• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Politics in 2017

Status
Not open for further replies.
mariomike said:
Do you have a source for that?

If you do, I will add it to this discussion,

RCMP prevent attack - 10 Aug 2016 
http://army.ca/forums/threads/123793.25
7 pages.

Aaron Driver "intended target"
https://www.google.ca/search?q=%22aaron+driver%22+%22intended+target%22&sourceid=ie7&rls=com.microsoft:en-CA:IE-Address&ie=&oe=&rlz=1I7GGHP_en-GBCA592&gfe_rd=cr&ei=dX1iWYOuFYiR8QfvjoCQCg&gws_rd=ssl

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/rcmp-says-it-received-credible-information-on-potential-terrorist-threat-public-not-in-danger/wcm/cf21979b-58a2-4718-affb-f304384d020c

Citi Plaza is the "official" name. I certainly ope that we don't see another incident like this, but as I learned years ago in economics, people follow incentives, and if you incentives behaviour, you get more of it. Getting them million dollars for committing an act many of us went to Afghanistan to stop (or kill the animals who did that sort of thing) is a pretty powerful message to send.....
 
Thucydides said:
http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/rcmp-says-it-received-credible-information-on-potential-terrorist-threat-public-not-in-danger/wcm/cf21979b-58a2-4718-affb-f304384d020c

Citi Plaza is the "official" name.

Thank-you for your source. It's dated National Post 11 Aug 2016:

"Toronto Transit Commission spokesman Brad Ross said Thursday the service had been “made aware of a terror threat investigation yesterday morning, but it had no specifics attached to it, including city or location. We took the opportunity, however, to remind our workforce that if they see something, say something and to be vigilant at all times. That is standard operating procedure at the TTC.

Metrolinx, which operates the Go Transit system, said it was also told of a general threat “which was not specific to our agency or a location as far as I understand. In response, we raised our level of vigilance and worked closely with national, provincial and local security and police services on our response,” spokeswoman Anne Marie Aikins said."

National Post 20 Aug 2016

"The target of his alleged attack has still not been determined, he added. While Driver had told the taxi driver to take him to Citi Plaza in London, Ont., there is no indication that was the target and Cabana noted there was a train station near the mall.

“Was he going there to hop on the train? We don’t know yet
so we’re doing the forensics on the computer, hoping that we’re going to find something there but so far we have nothing,” he said."
RCMP Deputy Commissioner Mike Cabana

http://nationalpost.com/news/canada/aaron-drivers-more-powerful-bombs-never-detonated-rcmp-says-revealing-new-details-of-tense-confrontation/wcm/034c5249-744c-4092-8021-c2befc768bd9
 
http://nationalpost.com/opinion/mark-mcconaghy-trudeaus-failure-to-commemorate-liu-xiaobo-proof-that-economic-self-interest-canadas-only-goal-with-china/wcm/53826f03-2d5d-444c-b891-daca44286270

Mark McConaghy: Trudeau's naked economic self-interest dishonours a hero of Chinese democracy

Canadian leaders do these Chinese citizens a tremendous disservice by refusing to publicly critique the web of repression they live through everyday. Such advocacy must begin with the prime minister

Special to National Post
July 14, 2017
8:35 PM EDT

On the same evening that Canadian Governor General David Johnston met with Chinese President Xi Jinping in Beijing, Chinese democracy activist Liu Xiaobo died under guard in a hospital in Shenyang. As Johnston expressed his appreciation for President Xi “making time for us,” Liu passed away in silence, his body wracked by a cancer that was revealed to the public only after it was largely beyond treatment. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau didn’t acknowledge or commemorate Liu’s death in any way, not even on Twitter. This was in keeping with his silence regarding Liu’s case over the last few weeks, even as China’s refusal to allow Liu to seek medical treatment abroad became known to the world.

Though Minister of Foreign Affairs Chrystia Freeland would later release a statement commemorating Liu, it also avoided directly criticizing China. Instead, Freeland notes passively that Liu “spent many years imprisoned for peacefully exercising his right to speak freely, was denied the opportunity to travel to receive his 2010 Nobel Peace Prize, and more recently, in his final days, was denied the medical treatment he requested.” Trudeau’s failure to deliver a statement, coupled with this bland comment from the foreign affairs minister, compounded the sense that Ottawa is loath to say anything that will upset leaders in Beijing - a reticence no doubt related to the next round of exploratory discussions set to begin in two weeks regarding a potential free trade deal between the two countries.

