluded their high profile investigation last month.

Their finding was that due to the historical nature of the incident in question and the faulty memories of the witnesses, no charges would be laid against Admiral McDonald under the Criminal Code of Canada or, most astonishingly, the military Code of Service Discipline. "Say again, over!" Not even a charge of conduct unbecoming good order and discipline was deemed warranted in this case?

Equally perplexing was when Admiral McDonald unilaterally announced through his lawyers, that it was his intent to return to his position as Canada’s CDS immediately!

“The complaint was unfounded. The absence of any charges — even Under the Code of Service Discipline — is indicative of the absence of blameworthy conduct. As the investigation revealed, the complaint was groundless.”was McDonald’s rationale.

It makes me question whether or not the CFNIS investigators happened to watch McDonald’s accuser, Lieutenant (N) Heather MacDonald. In an interview with Mercedes Stephenson for Global News, Heather McDonald bared her soul to millions of Canadians. I watched her testimony and I believed her to be telling the truth. I was therefore quite saddened to read a quote attributed to her after the CFNIS announced the decision not to lay charges against the Admiral. 

"I am not surprised as this was exactly why I was reluctant to come forward and why most survivors don’t come forward.” said Heather McDonald. "It’s not worth it. I feel a little like I’ve gone through hell for nothing…”

Does this not sound all too familiar?

I somehow suspect that the Trudeau Liberals expected a different outcome. Admiral McDonald currently is on administrative leave and he will likely remain on administrative leave until a new government is formed following this September’s election. General Eyre, recently promoted to full general, has evidently earned the trust of the Prime Minister and Privy Councillors Office, and as such he will continue to serve as the CAF’s acting CDS..

Finally, on Wednesday August 8, Quebec Prosecution Services levied a single charge of sexual misconduct against Maj-Gen Dany Fortin, the former overseer of Canada’s Vaccine rollout campaign. The alleged incident occurred in 1988,  at which time Fortin was an 18 year old officer cadet (student) at Royal Military College, Saint-Jean, Quebec.  Responding to a warrant for his arrest, Fortin attended a police station in Hull, Quebec. He was attired in full dress uniform, accompanied by his wife and lawyers. Maj-Gen Fortin is currently on administrative leave from the CAF. His case will be arraigned on September 20th

Fortin has denied the allegation and has pledged a vigorous defense against not only the sexual misconduct charge, but he also seeks legal recourse against the Canadian government in respect to him not being afforded proper due process and his potentially wrongful dismissal from the COVID-19 task force. To protect the identity of Fortin’s accuser, a publication ban has been imposed.  

More to follow Im sure... 

Rank has its Privileges

By Mike Blais

The title is particularly apt when one is sporting four Maple Leaf’s on their epaulettes and they have been formally appointed by the government to act as the Canadian Armed Forces Chief of Defence Staff.

Apparently one such privilege is immunity from prosecution under the military justice system. As alleged by his paramour, Major Kellie Brennan, General Jonathan Vance would have apparently been correct in telling her that he was “untouchable" and above the law in respect to the military justice system. The Canadian Forces National Investigative Service has finally concluded its investigation into the alleged, two decade, inappropriate sexual relationship between CDS Vance and Maj Brennan. Despite the volumes of public allegations, theCFNIS have come to a remarkable conclusion: Formal military service charges cannot be levied against General Vance. 

According to Global News, DND sources claim this is not due to Vance's actual conduct but rather no military service charges are being laid due to the seniority of Vance’s rank. 

Seriously, his rank? Yes. Seriously.

The Military Police insiders clarified their position by referring Global News to a recently submitted report penned by former Supreme Court Justice Morris Fish. Fish was invited by the federal government to conduct an extensive review of the Canadian Forces military justice system. Justice Fish pointedly noted in his report that potential military service charges against a CDS could not be adjudicated through the military courts  due to the fact that an accused soldier must be judged by a Military court martial composed of officers bearing equivalent or higher rank than the accused. 

There is only one  Chief of Defence Staff, only one  4-Leaf general in the Canadian Armed Forces. Consequently, there are no rank equivalent or superior officers to pass  judgement. 

This is definitely a Catch 22 situation.

“To minimize the risk of rank-based influence, all officers of the CAF should as a general rule be judged by officers of or above their rank. How can this be done when the accused is among the highest general officers in Canada? In my view, the solution is to allow the empanelment of retired officers.",

Regrettably,  the government has yet to implement the reforms Judge Fish recommended in his report. There is no "panel of retired officers" available to process potential charges against the CDS. Military fraternization regulations are not applicable to a civilian court and the consensual relationship between General Vance and Major Brennan, while clearly suspect by military standards, does not  contravene civilian law.

Prime Minister Trudeau has responded to this extraordinary situation by declaring it is "absolutely unacceptable for people to be above the law because of rank." The government is purportedly waiting until reports are submitted by retired Supreme Court Justice Louise Arbour and Lieutenant General Jennie Carignan before making decisions with respect to reforming the military justice system.

General Vance, however, is not out of the legal minefield yet. During the investigation into the alleged inappropriate relationship, Major Brennan provided audio recordings to the military police allegedly revealing the CDS had  attempted to influence her testimony by encouraging her to lie about their relationship. The CFNIS provided these incendiary audio recordings to a civilian prosecutor who, upon deeming the conduct potentially illegal, filed a single Obstruction of Justice charge. 

This is a potentially serious criminal offence. There will be no military procedural Catch 22 this time and he will be called into account for his personal conduct. The court has remanded Vance's case until mid-October when the  participants likely first convene in an Ontario courthouse. 

One question begs, how can there be obstruction of justice when there have been no criminal charges laid? If no laws were broken, how can justice be obstructed? We shall see.

The inappropriate relationship cannot be disputed. Major Brennan testified before a parliamentary committee that General Vance fathered two of her eight children. Recent paternity tests cast doubts on her claims as it has been determined he is definitely not the father of one of the children. However, the child who has been identified as Vance's son or daughter was conceived during a period wherein Vance told Global News that the consensual sexual relationship between himself and Brennan had ended. Did he lie to the media and by extension the Canadian public? Is this not a case for a Conduct unbecoming to the good order and discipline of the CAF? 

If Vance’s actions constituter a military infraction, we now understand, the CDS cannot be held accountable for any transgressions warranting military service charges through the current courts martial structure. 

Clearly, such a situation is untenable. Urgent reforms to the military justice system are definitely required. Procedural deficiencies which provide blanket immunity from prosecution to the Chief of Defence Staff due to their rank seniority must be eliminated. Fish’s finding is no longer a hypothetical scenario. It just got real.

No Canadian should be above the law. 

No  soldier should be above the Military Code of Service Discipline.

Never pass a fault. 

Fish & Chips 2: Punting the Ball

By Vincent J. Curtis

We resume the analysis of the Fish Report, Chapter 2, Sexual Misconduct.

Last time, we observed how convoluted the reasoning gets when Justice Fish recommended eliminating the duty to report service offences to the chain of command in respect of sexual misconduct.  The rationale of solicitousness towards ‘the victim’ kept the chain of command in the dark and unable to respond to the underlying disciplinary problem in the ranks.

He continued.  After saying without proof that victims simply didn’t trust the chain of command, Fish goes on to suggest the SMRC is also untrusted because it’s not fully independent of the chain of command, the VCDS being responsible for its budget.  Strengthening the independence of the SMRC, Fish asserts on the basis of SMRC submissions, “would increase victim confidence in the organization.”  Sounds like empire-building is afoot at SMRC!

