A message from CSIS agent who leaked information to the media

[I am Groot]

I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this in the media before.

Why I blew the whistle on Chinese interference in Canada’s elections

When I joined the public service many years ago, I swore an oath.

Not to party or to person, but to my country, to its democratic institutions and to my fellow Canadians.

When I first became aware of the significance of the threat posed by outside interference to our democratic institutions, I worked – as have many unnamed and tireless colleagues – to equip our leaders with the knowledge and the tools needed to take action against it.

Months passed, and then years. The threat grew in urgency; serious action remained unforthcoming. I endeavored, alone and with others, to raise concerns about this threat directly to those in a position to hold our top officials to account. Regrettably, those individuals were unable to do so.

In the time that passed, another federal election had come and gone, the threat of interference had grown, and it had become increasingly clear that no serious action was being considered. Worse still, evidence of senior public officials ignoring interference was beginning to mount.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-whistleblower-china-canada-election-interference/

Edited March 18, 2023 by I am Groot

[Dougie93]

21 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

I don't think I've ever seen anything quite like this in the media before.

Why I blew the whistle on Chinese interference in Canada’s elections

When I joined the public service many years ago, I swore an oath.

Not to party or to person, but to my country, to its democratic institutions and to my fellow Canadians.

that's not actually true

the oath that CSIS officers swear is as follows :

I, [name], do swear, that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles III

thus this CSIS officer is invoking a Canadian republic which does not exist, as their justification

hence I would say that the Prime Minister has a case

that this officer is in fact in violation of their oath, and is admitting so publicly

[West]

2 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

that's not actually true

the oath that CSIS officers swear is as follows :

I, [name], do swear, that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles III

thus this CSIS officer is invoking a Canadian republic which does not exist, as their justification

hence I would say that the Prime Minister has a case

that this officer is in fact in violation of their oath, and is admitting so publicly

Sure. The King, not the Chinese Communist Party. Unless the King himself loves the Chinese

[CdnFox]

4 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

that's not actually true

the oath that CSIS officers swear is as follows :

I, [name], do swear, that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles III

thus this CSIS officer is invoking a Canadian republic which does not exist, as their justification

hence I would say that the Prime Minister has a case

that this officer is in fact in violation of their oath, and is admitting so publicly

Seeing this is about canadian sovereignty why don't you leave it to Canadians to discuss. You can go back to your drivel elsewhere.

[CdnFox]

The Globe is knocking it out of the park with this issue. Normally they tend to the left but at the end of the day they need revenue same as anyone else and print what is popular.

I don't know how you can read this as a Canadian and not be concerned as hell.

[eyeball]

50 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I don't know how you can read this as a Canadian and not be concerned as hell.

It seems easy enough given the decades and decades of conniving Machiavellian governance that we've been subjected to before this.  Why now and how will being concerned make my life better going forward? How bent out of shape do I have to get and what's the payoff look like?

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, eyeball said:

It seems easy enough given the decades and decades of conniving Machiavellian governance that we've been subjected to before this. 

I don't think the average person knew that it was this serious.  Further historically  people tolerate a little abuse but when it gets serious they get angry. Everyone knows the liberals have always been corrupt but the sponsorship scandal set people off with it's scope and brazenness.  I think this would tend to fall under the same thing normally,

3 minutes ago, eyeball said:

 How bent out of shape do I have to get and what's the payoff look like?

Give me a dodecahedron and 20 push ups and we'll call it fair

Bent enough to speak out about it and not vote liberal next election and even better let some liberal mps know how you feel. And let the party you do vote for know you expect them to get to the bottom of this.

The pay off is that while you're not going to stop this kind of abuse entirely you can seriously curtail it.  which is good for our democracy.

The pay off is that if enough do that then the libs will suffer at the polls and realize that

[eyeball]

10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I don't think the average person knew that it was this serious.

**** 'em then if that's the case. They deserve the governance they get for not paying attention.

[Moonlight Graham]

6 hours ago, Dougie93 said:

that's not actually true

the oath that CSIS officers swear is as follows :

I, [name], do swear, that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to His Majesty King Charles III

thus this CSIS officer is invoking a Canadian republic which does not exist, as their justification

hence I would say that the Prime Minister has a case

that this officer is in fact in violation of their oath, and is admitting so publicly

Do you have a link to this oath for CSIS officers?

If this is the oath, they are still acting in allegiance to King Charles.  Their allegiance isn't to MP's who are acting in concert with foreign adversaries and breaking their own oaths.  And if the PM is acting on their own interests and the interests of a foreign country, the PM is acting contrary to their oath of allegiance to King Charles.