Trudeau's failure to deliver a statement about Liu compounded the sense that Ottawa is loath to say anything that will upset leaders in Beijing

The Liberals’ failure to critique their counterparts in Beijing shows that it is naked economic self-interest, rather than any larger commitment to a shared democratic future, which defines this government’s handling of the China file. Were it not so, Trudeau would have commemorated Liu, a veteran of the 1989 democracy movement, who fought tirelessly for human rights and political reform in China. In 2008, Liu bravely spearheaded the Charter 08 campaign, a movement for genuine systemic reform in the country. The Chinese regime only confirmed the power of the Charter when they chose to suppress all traces of it, jailing Liu on the charge of “inciting subversion of state power.” His case has had a tremendous “chilling effect” on China’s intellectuals, as they have largely accepted the regime’s demand that no open critique of China’s one-party system appear in their work.

The Trudeau administration may believe that they are doing both China and Canada a service by refusing to comment on such issues. After all, as the Beijing government often says, are these not China’s domestic affairs, ones that foreign nations have no right to intervene in? Yet to accept Beijing’s logic on such matters flies in the face of a central Canadian value: the free exchange of ideas across cultures.

More importantly, it does nothing to empower those young people in China who are searching for a means of transitioning their country away from authoritarian governance. Such young people have fewer and fewer outlets for global interaction. On the same week that Liu died it was reported that the Chinese government plans to block all Virtual Private Networks (VPNs) throughout the country, starting in early 2018. VPNs allow internet users to securely access private networks and share data through public networks. If the government does block them, vital digital lifelines to international news and global cultural trends will be severed. 

It is little surprise, then, that with their digital ecosystem dominated by state media, the question of Liu’s legacy remains a fraught one for China’s netizens. When the news of Liu’s death broke, many Chinese wrote indirect expressions of condolence on the popular social media site Weibo, calling him a Doushi (a warrior). Yet others claimed that Liu was not worth remembering. They argued he was a false Junzi (the Confucian term for a cultivated man) who had sought fame by undermining the party and the state. While Liu has been praised for his courage in Taiwan and Hong Kong, in the Mainland, the battle over his legacy has only just begun.

Canadian leaders do these young people a tremendous disservice by refusing to publicly critique the web of repression they live through everyday. Such advocacy must begin with the prime minister, who remains the only Canadian leader with a global platform large enough to have a sustained impact. As tens of thousands of young Chinese move to Canada to study and live, and with millions more on campuses across the Mainland eager to engage with Canada, the ethical imperative to articulate what Canada can mean for China in the realm of ideas and values is more urgent than ever.

In an era in which one tweet can cross oceans instantly, Canada’s leader must remind young Chinese citizens that they are not alone, and that different models of social governance are not only possible but essential. Such a message is the only fitting tribute Justin Trudeau can give to Liu Xiaobo and his life’s work.

Mark McConaghy is a visiting post-doctoral scholar at Academia Sinica’s Institute for Chinese Literature and Philosophy in Taipei, Taiwan. He completed his PhD studies in modern Chinese cultural history in the Department of East Asian Studies at the University of Toronto.
 
http://nationalpost.com/opinion/national-post-view-as-trudeaus-symbolic-gestures-flop-aboriginals-continue-to-suffer/wcm/d829428c-33c2-49c0-a7c3-2fa2b7cdf2f3

National Post View: As Trudeau's symbolic gestures flop, Aboriginals continue to suffer

There are dozens of reports containing hundreds of recommendations gathering dust on shelves, while the MMIW inquiry haplessly spins its wheels and descends into bickering

National Post View
July 14, 2017
8:33 PM EDT

It has become apparent that the National Inquiry into Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls is at risk of going off the rails. Established last September to investigate systemic causes of violence against Canadian Indigenous women and girls, the inquiry’s image has been hurt by a series of high-profile personnel departures, public condemnations by vocal Aboriginal critics (including Justice Minister Jody-Wilson Raybould’s father), and little to no progress in commencing hearings. As a recent article by the National Post’s Maura Forrest made clear, many now view the inquiry as completely illegitimate and dysfunctional.

“It lacks leadership. I think (Chief Commissioner) Marion Buller, she’s a lovely person, but she doesn’t have the skills, the management skills,” one source told Forrest. Forrest further noted, “disagreements between commissioners and employees have spawned factions, power struggles and inertia within the inquiry. ‘It’s high school, it really is. … It’s dysfunctional, and it’s not because they don’t care. They do care, they just don’t know how to do it.’”

Unfortunately, the inquiry's dysfunction was always foreseeable. It was also avoidable

The National Post warned from the beginning that an inquiry was no way to address the serious problem of violence against Aboriginals, and Indigenous women in particular. We have all known all along that too many Indigenous women and men live in conditions that make them especially vulnerable to violence.