How a private soldier in Shilo develops confidence through Ottawa-level bureaucratic machinations Fish doesn’t explain, but the underlying assumption here is that the victim is some fragile entity fearful of command.  Her professional job might involve sticking a bayonet into the guts of some enemy bastard.  How  can a female combat infanteer reasonably be expected to have what it takes to blow somebody’s brains out when she’s also expected to fall to pieces reporting a sexual assault goes unexplored.  But never mind; Fish’s reporting option is supported by Justice Deschamps (passim), the Deputy Minister, the JAG, the SMRC, and “experts in the field” – none of whom are warriors.

Fish finally comes to realize the rationale of special pleading leads to complications after he turns to the duty to report of witnesses.  Removing the duty from witnesses, “might foster a climate in which members remain passive in the face of misconduct.”  Well, yeah!  The principle of special pleading is hanging out there, and if applicable to sexual misconduct, why not to other offenses?  It’s hard to contain a principle like passivity.

While maintaining the duty to report on witnesses “would help find and punish the perpetrators…on the other hand, preserving the duty to report on witnesses might deprive victims of their autonomy, as they would be drawn into the investigative process against their will.”  Fish reached a vicious circle.  Prepare to punt 

The SMRC has recommended that the removal of the duty to report should not apply (the removal being removed!) where there exists “a risk of imminent harm, harm to children, national security.”

At this point, Fish, having realized his position is untenable, punts the ball thusly:

Recommendation #70:  An exception to the duty to report incidents of sexual misconduct should be established for victims, their confidantes, and the health and support professionals consulted by them.  Their duty to report should be retained, however, where a failure to report would pose a clear and serious risk to an overriding interest, which may include ongoing or imminent harm, harm to children, and national security concerns.  A working group should be established to include an independent authority and representatives of the [SMRC], military victims’ organizations and the military justice system.  The working group should also consider (a) the removal of the duty of witnesses to report incidents of sexual misconduct; and (b) requiring witnesses to report incidents of sexual misconduct to the [SMRC] only.

Try explaining that to Herbie on a basic military training course! 

But what happens if a witness reports anyway?  Would he or she be committing an offence by reporting an instance of sexual misconduct without the permission of ‘the victim’?  The whole edifice created to protect ‘the victim who may not be ‘ready’ collapses if a witness reports the offense to the chain of command.

Other problems for Fish: the breadth of “sexual misconduct.”  DAOD 9005-1 misconduct ranges from off-colour jokes to penetrative rape, and Fish treats the entire range with the moral gravity of penetrative rape.  Second, ‘victim’ presumes guilt.  A ‘victim’ is a complainant until the accused is proven guilty.

This leads to Part 3.

Existential Threat - Military Sexual Misconduct

By Michael Blais CD

One can only guess at how severe the impact has been on those serving within the Canadian Armed Forces following months of sordid allegations involving military sexual misconduct, exacerbated by the inept manner in which the Liberal government has dealt with this demoralizing situation. 

Lt-Gen Wayne Eyre,Canada's Acting Chief of Defense Staff (A-CDS), publicly admitted to seeing “cracks” in the Canadian Armed Forces (CAF) institution. Eyre noted that his troops face a manpower shortfall of nearly 2300 personnel, yet they must somehow adapt, overcome and prevail against the challenges posed by both domestic pandemic operations and Canada’s UN / NATO commitments abroad. Lt-Gen Steve Whelan, recently appointed Chief of Military Personnel, subsequently defined the current crisis as an existential threat.

During the past month, the public relations blows to the CAF’s reputation have continued unabated. On June 9, Canadians were told the Commandant of the Navy Fleet School Atlantic, Commander Croucher, was “temporarily” relieved of his post after allegations of sexually inappropriate comments. BGen Simon Bernard, who was seconded to the Public Health Agency of Canada to assist with the COVID vaccine delivery, has been reassigned after allegations that he used racist language while in on duty. 

This was followed by the stunning news report about Lt.-Gen. Mike Rouleau, Vice Chief of the Defence Staff (VCDS) and Vice Admiral Craig Baines, Commander Royal Canadian Navy (CRCN), who, inexplicably chose to enjoy a private round of golf with former Chief of Defence Staff, General (ret’d) Jonathan Vance. The political repercussions were immediate and despite Rouleau’s claims that nothing improper occurred, within days he stood down as the CAF's second in command and was posted to the CAF Transition Group in anticipation of release. VAdm Baines has since apologized and taken temporary personal leave. In his absence Rear Admiral Chris Sutherland will become the Acting CRCN.

Pretense to justice? Abuse of power? Political appeasement to the masses in exchange for votes?

One can only wonder if the government's interpretation of procedural fairness is predicated by the court of public opinion, which is often fueled by salvos of sensationalized media allegations against the CAF’s highest echelons. The spectrum of these allegation is vast, ranging from inappropriate commentary, and historical acts of indecency right up to sexual assault and even rape. How many of these senior officers' careers have been destroyed before they were even provided an opportunity to defend themselves, or before they were found guilty in a court of law? Is this fair? Hardly. This past month,we have witnessed the addition of a new twist: Guilt by association as in the case of Lt.- Gen. Rouleau and R- Adm Baines.

Professor of Military Law Michel Drapeau summed up the current situation perfectly. “There is a general common law principle, a duty of procedural fairness lying on every public authority making an administrative decision which is not of a legislative nature and which affects the rights, privileges or interests of an individual. Since January 2021, the MND and his most senior advisors do not appear to concern themselves with such a principle. The absence of procedural fairness is a form of abuse of power and a failure of their duty to act fairly.”

Major General Dany Fortin certainly feels he was denied "procedural fairness" and that he was victimized through the political interference of Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, Minister of National Defence Harjit Sajjin and Minister of Health Patty Hajdu. Fortin has filed a claim with the Federal Court seeking a judicial review of his alleged wrongful dismissal. Fortin claims his removal from the COVID task force was unreasonable and  bereft of procedural fairness. Fortune’s claim purports that the decision to remove him from his post was influenced by politicians serving the highest levels of government. 

Fortin also claims that his personal privacy rights were violated, and that the resulting public conjecture has damaged his reputation. For the record, Fortin has denied any wrong doing with respect to the original  allegation against him pertaining to an historic sexual misconduct incident. The CFNIS has completed their investigation into this case and turned over their evidence to Quebec’s public prosecutor. At time of writing, no decision has been announced as to whether formal charges will be laid against Fortin. 

Should the Quebec prosecutor decide not to press charges or if Fortin should ultimately prove his innocence in a court of law, what then, Minister Sajjin? 

Elsewhere on the Military Sexual Misconduct file, on June 1 retired Supreme Court Justice Morris Fish released 107 recommendations to amend the National Defence Act, after concluding a DND mandated review of the military justice system. Of particular note was Fish’s recommendation that henceforth, cases of sexual assault should be investigated by civilian authorities. Fish also recommends the elimination of the harmful Duty to Report policies which compel the victim, witnesses, confidantes and/or health care professionals to report any incidents to the military chain of command. 

Justice Fish also recommends the independent authority of the Sexual Misconduct Response Centre be strengthened. The new powers proposed include authorizing the SMR Centre to be able to compel potential witnesses into providing testimony. Something which heretofore was simply not the case.

Defence Minister Sajjin has accepted the recommendations "in principle" but he has only promised to implement 36 of the 107 in an expedient manner.

After months of ministerial ineptitude, it is doubtful whether the victims of Military Sexual Misconduct, the Canadian Armed Forces rank and file or veterans have any confidence whatsoever in Sajjin’s 'principles’ or the government’s shallow promises

I know I don’t.