The job of CSIS is to protect the national security of the country.  If they have to break the law in order to protect the country from severe and fundamental national security threats, you do it, in the most minimally harmful way possible.

How much are the Chinese or Russians paying you?

Edited March 18, 2023 by Moonlight Graham

[Moonlight Graham]

41 minutes ago, eyeball said:

It seems easy enough given the decades and decades of conniving Machiavellian governance that we've been subjected to before this.  Why now and how will being concerned make my life better going forward? How bent out of shape do I have to get and what's the payoff look like?

Well maybe the laws you live under won't be increasingly bought and paid for by the Chinese Communist Party?  Or we can just run and hide.

[Moonlight Graham]

1 hour ago, CdnFox said:

Seeing this is about canadian sovereignty why don't you leave it to Canadians to discuss. You can go back to your drivel elsewhere.

You're right.  He's not a Canadian.  He's a Brit and an American.

Edited March 18, 2023 by Moonlight Graham

[Moonlight Graham]

Quote

"So let me be clear: as troubling as the revelations we have seen are, I do not believe that foreign interference dictated the present composition of our federal government. Nor do I believe that any of our elected leaders is a traitor to our country. "

Not a traitor??  Geez even the CSIS leaker is a PC soft-language type.  Call a spade a spade.  If you break your oath of allegiance and act on behalf of malicious foreign government over the fundamental national security and democratic interests of the King's and his country you're a traitor.  Pure and simple.

This op-ed is just a psy-op to construct a case and the proper narrative the gain support for an investigation and accountability into what's happening here.

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

**** 'em then if that's the case. They deserve the governance they get for not paying attention.

Paying attention to what? The gov't and it's media minions haven't exactly been allowing that kind of story to get out there. And when it does it's portrayed as an isolated case where the people involved are all gone now.

pay no attention to the man behind the curtain

[Dougie93]

8 hours ago, West said:

Sure. The King, not the Chinese Communist Party. Unless the King himself loves the Chinese

under the Westminster Parliament which governs Canada

the will of the King is expressed by the Parliament

it's called Parliamentary Supremacy

the MP's swear an oath of allegiance to the monarch, which is a legally binding oath

the MP's do not swear fealty to the Canadian people

that would be a republic

but Canada is not a republic

[Dougie93]

7 hours ago, CdnFox said:

Seeing this is about canadian sovereignty why don't you leave it to Canadians to discuss. You can go back to your drivel elsewhere.

it doesn't matter if I think that the Prime Minister is a Communist traitor

I'm welcome to that opinion, ostensibly under Section 7 of the Charter

but since Canada is not a republic, there is no public rule in Canada :

the Prime Minister does not answer to me

this CSIS officer is invoking fealty to res publica, public rule

but since Canada is a monarchy

that would appear to be mutiny against the Crown

[Dougie93]

5 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

You're right.  He's not a Canadian.  He's a Brit and an American.

surely Britons & Americans can read the Constitution Act of Canada

wherein it states that all officers of Canada swear fealty to the monarch

wherein it states that a Prime Minister has Parliamentary Supremacy

so the Prime Minister is in fact empowered to keep secrets from the Canadian public in the name of the King

and if CSIS officers take it upon themselves to disclose those secrets in the name of a de facto republic

that is the definition of a mutiny

[Dougie93]

6 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

Do you have a link to this oath for CSIS officers?

that is the oath of allegiance in Canada :

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/O-1/page-1.html

I, [name], do swear that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to his Majesty King Charles the Third, King of Canada, His Heirs and Successors. So help me God

Those required to take the oath

The following persons must take the Oath of Allegiance before occupying a governmental, military, police, or judicial post. Generally, these individuals are appointed by the monarch or relevant viceroy, meaning they serve at His Majesty's pleasure, and are charged with creating or administering the law.

Federal

• Governors general of Canada
• Members of the King's Privy Council for Canada
• Senators
• Members of parliament
• Clerk of the House of Commons
• Justices of the Supreme Court of Canada
• Justices of the Federal Court of Appeal
• Justices of the Federal Court
• Justice of the Tax Court of Canada
• Citizenship Judges
• All employees of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service
• Recruits of the Canadian Armed Forces^[40]
• Members of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police^[41]
• Officers of the Canada Border Services Agency
• Locally engaged staff at Canada's foreign missions who are Canadian citizens
• Employees of Correctional Service Canada

Edited March 18, 2023 by Dougie93

[Dougie93]

6 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

 

If this is the oath, they are still acting in allegiance to King Charles.  Their allegiance isn't to MP's who are acting in concert with foreign adversaries and breaking their own oaths.  And if the PM is acting on their own interests and the interests of a foreign country, the PM is acting contrary to their oath of allegiance to King Charles.