The need for law enforcement to better protect these vulnerable people is abundantly clear. In October 2016, the RCMP oversight agency known as the Civilian Review and Complaints Commission completed a two-year investigation into the conduct of officers in northern British Columbia. The commission was established to understand how the RCMP had failed to protect Indigenous women and girls in that region, and has developed recommendations for addressing systemic problems in its procedures and practices.

And in 2014, the RCMP released its own report, entitled Missing and Murdered Aboriginal Women: A National Operational Overview, which covers many of the issues the inquiry was established to address.

The inquiry was not really expected to unearth new causes or solutions

Meanwhile, the Truth and Reconciliation Commission spoke directly to the social causes behind the particular vulnerability of Aboriginals, offering 94 recommendations to help remedy the legacy of Canada’s residential schools, which contributed to so much social breakdown on so many reserves.

So the MMIW inquiry was not really expected to unearth new causes or solutions. Rather, its primary function was to provide an outlet for the families of victims to voice their pain and anger, and achieve some measure of healing.

But when this is the goal, it cannot be a surprise that it is impossible to satisfy all parties. Justice can mean many different things to different people. Aggrieved families will each have different views on who ought to be consulted and on what terms. Thus, it is entirely unsurprising to see so many people expressing dissatisfaction with how the inquiry is being run.

In this respect, the inquiry highlights the danger of the largely symbolic, if well-intentioned, gestures of which this government is so fond. Such actions often end up being costly, while opening up more divisions than they close.

Take, for example, the government’s recent efforts to promote Indigenous inclusion and recognition in its Canada 150 celebrations. The government’s seemingly hasty decision to turn the former United States Embassy building into an Indigenous centre was dismissed by many Aboriginal leaders on the grounds that the building was “not a culturally appropriate space.” Now, some groups are calling for a building that will not be a mere “hand-me-down,” to use the words of the Indigenous Task Force of the Royal Architectural Institute of Canada.

Earlier in its mandate, the government also reneged on its promise to enact the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples - presumably after it became apparent that it would be utterly unworkable to incorporate the UNDRIP into Canadian law. The Liberals could have avoided disappointing a lot of people if they had never made this grand, symbolic promise in the first place.

Given that the Liberal government won so much easy credit for offering little more than gestures on this file, it seems just that they’re now struggling to catch a single break. Perhaps, having been chastened by these flops, it will now see value in taking tangible action.

It could be done, and immediately. As we noted in a 2015 editorial, “58 reports (have already) contained plenty of very common-sense recommendations: Improved data-gathering …; better access to transportation, shelters and safe housing; and improved relations with police. … (B)oth aboriginal and non-aboriginal leaders have spoken of the need for comprehensive improvement in aboriginal Canadians’ lives: better and less crowded housing, education improvement, fighting addictions, job opportunities.”

Two years later, we’re no further ahead and this government isn’t meaningfully helping. There are dozens of reports containing hundreds of recommendations gathering dust on shelves in Ottawa, while the planned inquiry haplessly spins its wheels and descends into pointless bickering. If we want to protect and improve lives, enough with the gestures. Start fixing the problems.
 
jollyjacktar said:
That election,  sadly, is a ways off.  Will this still be a hot button topic for folks (myself excluded) come then?  I will be expressing my displeasure at the ballot box without question but I'm not sure about the general public.

I think it will, it's is a easy story to retell and can be added to some other event closer to the election, if word gets out that any of the money goes to anything that might look like hardline Muslim group, then there will be hell to pay. If there is a major terrorist attack in Canada, this will be on people's minds.
 
Colin P said:
I think it will, it's is a easy story to retell and can be added to some other event closer to the election, if word gets out that any of the money goes to anything that might look like hardline Muslim group, then there will be hell to pay. If there is a major terrorist attack in Canada, this will be on people's minds.

Most of it will go to his lawyers, who have been unpaid to this point.  There's also a slightly greater than 50% chance that Khadr's conviction will be overturned in US court (probably a greater chance than that actually).  If it is, the narrative changes significantly.
 
jmt18325 said:
Most of it will go to his lawyers, who have been unpaid to this point.  There's also a slightly greater than 50% chance that Khadr's conviction will be overturned in US court (probably a greater chance than that actually).  If it is, the narrative changes significantly.

I am nearly 100% certain that the Feds paid him $10.5 million, PLUS his legal fees.

Please correct me if I am wrong.
 
SeaKingTacco said:
I am nearly 100% certain that the Feds paid him $10.5 million, PLUS his legal fees.

Please correct me if I am wrong.