DAOD 9005-1

By Vincent J. Curtis

Defense Administration Orders and Directives (DAOD) 9005-1 is entitled “Sexual Misconduct Response.”  Issued on 18 November 2020, it supersedes DAOD 5019-5, Sexual Misconduct and Sexual Disorders.  DAOD 9005-1 is an order that applies to officers and non-commissioned members of the CAF, and is the order on which the accusations of sexual misconduct against General Vance and others stand or fall.

In respect of Big Jon, they fall.

The DAOD opens with a definition of sexual misconduct: “Conduct of a sexual nature that causes or could cause harm to others, and that the person knew or ought reasonably to have known could cause harm.”

Harms includes: “actions or words that devalue others on the basis of their sex, sexuality, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression; jokes of a sexual nature, sexual remarks, advances of a sexual nature or verbal abuse of sexual nature in the workplace; harassment of a sexual nature, including initiation rites of a sexual nature; viewing, accessing, distributing or displaying sexually explicit material in the workplace; and any criminal code offense of a sexual nature…”

The order explains that a workplace is any location where work-related functions and other activities take place and work relationships exist, such as: travel, conferences, DND or CAF sanctioned instruction or training activities, and other DND or CAF sanctioned events, including social events.  There are also the usual workplaces: ships, planes, vehicles, offices, classrooms, garrisons, hangars, messes, dining halls, quarters, gyms, on-base clubs, on-line forums, and locations for sanctioned events such as holiday gatherings and course parties.

Key elements are ‘unwanted’ and workplace, with workplace drawing a line between private and professional life.  A consensual Friday night fling at the Angus Inn Motel isn’t 9005 material, but jokes in a classroom, a pin-up calendar, and unwanted attention at the Waterloo Officer’s Mess could be show-stoppers 

Vance is accused of having had several affairs.  Most notoriously, he was accused by Major Kellie Brannan of fathering two of her eight children over the course of a twenty year affair.  A long-term affair is not what is contemplated by the definition of sexual misconduct.  There is no issue about ‘unwanted’, and nothing apparent that involves criminal code violations.

Brennan further alleged that they had had consensual sex in Vance’s office and in his car, which, if true, still mightn’t meet the definition of misconduct unless they were caught in flagrante delicto by a third party who wanted to make an issue of it.  In that case, both would be guilty of misconduct, not by harming each other, but for harming the third party.  Section 129, conduct prejudicial to good order and discipline, could supply the service offence charge for violating the DAOD.

If the alleged affair were adulterous, Vance’s wife would have cause for complaint, but that’s a civil matter, not a disciplinary one.  The U.S. military has a legal prohibition of adultery, but the Canadian military does not.  (If we did, we could have lost the services of Lieutenant General Guy Simonds just before the Normandy invasion.)

A long-term affair, a succession of affairs, adulterous affairs, are not sexual misconduct as defined in the DAOD, which is all that is of military significance.  Vance knows his regs; he wasn’t making passes at everything in a skirt, which is what the DAOD foresees as misconduct.  Untethered from the DAOD, accusations of sexual misconduct are just subjective opinions of no disciplinary significance.  Besides, Vance is now released, making the administrative action mentioned in the DAOD moot.  (There is always politically motivated lawfare.)

To deflect unwanted political attention, Prime Minster Trudeau appointed Louise Arbour, another retired Supreme Court Justice, to look into and report upon the ‘culture of sexual misconduct’ in the CAF.  Arbour follows upon Marie Deschamps (passim) whose vagaries of 2015 led to Op Honour; and Michel Bastarache (passim) who wrote a stinker on the RCMP last year.

I watched Arbour get torn to pieces by Mark Steyn at a Munk Debate in 2016.  I look forward to her report.

Whats going on in the NDDN? The National Defence Committee All Political Parties Need to do better

By Military Women

Question: What do you think about everything that is going on right now in the National Defence Committee?

Answer: Every political party says it cares about ensuring the wellbeing of those serving in the military (and veterans)–but that sentiment isn’t always evident in these committee meetings. So, while the highly politicalized media storylines may keep shifting, from the perspective of serving and former military members the one point that hasn’t shifted is that ALL political parties can and need to do better. 

In case there are any readers not already aware, the Parliamentary Standing Committee on National Defence (NDDN) started a study into sexual misconduct in the Canadian Armed Forces mid-February.  The study was initially slated for three committee meetings, but strategically timed, laser-guided incoming media bombs have resulted in a continuation of those meetings. Spillover from NDDN is expected to soon reach into other committees such as Status of Women (FEWO) and Veterans Affairs (ACVA).

When one is discussing the need for improved federal government oversight mechanisms for Canada’s all volunteer military workforce, within a minority government situation, Canadians might have assumed that all political parties would work together towards achieving that commonly held goal. Surely, the wellbeing of women and men in uniform would be the one time and place that doing the right thing would trump individual and party political agendas. Unfortunately, that assumption has not yet proven to be correct.

Elizabeth May always elevates any political discussion she’s involved in, so kudos to her for her involvement of late in the NDDN; however, let’s face it, supporting women in the military has never been a priority for the Green Party.

The signature strength of the NDP party is its support of “the people” and yet there is no NDP call for unionization of the military. If unions are good for the RCMP and several European militaries, why not the Canadian military too? 

Québec is home to over 20% of Canadian veterans and the Bloc is usually keen to highlight and amplify that fact and support francophone voices. But we continue to watch as courageous Francophone women such as Stéphanie Raymond and Marie-Claude Gagnon take on the military system alone.

The Liberal Party says all the right things about women and intersectionality, and it did introduce gender-based analysis and named the first ever Ambassador for Women, Peace and Security (Jacqueline O’Neill).  But, the Liberal’s significant efforts to increase the number of women in the military to 25% continues to fall short. One has to be willing to boldly address the core issues behind CAF’s “diversity and inclusion” recruitment and retention woes. This includes identifying and neutralizing the dinosaurs still roaming amongst us that come from all political stripes, Liberals included. 

That leaves us with the Conservatives. While in uniform, military members are apolitical. We vow to serve Canada and Canadians faithfully and fully regardless of which political party governs. However, as per all law and order-related professions, there tends to be a natural alignment between soldiers and conservative values. For example, when a veteran recently ran for party leadership, the Conservative party successfully played to those values to help grow its constituency. The Conservative party has successfully solicited financial support and campaign volunteers through military and veteran social circles, charities and organizations—officially and unofficially. As a result, many veterans, including from the highest military ranks, have now, often for the first time, become politically active.

So where does this leave us? Instead of everyone working together to ensure the wellbeing of military members (and veterans), individual military-related vendettas and agendas are being intermixed with opportunistic party politics at the NDDN. It’s hard not to feel exploited.

The Australian Chief of Defence Staff, Gen Campbell, recently commented that sexual misconduct within the military really comes down to two problems—abuse of power and lack of respect for the individual human being. The failure of Canada’s MPs and political parties to prioritize military members’ needs for federal workplace safety conditions feels like another layer of abuse (of parliamentary powers) and disrespect for those in uniform.

Being in service means putting the mission first and self second.  Ensuring all Canadian military members a welcoming and inclusive workspace is part of the parliamentarian’s mission to achieve. We do our job, we need parliamentarians to do their job.  Members of the NDDN, we deserve your help. Together we can fix these problems. Let’s get on with it.

Is Esprit de Corps on trial for being on target against Nazism?

Marcus Kolga

By Richard Sanders

Readers of Esprit de Corps know Scott Taylor as an outspoken columnist whose trajectory can be controversial. His on-course opposition to Nazis, their collaborators and apologists, in Canada and abroad, should not be contentious, especially to members and veterans of Canada’s armed forces. 

