- Reaction score
- 6,284
- Points
- 1,040
Also, the leader of the official opposition should get appropriate security clearance and receive confidential briefings. Both things can be true.Thank you Discussion ends there. It really is that simple.
Also, the leader of the official opposition should get appropriate security clearance and receive confidential briefings. Both things can be true.Thank you Discussion ends there. It really is that simple.
Get appropriate security clearance =/= receive confidential briefings. Particularly if the receipt of those briefings is going to be used to effectively silence you.Also, the leader of the official opposition should get appropriate security clearance and receive confidential briefings. Both things can be true.
Well he hasn't gotten the clearnace or gotten the briefings, so is a moot point.Get appropriate security clearance =/= receive confidential briefings. Particularly if the receipt of those briefings is going to be used to effectively silence you.
Interesting interpretation...Well he hasn't gotten the clearnace or gotten the briefings, so is a moot point.
I have no tolerance for people that remain intentionally ignorant for convenience. There is nothing stopping him from getting the briefing and publically saying the allegations from Trudeau are lies, or that there are LPC MPs with similar allegations.
I think pretty much everyone on here with time in the CAF has knowledge of confidential things and can still speak about generalities on a lot of it without getting into anything that breaches confidentiality, so this is a pretty weird spot to hear people making that position. The only thing he won't be able to speak about is specific information that is confidential, which he can't speak about anyway because he hasn't been briefed on this, so it's a circular bullshit argument.
Refusing to get clearance and a briefing is a gimmick, nothing more, but pretty much on par for someone that has never had a job outside politics.
I feel like most Canadians don't give a shit about the semantics anymore.For context, the CBC article I listed above also talks about why just releasing the names is a bad idea:
If you’re comfortable with the aftermath of our agents’ and informants’ covers blown and put in danger, our enemies knowing our methods of obtaining information, our allies losing what little trust they had in us by blowing info they gave to us in confidence wide open and the government losing a bajillion dollars in libel lawsuits, then sure let’s do it.I feel like most Canadians don't give a shit about the semantics anymore.
They government should release the names and deal with the aftermath.
I feel like most Canadians don't give a shit about the semantics anymore.
They government should release the names and deal with the aftermath.
I’m so torn with this. Are these parliamentarians active agents, unwilling informants, or useful idiots? Do they need a stern talking to, a quiet word to resign or a public shaming?If you’re comfortable with the aftermath of our agents’ and informants’ covers blown and put in danger, our enemies knowing our methods of obtaining information, our allies losing what little trust they had in us by blowing info they gave to us in confidence wide open and the government losing a bajillion dollars in libel lawsuits, then sure let’s do it.
Or we can fix the problem we have in this country with converting intelligence into prosecutable evidence, which our peers seem to figure out.
…and you’re comfortable that Trudeau & Co. have Canadians’ best interests at heart and are working with all concerned to ensure that Canada’s intelligence and prosecutable evidence is being actioned?If you’re comfortable with the aftermath of our agents’ and informants’ covers blown and put in danger, our enemies knowing our methods of obtaining information, our allies losing what little trust they had in us by blowing info they gave to us in confidence wide open and the government losing a bajillion dollars in libel lawsuits, then sure let’s do it.
Or we can fix the problem we have in this country with converting intelligence into prosecutable evidence, which our peers seem to figure out.
I’m so torn with this. Are these parliamentarians active agents, unwilling informants, or useful idiots? Do they need a stern talking to, a quiet word to resign or a public shaming?
What I do know is that the PMO/PCO have failed massively in treating insidious foreign meddling in a professional manner with the best interests of the Nation as a whole. I pray the opposition is taking notes on how to do better?
I am absolutely not comfortable about this. Check my posting history. I have posted a lot about this and have been harsh with the Liberals’ coziness with Beijing. However until we can prosecute people with intelligence like our peers can, we’re stuck in this shitty situation.…and you’re comfortable that Trudeau & Co. have Canadians’ best interests at heart and are working with all concerned to ensure that Canada’s intelligence and prosecutable evidence is being actioned?
At this rate, that’s a 2nd-order consequence, and we have 1st-order factors as voters of not knowing who not to potentially trust, because the extant Government has done the absolute opposite of foster transparency in responsible government. Other FVEYs members have had their own quandary’s of weighing national security vs potentially compromising sources. If people think for a second that it’s better to keep things hushed and not address any known but unspoken and unaddressed parliamentarian compromise for the sake of potentially impacting sources that we don’t even know were or were not formative to the silenced case in f foreign interference, I’d say it’s time to reassess risk-reward. A Chinese vassal-state would be an even worse compromise than a nation-state that addresses the pre-vassal compromised government.The biggest consequence I am worried about if we “name the names” (which I really do want) is that our Five Eye allies will no longer trust us with their intelligence that they don’t want in the public sphere. We’re already in the doghouse with them.
I am absolutely not comfortable about this. Check my posting history. I have posted a lot about this and have been harsh with the Liberals’ coziness with Beijing. However until we can prosecute people with intelligence like our peers can, we’re stuck in this shitty situation.
The biggest consequence I am worried about if we “name the names” (which I really do want) is that our Five Eye allies will no longer trust us with their intelligence that they don’t want in the public sphere. We’re already in the doghouse with them.
McCarthyism at it's finest. But cannot the PM or someone else in security deem an individual as being need to know on any particular issue without going through the full security routine? To my mind JT should be able to call PP and provide him with a heads up. Should be a no-brainer.If you’re comfortable with the aftermath of our agents’ and informants’ covers blown and put in danger, our enemies knowing our methods of obtaining information, our allies losing what little trust they had in us by blowing info they gave to us in confidence wide open and the government losing a bajillion dollars in libel lawsuits, then sure let’s do it.
Or we can fix the problem we have in this country with converting intelligence into prosecutable evidence, which our peers seem to figure out.
Yup. The guy who for years ‘hasn’t been informed’ goes full Robert Downey Junior on his opponent because suddenly he’s deigned to be informed himself.McCarthyism at it's finest. But cannot the PM or someone else in security deem an individual as being need to know on any particular issue without going through the full security routine? To my mind JT should be able to call PP and provide him with a heads up. Should be a no-brainer.
So the Bill Clinton message in the 1995 Quebec referendum and OBama's tweet during a more recent Election were NOT foreign influence? It sure got Liberals revved up.At least we don't reach out to foreigners for campaign dirt, or invite foreign politicians to come here and campaign for a party. Or at least it seems to me, so far.