I don't think so.  They had to pay costs for each of the judgements in his favour, but I didn't see anything about his continuing legal fees.
 
jmt18325 said:
Most of it will go to his lawyers, who have been unpaid to this point.  There's also a slightly greater than 50% chance that Khadr's conviction will be overturned in US court (probably a greater chance than that actually).  If it is, the narrative changes significantly.

His Lawyers earned it, they did a great job painting him as some sort of innocent kid. I am convinced that we interrupted a fruitful career in AQ that was mapped out for him and that he was eagerly hoping for.
 
jmt18325 said:
I don't think so.  They had to pay costs for each of the judgements in his favour, but I didn't see anything about his continuing legal fees.

For once, I hope you're right.  If so, all's the more reason for the Feds to have dragged this out in court to the bitter end, as far as I'm concerned.
 
Colin P said:
His Lawyers earned it, they did a great job painting him as some sort of innocent kid. I am convinced that we interrupted a fruitful career in AQ that was mapped out for him and that he was eagerly hoping for.

Of that, I have no doubt you're right.  His family was his main influence, and we all know where that was going.  He was a kid though, dragged away from his home at 9 to go do god knows what.
 
jollyjacktar said:
For once, I hope you're right.  If so, all's the more reason for the Feds to have dragged this out in court to the bitter end, as far as I'm concerned.

In that case, they would have had to pay costs, when they inevitably lost.  Don't take what I said as gospel though.  Just because I didn't hear it, doesn't mean that it didn't happen.
 
Colin P said:
I think it will, it's is a easy story to retell and can be added to some other event closer to the election, if word gets out that any of the money goes to anything that might look like hardline Muslim group, then there will be hell to pay. If there is a major terrorist attack in Canada, this will be on people's minds.

As much as this is a hot button issue. This is what I dislike the most about Canadian Politics. It's more about being punishing an outgoing party then taking in the platform of the incoming party

Don't get me wrong, I hope this is remembered when the next election happens, but as much as I disagree with Justin Trudeau, I still don't like it when someone votes for a party for the sole reason they are not another party. This seems to play out over and over in our politics.
 
jmt18325 said:
Of that, I have no doubt you're right.  His family was his main influence, and we all know where that was going.  He was a kid though, dragged away from his home at 9 to go do god knows what.

dragged? or did he follow as kids do. I don't buy the "influenced crap" He knew what he was doing and likely had a pretty good idea that his ties to Canada ended when he started making and planting bombs. I am surrounded by kids 8-12 right now and already they have a good sense of right and wrong, better than some adults.
 
jmt18325 said:
In that case, they would have had to pay costs, when they inevitably lost.  Don't take what I said as gospel though.  Just because I didn't hear it, doesn't mean that it didn't happen.

I will be more surprised to learn that they in fact let Khadr pay his own costs than I would be to find they wussed out and paid that too.
 
I cannot find the article I thought I read saying the Feds paid his legal bills, too.

Every other article I googled indicated that the 10.5 million included his legal fees.

I was wrong.
 
SeaKingTacco said:
I cannot find the article I thought I read saying the Feds paid his legal bills, too.

Every other article I googled indicated that the 10.5 million included his legal fees.

I was wrong.

Still even if its 30-40% of the settlement ,which is not unheard of, Khadr still walks with more than 6m.

In the end Business is good for that Lawyer, he's representing the 5 who are suing CSIS now.
 
jmt18325 said:
Of that, I have no doubt you're right.  His family was his main influence, and we all know where that was going.  He was a kid though, dragged away from his home at 9 to go do god knows what.

What? Build IEDs.

Regards
G2G
 
The government should have fought it out in court, since the legal principle seems to have been Khadar's rights were violated. I'm not a lawyer and would appreciate feedback from one, but my sense is that taking up arms against Canada and her allies as Khadar and indeed his entire family did negates any rights or claims they have against Canada. That being the case, he (and by extension any people who take up arms against the nation) no longer have any "rights" or claims on Canada, nor do we have any obligations to them (outside of any LOAC considerations).

I was also interested in Trudeau's demand that opposition MP's stop talking about the issue (especially in the US), since this makes sweeping the entire issue under the rug that much harder.
 
Well the Loyal Jiga (spelling?) took place earlier that year, so he was fighting the lawful government of the land and the US. Not sure if Canadian troops were on the soil. My read of the SCC decision was they were duty bound to request extradition but any compensation if at all was up to the government. At the end of the day saying "Sorry for interviewing you while sleep deprived and sharing that information with our allies" and then state, we will consider charges under the ATA if you pursue the matter. 
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top