But when Taylor stood up against the glorification of Nazi SS divisions by modern governments in Eastern Europe he took flak from some, including an Estonian-Canadian activist, Marcus Kolga. As a senior fellow of the right-wing MacDonald-Laurier Institute, Kolga targeted Taylor saying he’d “mischaracterized Ukrainian and Baltic freedom fighters who resisted Soviet occupation as Nazis.” To Kolga, this branded Taylor guilty of spreading the “virus” of “a particularly popular Kremlin narrative.”

Kolga’s report, Stemming the Virus, on “the threat of Russian disinformation,” also fired at Esprit de Corps, which, he chastened, “frequently echoes the anti-NATO views common on pro-Russian websites.” 

I should disclose that Kolga’s report also aimed epithets at my research, which he filed under “pro-Kremlin media and trolls.” Apparently, I spread the Russian virus by exposing how Canada’s Deputy Prime Minister Chrystia Freeland’s journalism career began with jobs for publications promoting the WWII Ukrainian Waffen SS Galicia as heroic “freedom fighters.” Not knowing I’d be besmirched by Kolga, I posted, in March 2017, a wealth of evidence (still unreported by mainstream media) proving that Freeland and her grandfather, Michael Chomiak, the Nazi news propagandist, had both worked for the same far-right, Ukrainian-Canadian publications in Edmonton.

One of these, The Encyclopedia of Ukraine, was the postwar brainchild of Volodymyr Kubijovych.  As a top Ukrainian coordinator of Nazi collaboration, Kubijovych pushed the Germans to set up the SS Galicia and oversaw Chomiak’s work, which included publishing his call for Ukrainians to volunteer for this Nazi division.

As a teen, Freeland landed two Canadian government summer jobs writing for Kubijovych’s encyclopedia.  It romanticises ethnic-cleansing Ukrainian fascists as ethical anticommunists and whitewashes their complicity in the genocide of Jews, Poles, Roma and communist partisans who were backing the Red Army.

Visiting Edmonton, Chomiak’s wartime boss signed over his encyclopedia to a government-funded Ukrainian research centre at the University of Alberta, whose chancellor, Peter Savaryn, was a proud veteran of the Ukrainian Waffen SS and a leader of nationalist Ukrainian organizations. The Governor General subsequently awarded Savaryn the Order of Canada for volunteering with these Ukrainian groups.

As an apologist for Estonians who welcomed Nazi forces as liberators, Marcus Kolga cheerleads NATO and praises today’s SS-revering European regimes. But they are victims, he says, “targeted by Kremlin aggression.”

There is a hearty tradition of vilifying antifascists by disparaging them with offensive insults. Let’s illustrate this with a chapter from the history of the Estonian Central Council (ECC) in Canada, which Kolga served as president from 2016 to 2020.

The ECC claims to oppose those two arch-rivals, Nazism and Communism, which it falsely equates as twin evils equally to blame for WWII. But since its creation in 1954, the ECC has only aimed its fire at Reds. This, after all, was the fixation of Nazi collaborators and supporters who created and led the ECC through the Cold War until the present.

In 1964, the ECC’s vice president was a German-Estonian named Karl Eerme. An embedded war correspondent for the Nazi-led Estonian SS, Lieutenant Eerme landed in a post-war US POW camp in Germany. Moving to Toronto, he continued anti-Soviet propaganda through the ECC and stated its McCarthyesque purpose as providing “the focal point for ... all Estonians in Canada ... in their avowed and active opposition to the doctrine of Communism.”

In 1960, the USSR — having lost 27 million citizens to the Nazis and their East European supporters — sought to expose some perpetrators.  It named ECC leaders, including three former SS-lieutenants, an SS-Legion staff member and two former Gestapo police commissioners. Using German documents, eyewitness accounts and other evidence gathered when forcing the Nazis from Estonia in 1944, the Soviets identified Winnipeg’s Aleksander Laak as an ECC member who represented the most brutal of Estonia’s Nazi collaborators protected in Canada.

In August 1960, the Soviets indicted Laak for “organizing extermination camp Jägala and personally shooting Jews” and reported that he’d overseen the murder of 3,000 prisoners.

“The Russian story is 99 per cent lies,” said Laak. “It is only Communist propaganda.” Dozens of Canadian journalists agreed. Headlines blaring “Red Story,” “Red Charges” and “Red Claims” rejected it as Russian “propaganda.”  The RCMP gave Laak a “clear” record. The government dismissed it as “phony.” Laak’s neighbours, co-workers and employer said he was a victim of Soviet lies. Despite this support, Laak hanged himself a few days later and papers blamed “Communist propaganda” for killing him.

The ECC joined the fray. One article, “Estonians Fear Smear Campaign,” said Toronto’s 8,000 Estonians were afraid they would “come under a Soviet propaganda barrage.” Although the USSR focused on Laak, the ECC’s leader Enn Salurand said all Estonian-Canadians were “bracing themselves for a Communist campaign designed to discredit them.” How many of Estonia’s tens of thousands of SS men came to Canada is unknown.

Salurand helped found the ECC and was its secretary-general for 25 years. In 1931, he helped create and lead an outfit back in the Baltic, the Estonian National Club. Its eugenics-based ethno-nationalism, intolerant of minorities, got it outlawed by the Soviets when they occupied Estonia in 1940. After coming to Canada, Salurand is said to have never missed a board meeting of the Estonian veterans’ publication, Combatant.

When Laak’s photo appeared in newspapers, Jewish Holocaust survivors in Canada and the US called the press, identifying him as the slave-labour camp’s commandant. “Laak was wearing the SS uniform and was in charge,” declared Toronto’s Greta Zarkower. “Laak and his men took all our valuables.... I was beaten unmercifully, regularly, with a riding whip by SS men.” The media fell silent on Laak for six months.

This silence ended when three top Estonian Nazis went on trial in September 1960. Ralph Gerrets, Laak’s deputy, confessed in Soviet court that they killed thousands, mostly Jews and “Gypsies,” and that Laak took part. Gerrets described shooting small children and dumping them in trenches. Forty witnesses identified Laak as camp commander.

Female survivors recounted being “ordered to undress on arrival at the extermination camp while being examined by Gerrets and Lt. Alexander Laak.” Some testified Laak arranged for “girl inmates” to be “forced to take part in orgies at night and murdered afterward.”

Despite this shocking testimony, no Canadian papers mentioned Laak’s name, or previous claims of innocence by the ECC, RCMP, government and media. Instead, most stories blasted the trial as propaganda. When the three Estonian war criminals were sentenced to death, Canadian journalists didn’t mention Laak but concurred the “show trial apparently aimed at discrediting anti-Soviet Estonian refugee groups.”

Estonian Canadians also went silent, except for one letter to the editor from an ECC-linked Montreal group. Its vice president, Martin Puhvel, castigated the Gazette for covering the trial at all and defended Estonian collaborators as heroes. Describing the trial as “vicious propagandists fairytales,” he said “the Soviet propaganda machine has ... launched a campaign of calumny and vilification against Estonian patriots whose only ‘crime’ lies in defending their homes against murderous, unprovoked aggression by the Russian enslavers.”

Calling the trial a “vicious smear campaign,” Puhvel denounced the media for helping “the enemies of freedom” by “spreading grisly, painful stories of massacre of infant children by men who were busy defending their homes” against the Reds.

Kolga is also active in the Estonian World Council (EWC), an international diaspora network he has served as vice president. Like the ECC, the EWC’s founders and spokesmen included Waffen SS veterans. Take for example, German-Estonian Gerhard Buschmann who joined Nazi intelligence (Abwehr) in 1940 and subsequently won two Iron Crosses. He created and lead the Sonderstaffel Buschmann, a Luftwaffe squad with 50 aircraft. Among other crimes, Buschmann aided the 900-day Siege of Leningrad that killed over one million Soviet civilians.