The job of CSIS is to protect the national security of the country.  If they have to break the law in order to protect the country from severe and fundamental national security threats, you do it, in the most minimally harmful way possible.

there is no requirement to break the law

the CSIS officer could have invoked their oath to the monarch as justification

asserting that the Prime Minister is in violation of his oath, so the CSIS officer is bound to report it

but that is not what the CSIS officer said

the Prime Minister claims that something untoward is going on, somebody at CSIS has gone rogue in effect

when the CSIS officer is invoking fealty to some sort of public rule which is not in the constitution

that would lend credence to the Prime Minister's version of events

furthermore, CSIS is not permitted to break the law, that is expressly prohibited

but if they are breaking the law to overthrow Parliamentary Supremacy as you assert

that would be sedition & mutiny by definition

[Dougie93]

6 hours ago, Moonlight Graham said:

How much are the Chinese or Russians paying you?

I am simply invoking the Canada Act of 1982 as it is written

if Canadians are under the impression that they live in a republic which is not in the Constitution Act ?

don't blame me, those Canadians are simply mistaken

[Dougie93]

8 hours ago, CdnFox said:

I don't know how you can read this as a Canadian and not be concerned as hell.

I think Americans should be concerned as well

but Americans have to look at the big picture

not only that Canada appears to be falling under the undue influence of the Chinese Communists

but that this seems to be inciting political instability in Canada

wherein it appears that the military, police & security services in Canada

may be at the threshold of mutiny against their own government

[Zeitgeist]

One would hope, in a rational society, that since the MP’s are elected by the people to represent their interests, including the PM, and the PM appoints the Governor General (monarch’s representative in Canada), that would indicate that loyalty to the Crown is loyalty to the people, especially since the monarch is considered the final last resort of the people if Parliament begins to work against the interests of the people. I won’t get into the fact that our Governor General is the PM’s hand-picked puppet.

CSIS seems to be saying that the MP’s, including the PMO, are not a disinterested party in this Chinese interference because they have benefited from it and likely looked the other way.  The price of this Faustian bargain, of course, is that our Liberal leadership are now beholden to the Chinese and inextricably linked to the various tethers of clubs, associations, “police stations”, study groups, news media, etc. that are funded and installed by China.

The bigger problem for Canada is that this kind of influence could take hold, grow, and endure.  Even in the days of Chrétien there was mounting concern about the amount of power held within the PMO.  Even then the word “dictatorship” was used by intellectuals to describe how the PM ruled: the whipped votes, reliance on unelected advisors, and so on.  I think that tendency has only grown under the Telford-Trudeau PMO and Cabinet. That this quasi-dictatorship appears to be in bed with China is a serious concern for Canadian democracy.

Edited March 18, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[Dougie93]

1 minute ago, Zeitgeist said:

 that would indicate that loyalty to the Crown is loyalty to the people

only those people whom are loyal to the Crown themselves

but how many Canadians are actually Loyalists ?

the vast majority of Canadians whom I ask, say that they are not Loyalist and couldn't care less about the Crown

most Canadians I speak to about it, are de facto republicans, who actually embrace the American religion therein

[Dougie93]

9 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

 the monarch is considered the final last resort of the people if Parliament begins to work against the interests of the people.

then why did this Canadian officer not invoke that ?

this Canadian officer did not invoke the King as last resort

this Canadian officer invoked a de facto Canadian republic which does not exist under Canadian law

that is not a Loyalist speaking to me

[Zeitgeist]

9 minutes ago, Dougie93 said:

only those people whom are loyal to the Crown themselves

but how many Canadians are actually Loyalists ?

the vast majority of Canadians whom I ask, say that they are not Loyalist and couldn't care less about the Crown

most Canadians I speak to about it, are de facto republicans, who actually embrace the American religion therein

Well I’m a Loyalist as long as our monarch supports democratic representation.  Our Gov Gen and entourage, as well as the Cabinet, seem so unaccountable and self-interested that it’s hard to see much connection to the people.  King Charles can’t even get his coronation launched.  The Canadian public seem asleep both to their traditions and the importance of representative democracy, so they made this bed by allowing this to happen — perhaps until the next election, though I’m skeptical. And yes, America is looking relatively wise right now, even with their zombie President and radical left EDI government (which looks similar to ours).

Edited March 18, 2023 by Zeitgeist

[Dougie93]

13 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

The bigger problem for Canada is that this kind of influence could take hold, grow, and endure.

would it not be a problem for Canada as well, if this kind of influence incited a revolution against the Crown ?

as there are increasing signs of sedition & mutiny in the ranks, against Parliamentary Supremacy itself