During the Cold War, Buschmann continued the anti-communist crusade by working for the US army and American intelligence.  Becoming the leader of the Estonian SS veterans group in the US, he was one of the EWC’s best known representatives. For example, in 1968, he was a key witness at a huge “mock trial” in Washington, DC., that blamed communism for everything imaginable.

Immediately after the trial’s conclusion, the Soviet embassy in Washington was bombed. Newspapers spread unfounded accusations by Buschmann and others involved in the trial that the Soviets themselves had bombed their own  embassy.

One article said: “Gerhard Buschmann, a member of the Estonian World Council, said adverse publicity all over the world has pressured the communists to take such action in an attempt to discredit the trial.”

For decades this “blame the victim” approach wielded by Eastern European émigré groups has been weaponized to deflect their historic links to Nazi atrocities. The ECC, EWC, and Ukrainian organizations that Freeland has identified with since her childhood, need to acknowledge their fascist roots and stop defaming those who report the truth about ongoing, state glorification of fascist war heroes. 

Author Richard Sanders’ most recent publication is called Defunding the Myths and Cults of Cold War Canada. It exposes the Canadian government’s ongoing financial support for several East European émigré groups which, having been founded, led and inspired by Nazi collaborators, continue to venerate Waffen SS veterans as heroes. References for all the quotations in this article can be found online at https://coat.ncf.ca/ 

Square Pegs, Round Holes

By Michael Nickerson

Think back to kindergarten. Remember that big piece of wood with various circles, squares, triangles and the like cut out of it? They would give you little bits of wood, point at the board, and say have at it. Now in case you didn’t know at the time, this was a test. For instance, if you sucked on the wood or tried to stuff the pieces in your shorts, then you were likely earmarked for remedial kindergarten. Put the square peg in a round hole and you might have to repeat kindergarten. Put a square peg in a square hole? You’re off to grade one! Devise a way to make the pegs levitate using only your wits and a digestible cookie, and you’ll be at MIT before your baby teeth have fallen out.

            Needless to say you don’t put square pegs in round holes. As the old saying goes, there’s a peg for every hole and home for every peg (or so my teacher always said). Good advice that, but it seems one huge viral outbreak has people everywhere creating a lot of homeless pegs.

            Which brings us to Rick Hillier. For simplicity sake, let’s make him a square peg. Back when the retired general was doing general-like things, we might say he was all snug as a bug in his square hole, with the occasional squeak and creak depending on how well he actually did the job. But he was trained for it, ready for it, and had a whole army of square pegs firmly in their proper holes. My playschool teacher could not have been prouder.

            Now in case you haven’t heard, the premier of Ontario seems to have run out of competent round pegs. But being a politician looking for a quick fix to a problem long in the making, he decided to use Gen. (ret.) Hillier to fill the spherical gap. And let it be said that on the federal level, Justin Trudeau has taken up the idea with gusto, hammering Maj.-Gen. Dany Fortin into a role in which he really does not belong.

            Why you ask? For let’s be honest, these are men schooled in and experienced with problems of logistics, leadership, organization, and calmness under pressure. And I will readily admit they are some of the finest square pegs you’re going to find. The sort of pegs you’d want to bring home to meet your mother.

            The problem arises when you take generals used to people following orders as a god would his disciples and ask them to take charge of a huge bureaucracy of civil servants and health workers who consider orders suggestions, many of whom have a union to fall back on if they don’t like what’s being asked of them, or if they don’t are underpaid and really couldn’t give a damn, and in many respects are just plain exhausted and fed-up. Go team!

            So far the results have been rather predictable. Vaccine distribution has been spotty at best. The country that secured the most vaccines per capita is well behind other nations, notably the US and Israel, in actually getting people vaccinated. Bottlenecks, shortages, wasted inventory and no end of cockups on the ground has made this a deadly situation just when Canadians need their government most.

            And to be clear, this is not solely, or in any great measure, the fault of either Hillier or Fortin. They came late to the game, leading departments not savvy to the ways of military command, trying to get to grips with something federal and provincial governments knew would be coming months and months ago. Last spring, people were ‘blindsided’ by deaths in our long-term care homes, and called in the military to clean up the mess. Eight months later, seniors are once again dying; there are staff shortages, and calls for military help. We knew this winter wave was coming, knew that at some point vaccines would be available, yet once again it’s up to the military to clean things up.

            I can only assume our elected officials never passed kindergarten. Because anyone who did would tell you that you can only pound pegs into the wrong holes for so long before something cracks.

Ain’t That A Hoot?

By Michael Nickerson

Tell me if you’ve heard this one. Eight white guys walk into a conference room. The first white guy, an admiral, turns to the other white guys and says “hey, let’s talk about diversity.” A second guy (still white) pipes up and says “what’s that?” So a third puts up his hand and says “I know! I know!” So the admiral asks the third guy to explain, and he says “it’s like assorted donuts! I like the frosted ones.” Well, says the admiral, you’re on the right track, anyone else? So a fourth pulls out a set of coloured pencils that he’s been just itching to share with his fellow white guys and says “ta-da!” The admiral, so impressed with how well everyone is catching on to this novel idea, calls for a commemorative picture of the occasion and then tells an aide to post it on Twitter.

Ok, here comes the punch line…wait for it. They actually post it on Twitter! Ba-dum-bum! Bet you didn’t see that one coming.

Funnily enough, a whole lot of people didn’t see that one coming, particularly those members of the armed forces (or Canada as a whole) who are neither male nor white. Strange but true, there are actually quite a few of them about, though not particularly well represented in the higher ranks, and as Admiral Art MacDonald’s most hilarious of Twitter pics makes clear, non-existent where it counts.

            Now to be fair to Canada’s new Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS), if he had it posted with a caption that said “what’s wrong with this picture?” it wouldn’t have been nearly so hilarious. He’d be bringing attention to a serious problem, perhaps starting a discussion about how to fix it. If he’d included an after picture with women and minorities at the table, for those who learn better with pictures than words, you’d think he was being downright proactive.

            But where would the laughs be in that, I ask? Thankfully, the CDS has quite the sense of humour. Here’s how the CDS put it: “Conversations on diversity, inclusion, and culture change are not incompatible with our thirst for operational excellence. I count on my senior leaders to champion culture change. Diversity makes us stronger, inclusion improves our institution. We are #StrongerTogether – ArtMcD.” If that doesn’t have you rolling on the floor, I don’t know what would. A comic genius that admiral is.

            Thing is, it gets better. Because as everyone knows timing is everything in comedy. If he’d pulled this joke off even ten years ago it would have fallen flat. Misogyny, sexual assault, and discrimination were hardly in the public eye. Who cared if there were barriers to women and minorities then? The whole thing would have fallen flat. White guys sitting around a table feeling privileged making decisions that impact anyone but them. Ho hum.

            The admiral’s timing was impeccable, however. Just last fall the military released its new and exciting plan to end discrimination and sexual harassment, The Path to Dignity and Respect, perhaps one of the greatest setups in comedic history. Proof positive Canada’s military is willing to play the long game for a good joke.

            During the CDS change of command ceremony last January, Admiral MacDonald publicly apologized for racism and hateful conduct in the military, stating “I apologize to you my teammates, our teammates who have experienced racism, discriminatory behaviour and/or hateful conduct. I am deeply sorry. I want you to know I will do all that I can to support you; to stop these unacceptable acts from happening; and to put into practice our guiding principle: Respect and dignity for all persons.” Now how sly was that?

            An amateur would probably have let the proverbial cat out of the bag almost immediately after taking command and posted that hilarious tweet. But our new CDS is no amateur. He waited until not only did accusations and investigations concerning sexual misconduct of his predecessor came to light (he had to know, right?) but almost two weeks into Black History Month to finally post the punchline and drop the mic.

            Now ain’t that just a hoot?

Square Pegs, Round Holes

By Michael Nickerson

Think back to kindergarten. Remember that big piece of wood with various circles, squares, triangles and the like cut out of it? They would give you little bits of wood, point at the board, and say have at it. Now in case you didn’t know at the time, this was a test. For instance, if you sucked on the wood or tried to stuff the pieces in your shorts, then you were likely earmarked for remedial kindergarten. Put the square peg in a round hole and you might have to repeat kindergarten. Put a square peg in a square hole? You’re off to grade one! Devise a way to make the pegs levitate using only your wits and a digestible cookie, and you’ll be at MIT before your baby teeth have fallen out.

            Needless to say you don’t put square pegs in round holes. As the old saying goes, there’s a peg for every hole and home for every peg (or so my teacher always said). Good advice that, but it seems one huge viral outbreak has people everywhere creating a lot of homeless pegs.

            Which brings us to Rick Hillier. For simplicity sake, let’s make him a square peg. Back when the retired general was doing general-like things, we might say he was all snug as a bug in his square hole, with the occasional squeak and creak depending on how well he actually did the job. But he was trained for it, ready for it, and had a whole army of square pegs firmly in their proper holes. My playschool teacher could not have been prouder.

            Now in case you haven’t heard, the premier of Ontario seems to have run out of competent round pegs. But being a politician looking for a quick fix to a problem long in the making, he decided to use Gen. (ret.) Hillier to fill the spherical gap. And let it be said that on the federal level, Justin Trudeau has taken up the idea with gusto, hammering Maj.-Gen. Dany Fortin into a role in which he really does not belong.

            Why you ask? For let’s be honest, these are men schooled in and experienced with problems of logistics, leadership, organization, and calmness under pressure. And I will readily admit they are some of the finest square pegs you’re going to find. The sort of pegs you’d want to bring home to meet your mother.

            The problem arises when you take generals used to people following orders as a god would his disciples and ask them to take charge of a huge bureaucracy of civil servants and health workers who consider orders suggestions, many of whom have a union to fall back on if they don’t like what’s being asked of them, or if they don’t are underpaid and really couldn’t give a damn, and in many respects are just plain exhausted and fed-up. Go team!

            So far the results have been rather predictable. Vaccine distribution has been spotty at best. The country that secured the most vaccines per capita is well behind other nations, notably the US and Israel, in actually getting people vaccinated. Bottlenecks, shortages, wasted inventory and no end of cockups on the ground has made this a deadly situation just when Canadians need their government most.

            And to be clear, this is not solely, or in any great measure, the fault of either Hillier or Fortin. They came late to the game, leading departments not savvy to the ways of military command, trying to get to grips with something federal and provincial governments knew would be coming months and months ago. Last spring, people were ‘blindsided’ by deaths in our long-term care homes, and called in the military to clean up the mess. Eight months later, seniors are once again dying; there are staff shortages, and calls for military help. We knew this winter wave was coming, knew that at some point vaccines would be available, yet once again it’s up to the military to clean things up.

            I can only assume our elected officials never passed kindergarten. Because anyone who did would tell you that you can only pound pegs into the wrong holes for so long before something cracks.

Ain’t That A Hoot?

By Michael Nickerson

Tell me if you’ve heard this one. Eight white guys walk into a conference room. The first white guy, an admiral, turns to the other white guys and says “hey, let’s talk about diversity.” A second guy (still white) pipes up and says “what’s that?” So a third puts up his hand and says “I know! I know!” So the admiral asks the third guy to explain, and he says “it’s like assorted donuts! I like the frosted ones.” Well, says the admiral, you’re on the right track, anyone else? So a fourth pulls out a set of coloured pencils that he’s been just itching to share with his fellow white guys and says “ta-da!” The admiral, so impressed with how well everyone is catching on to this novel idea, calls for a commemorative picture of the occasion and then tells an aide to post it on Twitter.

Ok, here comes the punch line…wait for it. They actually post it on Twitter! Ba-dum-bum! Bet you didn’t see that one coming.

Funnily enough, a whole lot of people didn’t see that one coming, particularly those members of the armed forces (or Canada as a whole) who are neither male nor white. Strange but true, there are actually quite a few of them about, though not particularly well represented in the higher ranks, and as Admiral Art MacDonald’s most hilarious of Twitter pics makes clear, non-existent where it counts.

            Now to be fair to Canada’s new Chief of the Defence Staff (CDS), if he had it posted with a caption that said “what’s wrong with this picture?” it wouldn’t have been nearly so hilarious. He’d be bringing attention to a serious problem, perhaps starting a discussion about how to fix it. If he’d included an after picture with women and minorities at the table, for those who learn better with pictures than words, you’d think he was being downright proactive.

            But where would the laughs be in that, I ask? Thankfully, the CDS has quite the sense of humour. Here’s how the CDS put it: “Conversations on diversity, inclusion, and culture change are not incompatible with our thirst for operational excellence. I count on my senior leaders to champion culture change. Diversity makes us stronger, inclusion improves our institution. We are #StrongerTogether – ArtMcD.” If that doesn’t have you rolling on the floor, I don’t know what would. A comic genius that admiral is.

            Thing is, it gets better. Because as everyone knows timing is everything in comedy. If he’d pulled this joke off even ten years ago it would have fallen flat. Misogyny, sexual assault, and discrimination were hardly in the public eye. Who cared if there were barriers to women and minorities then? The whole thing would have fallen flat. White guys sitting around a table feeling privileged making decisions that impact anyone but them. Ho hum.

            The admiral’s timing was impeccable, however. Just last fall the military released its new and exciting plan to end discrimination and sexual harassment, The Path to Dignity and Respect, perhaps one of the greatest setups in comedic history. Proof positive Canada’s military is willing to play the long game for a good joke.

            During the CDS change of command ceremony last January, Admiral MacDonald publicly apologized for racism and hateful conduct in the military, stating “I apologize to you my teammates, our teammates who have experienced racism, discriminatory behaviour and/or hateful conduct. I am deeply sorry. I want you to know I will do all that I can to support you; to stop these unacceptable acts from happening; and to put into practice our guiding principle: Respect and dignity for all persons.” Now how sly was that?

            An amateur would probably have let the proverbial cat out of the bag almost immediately after taking command and posted that hilarious tweet. But our new CDS is no amateur. He waited until not only did accusations and investigations concerning sexual misconduct of his predecessor came to light (he had to know, right?) but almost two weeks into Black History Month to finally post the punchline and drop the mic.

            Now ain’t that just a hoot?

Illusions of Trust

By Michael Blais

In the interest of full disclosure. I have known Gary Walbourne since the Canadian Veterans Advocacy (CVA) began its formal engagement in Ottawa as a VAC stakeholder in 2011. At the time Walbourne was Deputy Veterans Ombudsman. In my opinion, Walbourne can be an intense individual and admittedly, I have increasingly enjoyed the robust conversations we have shared this past decade in respect to both the Conservative and subsequent Liberal governments' provisions to Canada’s veterans. After his appointment to lead the Office of the Military Ombudsman, we discussed topics such as; DND’s obligations on transition of the wounded/injured to civilian life, sexual assault/harassment in the CAF, Operation Honour and Military Sexual Trauma. I came to admire the former ombudsman’s tenacity and equally important, his dedication to assist those who have turned to his office to report incidents of concern.

Naturally, I was profoundly disappointed to read about the dismissive manner in which Mr. Walbourne was treated by the Minister of National Defence (MND), Harjit Sajjan as a consequence to performing his duty as Ombudsman. Hopefully, Prime Minister Trudeau will realize that Sajjan has violated the trust of the rank and file and will finally, after years of ineptitude, put someone in the MND’s office that will be respected, admired and trusted by Canada’s sons and daughters in uniform.

Is this desire perhaps too harsh? I think not. Ostracizing the Office of the Military Ombudsman because he is doing his job to the best of his abilities sets a dangerous precedent. It clearly demonstrates how an inept minister can corrupt the legislative intent at the Ombudsman’s office at both DND and Veterans Affairs Canada.

When Prime Minister Harper's Conservative government created these two positions, he legislated fail-safe protocols to ensure that the MND and  the prime minister retained ultimate control over the respective ombudsman’s and when necessary they retained the power to rein in the appointed ombudsperson’s activities should they become politically embarrassing or untenable. Readers need only to recall Ombudsman Stogran’s summary dismissal when he dared to go public about Veterans Affairs Canada intransigence and ineptitude?

These provisions are purposefully obstructive, designed to marginalize the ombudsperson’s effort and through a formidable legislative muzzle, negate the ombudsman's ability to affect justice for serving members or veterans who come forward to him or her at the departmental level.

It is any wonder very few serving members actually trust the Office of the Military Ombudsman?

Is it any wonder that few veterans or their families trust or respect the Office of the Veterans Ombudsman?

Former OVO Craig Dalton identified this existential problem in the summer of 2019 when he publicly expressed his concerns that the office of the Veterans Ombudsman was neither trusted nor respected by veterans and their families while he concurrently requested that the government conduct an “independent” review of the office’s mandate.  

“I am concerned with what has been reflected to me around the lack of trust in our office, questioning what value we offer to veterans, noting that we’re not independent enough to generate confidence in veterans,” Dalton told Murray Brewster atCBC news. “If veterans are not coming to us because they don’t believe we’re independent and they don’t believe we can support them. Then I think looking at other reporting relationships of an ombudsman office is certainly a component of the review I’d like to see included.”

Daulton was not, alas, prepared to take the required step of recommending that the OVO report directly to parliament instead of the minister. Minster McCauley was not, alas, prepared to do anything and Ombudsman Dalton’s request was filed in the dusty drawer where all OVO reports ultimately wind up.

Tragically, Harper's fail-safe mechanisms preclude any legitimate effort to conduct a review into the former CDS General Jonathan Vance's allegedly inappropriate conduct.

Why would that be the case?

Simply put, the ombudsman has no recourse at their disposal other than to report such allegations to the minister only.

The situation, in respect to General Vance’s allegedly inappropriate 2012 email to a female corporal, in which he proposed a joint vacation on a clothing optional beach, is further complicated by the accuser’s wish to remain anonymous. The legislation under these circumstances is specific, Mr. Walbourne, as Ombudsman for the DND, is duty bound to maintain General Vance’s accuser’s confidence and privacy.

For his part, MND Sajjan, claims he too was bound by legislative restrictions that compelled him to bring the accusation of Vance’s allegedly inappropriate email to the Privy Council Office (PCO). By doing so, Sajjan effectively relegated authority in respect to further investigations or any potential disciplinary acts to the PCO.

The secretive PCO apparently did nothing because General Vance’s accuser had requested anonymity and they did not have enough information upon which to proceed.

How can justice be served under these circumstances?

The government tell us to ‘trust them' but those words ring as hollow as those of the Mexican beach vendor who offers you a special deal because he is your ‘Amigo’. Trust me, he is not your friend.

Pandemic Wellness Checks Veterans at Risk.

By Michael Blais CD

The ongoing restrictions inherent with pandemic counter measures, continues to adversely affect the mental health of Canadians. Being isolated for long periods of time has certainly already borne out repercussions, and it would seem this will only increase as the virus mutates and the infection rates continue to soar within our communities.

 The COVID-19 situation has exacerbated the challenges for many who have been enduring heightened levels of discord as a consequence of being locked down alone, with their primary support elements either suspended or reduced in regularity. 

The personal, human touch inherent with doctor’s appointments or organized peer support meetings is absent. For many veterans, audio/visual interrelationships orchestrated through an internet forum does not provide them the same level of relief and comfort.

Having fears for the well being of a mentally traumatized veteran experiencing a crisis during the pandemic can heighten anxieties  for concerned family members and friends. This is particularly true when misgivings about alcohol and/or drug abuse, pharmaceutical addictions, erratic behaviour, self harm and/or fears of suicide are present. 

Canada’s vast geographic disposition often precludes personal interventions, which as a consequence, leaves loved one’s and friends with no alternative but to reach out to some distant community emergency service to initiate a Wellness Check on the individual.

If one is fortuitous, the community will field a Crisis Rapid Response Team to deal with the crisis. Ontario has designed such a program to cope with mental health related 911 calls and due to the pandemic induced surge, recently increased funding to support an expansion of the program.

In partnership with the Canadian Mental Health Association, this program acknowledges the futility of hospitalization or resorting to the justice system in addressing  a mental health emergency. Distinct crisis resolution training is provided to selected law enforcement officers and once qualified they are teamed up with mental health professionals to participate in 12 hour shifts, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week. 

The focus is on de-escalation with resolution without resorting to restraint, physical force, collateral criminal charges, incarceration or psychiatric internment at hospital. The Ontario program has so far proven to be very successful, having engaged with 612 distraught Ontarians over the past year. Three quarters of those individuals were provided mental health care or addiction resources without the need for hospitalization. Crisis de-escalation bereft of arrest or the use of force in order to restrain occurred over 80 percent of the time.

If one is not fortuitous… the response to your request for a wellness check may not result in the positive conclusion envisioned.

Police officers will be dispatched.

These officers may or may not be adequately trained in responding to a civilian mental health crisis let alone the protocols required to calm a traumatized combat veteran. Many of these law enforcement officers, having seen Rambo or other Hollywood endeavours wherein the stigma surrounding PTSD is perpetuated by portraying the traumatized veteran as being unstable, and also being capable of instant levels of ultra-violence, trained to kill, and possessing a deadly proficiency with weapons. 

Such apprehension heightens levels of alarm which in turn fosters de escalation protocols being built on restraint instead of dialogue, incarceration or consignment to a psychiatric hospital instead of compassion and immediate mental health provisions or substance abuse addiction counselling/assistance. Any form of resistance inevitably results in criminal charges after the employment by police of varying levels of force (inclusive of tasers and firearms) as they deem fit.

One veteran, one standard!
 

National standards, inclusive of de-escalation/resolution protocols that directly pertain to calming a traumatized veteran are clearly required. Veterans Affairs Canada has the obligation to establish these standards. Ministerial leadership is crucial, particularly in respect to creating the appropriate mechanisms through consultation with their Mental Health Advisory and the recently established Centre of Excellence on PTSD. 

Comprehensive guidelines for family and friends must be established and made public. Furthermore, a 24 hour a day, 7 days a week contact for liaison service must be established, so those who are concerned about a veteran’s well being can contact VAC for advice prior to initiating a wellness check. Once these protocols have been developed, the department must launch a dedicated liaison program with the Canadian Mental Health Association and the relevant law enforcement agencies to ensure successful crisis management when the occasion arises.

I emphasize this means ‘when’ and not ‘if'.

Stolen Valour and the Criminal Code of Canada

By Michael Blais

I have been travelling to Ottawa on a regular basis since 2011, when the Canadian Veterans Advocacy was first invited to participate with Veterans Affairs Canada stakeholder group. I was soon appalled to note that reprehensible crimes of stolen valour were being perpetrated even as we assembled on the National War Memorial at the eleventh hour on the eleventh day, of the eleventh month. 

At the poser level, -a poser being an individual who has never served yet poses as a soldier-, one incident was particularly remarkable. Readers will remember the case of an individual being interviewed prior to the National Remembrance Service wearing a CAF dress uniform and posing as a sergeant of The Royal Canadian Regiment. The individual brazenly added the Medal of Bravery to his other illegitimate medals, jump wings and pathfinders badge to complete his bogus ensemble. His false but impressive symbols of martial merit drew the attention of the national media. The consequences were immediate, starkly profound and by mid-afternoon, sharp eyed Royal Canadians had “outed” the individual as a fraud. As a result, I was invited to the CBC studio in Ottawa to do an interview on the subject of Stolen Valour for The National. Criminal charges were levied, and justice in this case was served. 

There have also been instances of deplorable embellishment, wherein yes, the individual did serve yet felt compelled to dishonestly embellish their service by adding medals, parachute wings and other unearned honorifics to their uniforms. A prominent charity and several veterans organizations were adversely impacted by such acts of fraud, with reputations being besmirched (guilt by association) and relationships being irrevocably destroyed. 

Stolen Valour Canada (SVC) emerged in 2014 as an independent, self funded, group of veterans willing to volunteer their time and military experience to provide an internet-based platform which investigates reports of alleged Stolen Valour across Canada. During the past 7 years, these veteran volunteers have exposed over three score of posers and embellishers who were exploiting national service & sacrifice in order to deceive Canadians across the nation. The accused have invariably been  provided with options.  An apology letter and the return of the medals is all that is required and many who have been exposed have availed themselves of this option, measly surrendering their fraudulent “trinkets” along with a public apology in order to escape those punitive provisions set out under the Criminal Code of Canada (section 419). For years now, SVC has provided expert advice to affected law enforcement agencies with one precedent setting conviction in 2019 resulting in a steep monetary fine and probation. A number of other cases currently remain in the cue, with criminal proceedings proceeding.

So why do these individuals do it? Why do they pose as a soldier or, in my opinion even worse worse, a soldier who embellishes their military service by adding undeserved medals, parachute wings, commendations and other trinkets? 

The SVC response line to this question is blunt: Most individuals reported to SVC  were declared to be “grifters and con artists who lie, cheat and steal for their personal gain.” Some posers have used “their Special Status to attend military ceremonies, Remembrance Day services, parades or charity sponsored galas and high profile sporting events as VIP guests.” Others have participated in fully funded commemorative pilgrimages and expeditions abroad. Some have used “fake military narratives and tales of battlefield injuries to advance their employment opportunities and political aspirations.” 

The list of motives to impersonate a soldier includes; Intimidation, theft, fraud ( which includes examples of nefariously applying for veteran/military discounts), questionable charity schemes, embezzlement and dating schemes. In one bizarre incident, the miscreant poser went so far as to claim that he had committed war crimes as a Special Forces Chief Warrant Officer, while at a presentation to six hundred schoolchildren! 

Every time this occurs, of course,  truly deserving veterans are increasingly doubted and our reputation as a unique community is blighted.  

So, how does SVC oversight work? 

First, most of the ‘poser' reports of Stolen Valour SCV receives are levied by veterans. When instances of embellishment arise, the suspect is often identified by veterans who served in the individual’s same regiments or units. Specific details are required, and if the allegations have merit, SVC conducts an investigation based "on open sources, public information, unit war diaries and timelines”. Please note that SVC has a rigorous set of Standard Operating Procedures. Research information is peer reviewed, and should the “smoking gun” or an admission of guilt be absent, the names of the suspected posers/embellishers are not published. It is also noteworthy that SVC does not have access to MPRR and depends on protocols inherent with the Access to Information Act to confirm or deny service and medal-commendation-parachute wing aberrations. 

Should you feel that there is a poser or embellisher preying on your community, reach out to SVC through this link.

www.stolenvalour.ca

Good Luck with That

By Vincent J. Curtis

Nearly twenty-five years ago there was a guided discussion concerning the dangers of “western hate groups” infiltrating the Canadian Forces.  In those days, the Heritage Front, founded in 1989 by Wolfgang Droege, Gary Lincoln, and CSIS agent Grant Bristow, was the most infamous of Canada’s “far-right.”  The Heritage Front was, by then, practically defunct, and went officially defunct in 2005. 

After some discussion, one of the course candidates said that he knew a couple of members of a “western hate group.”

“Really?”  asked the instructor.  “Tell us about it.” 

“Well,” replied the candidate quietly, “they have guns.  They wear these uniforms, and they practice fighting in the woods.” 

The other candidates leaned in, eyes widening.

“Can you tell us who they are?”  asked the instructor.

“I don’t know the name of the group, but their initials are P-P-C-L-I.”

Everybody laughed.  They liked the association of western Canada’s Regular Force infantry regiment with ‘western hate group.’  

The Canadian military has dealt with “far-right” “hate groups” before.  The promise by Lt-Gen Wayne Eyre, the new Commander of the Canadian Army, to deal with the “infiltration” of “far-right” “hate groups” is ploughing old ground. 

Eyre told CBC News that he wants to rid the army of soldiers who are “suspected of hateful conduct and extremism.”  (One wonders if killing people, destroying things, and the practicing thereof are acts hateful conduct and extremism.  But, I digress.) 

Eyre faces legal obstacles.  The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees freedom of thought, belief, expression; peaceful assembly, and association.  On the face of it, holding unpopular political beliefs is protected by the Charter and protected from disciplinary or administrative action under the National Defense Act.  So long as the member causes no disciplinary issues and acts on his beliefs lawfully on his own time, he should be in the clear.  Reservists especially.

This crusade for ideological purity began with Corey Hurren’s mad-cap attack on Rideau Hall, where the Governor-General resides and Prime Minister Trudeau currently has a hovel.  Hurren allegedly had firearms in his truck.  Nobody was hurt, Hurren arrested, and neither the GG nor PM were on the property at the time.  It so happened that Hurren was a member of a Canadian Ranger Patrol, and a rather good one at that.  Being a Ranger was all the hook needed for the CBC to associate the Canadian Armed Forces with an alleged attempt on the lives of Julie Payette and Justin Trudeau.  Hurren’s alleged connection with “far-right” “hate-groups” juiced the story.

Then, in hot pursuit of ideological enemies, the CBC revealed that Erik Myggland not only supported two “far-right” groups, but was allowed to continue as a Ranger.in northern B.C.  after a counterint investigation. 

It gets worse.  Former reservist sapper Patrik Mathews allegedly became a member of “The Base” (al-Qaeda in Arabic), another alleged “far-right” “neo-Nazi” group.  A naval reservist in Calgary, Boris Mihajlovic, reportedly administered a neo-Nazi hate forum that gave rise to a group called “Atomwaffen Division,” both now defunct 

The harassed Lt-Gen Eyre admitted to the CBC that “the army has a growing problem of “right-wing extremism,” and reiterated his determination to “crush hateful ideology and acts in the ranks.”  He expressed his disappointment at members who hold Nazism as a way of life 

“There is absolutely no place in the Canadian Army for those who hold hateful beliefs and express these beliefs through hateful behaviour.”

The CBC, the Friends of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, and no doubt Superior Commanders are pressuring Eyre for “action.”  However, high-handed and possibly unconstitutional disciplinary action to eradicate certain political beliefs sets precedent for morale crushing hypocrisy as other, politically sensitive, beliefs are allowed.  BLM, Islam, anyone?

Perhaps education in how the Canadian Army kicked Nazi ass in Sicily, Italy, and from Juno Beach to Wismar might get the point across.  Or is that culturally insensitive?  An over-reaction to mollify the far-left by savaging a small number of losers could be worse than patiently letting the problem disappear on its own.