Michael Hardner Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 4 minutes ago, I am Groot said: 1. I can't ignore the reality that... 2. ... they're told from the moment they set foot in Canada that this is not a real nation and is nothing but a seething mass of racism, oppression and white supremacy. 1. You claim to aspire to living in reality... 2. And in the same post, you write hyperbole. Not interested today... 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am Groot Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 Just now, Michael Hardner said: 1. You claim to aspire to living in reality... 2. And in the same post, you write hyperbole. Not interested today... Don't worry, Michael. I've never thought reality was important for you whenever the subject veers into identity politics territory. There you seem to be me to be pretty much in lockstep with Trudeau and Singh. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 36 minutes ago, I am Groot said: In other words, the Liberals won't tell her the names, even though she has this glorious clearance the Left is frantically demanding Poilievre get. You just explained why. Because the clearance is meaningless. The Liberals won't tell anyone anything they don't want them to know about. Including the judge investigating foreign interference. WTF is wrong with you?? She saw and read the report, in it's entirety as she has the required security clearance which is something PP doers not have so he cannot read it. You are clearly completely ignorant of what a secret security clearance is and how to get it and what it entitles you to read. Are actually daft enough to think that a political party can manipulate a secret report when provided to a person with the clearance? Man, what a pathetic uninformed loser LOL https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/may-has-no-worries-about-traitors-in-parliament-after-reading-intelligence-committee-report-1.6922179 https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/green-leader-elizabeth-may-says-no-list-of-disloyal-mps-in-full-spy-watchdog-report/ar-BB1o216T Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 7 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: WTF is wrong with you?? She saw and read the report, in it's entirety as she has the required security clearance which is something PP doers not have so he cannot read it. You are clearly completely ignorant of what a secret security clearance is and how to get it and what it entitles you to read. Are actually daft enough to think that a political party can manipulate a secret report when provided to a person with the clearance? Man, what a pathetic uninformed loser LOL https://www.ctvnews.ca/mobile/politics/may-has-no-worries-about-traitors-in-parliament-after-reading-intelligence-committee-report-1.6922179 https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/canada/green-leader-elizabeth-may-says-no-list-of-disloyal-mps-in-full-spy-watchdog-report/ar-BB1o216T It is CSIS themselves that are the author of the report that there was MP's that helped a feign government help taint our elections. So who are we going to trust CSIS the guys that made the report or windbag May...now perhaps she is right, then CSIS needs to be investigated on the validity of the report, perhaps someone over there needs to be fired or let go... or May needs to justify her statement,or have some form of consequences. in any case it is far from over... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 (edited) 39 minutes ago, Army Guy said: It is CSIS themselves that are the author of the report that there was MP's that helped a feign government help taint our elections. So who are we going to trust CSIS the guys that made the report or windbag May...now perhaps she is right, then CSIS needs to be investigated on the validity of the report, perhaps someone over there needs to be fired or let go... or May needs to justify her statement,or have some form of consequences. in any case it is far from over... Ok, so you are saying that the CSIS report said one former MP may have done something don't believe them? On what basis? Media? PP? You are saying CSIS lied on the report You are saying May lied in her press conference? I think that you need a lot more evidence than your say so to back up your accusations. I am very surprised at your dip into the conspiracy pool Edited June 11 by ExFlyer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I am Groot Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 (edited) 1 hour ago, ExFlyer said: WTF is wrong with you?? I guess I'm just too smart for you to understand. You SAY she read the entire report. And it doesn't mention names. But the names are known. THAT is the only information having the secret clearance would be useful for. And you can be damned sure Trudeau knows those names, as do other senior people in the PMO. They're just not going to tell any outsiders, including her. You simply can't face the fact that your beloved Liberals are the most secretive government in Canadian history and care nothing about national security. Edited June 11 by I am Groot Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 16 minutes ago, I am Groot said: I guess I'm just too smart for you to understand. You SAY she read the entire report. And it doesn't mention names. But the names are known. THAT is the only information having the secret clearance would be useful for. And you can be damned sure Trudeau knows those names, as do other senior people in the PMO. They're just not going to tell any outsiders, including her. You simply can't face the fact that your beloved Liberals are the most secretive government in Canadian history and care nothing about national security. Actually, @ExFlyer is the one with the reading challenge as i pointed out elsewhere. May definitely said there were names but that she believed all but one did not INTEND to betray the country. A 'small number' (however many that is) may have betrayed canada without deliberately intending to. My comment was 'fine, release the names and state you don't think the things they did were intentional'. But there's definitely a list of names of people who by intent OR unwittingly allowed their position to benefit a foreign nation and interfere with our democracy, and they should have to explain themselves. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 22 minutes ago, I am Groot said: I guess I'm just too smart for you to understand. You SAY she read the entire report. And it doesn't mention names. But the names are known. THAT is the only information having the secret clearance would be useful for. And you can be damned sure Trudeau knows those names, as do other senior people in the PMO. They're just not going to tell any outsiders, including her. You simply can't face the fact that your beloved Liberals are the most secretive government in Canadian history and care nothing about national security. How the F do you know it has names?? Are you secret cleared and read the report?? I have no stake in a CSIS report and neither does any political party. The investigation and report are outside of government control. You normally are a receptive and knowledgeable poster but are falling into the conspiracy hole. Sad you are dipping in thst direction. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 2 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: How the F do you know it has names?? Elizabeth May said so. She's read it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goddess Posted June 11 Author Report Share Posted June 11 30 minutes ago, CdnFox said: Elizabeth May said so. She's read it. Does she even have all the information? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 1 hour ago, CdnFox said: Elizabeth May said so. She's read it. She said there was one name...an ex MP Your comprehension issues rising up again LOL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted June 11 Report Share Posted June 11 (edited) 42 minutes ago, Goddess said: Does she even have all the information? Well she often has all of the information, the problem is for a box of Timmy's she'll say whatever you damn well like And there's the drinking. "First person on MY list is Chardonnay!!!!" Edited June 11 by CdnFox Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 On 6/11/2024 at 4:06 PM, ExFlyer said: Ok, so you are saying that the CSIS report said one former MP may have done something don't believe them? On what basis? Media? PP? You are saying CSIS lied on the report You are saying May lied in her press conference? I think that you need a lot more evidence than your say so to back up your accusations. I am very surprised at your dip into the conspiracy pool I'm saying that CSIS is the author of the report, and reported facts that one or more MP's did help foreign agents... I'm saying May, said she did not see a list of mp's names that were listed, perhaps she misread the report or did not interrupted the report correctly..or she out right lied...or there were not a list of names.....Based upon what she said it implies there is nothing to see here....She said she is confident that NO mp's were guilty of treasonous acts... BUT and there is always a but CSIS thinks other wise or it would have stated so in the report....You've read top secret documents before they are not always black and white, they are based on the reader and the need to know...MAY , may have the clearance but really does not need to know all the facts...like the list of names... What i think is that CSIS did report on a subject it was suppose to, and reported what it did find...that some of our MP's did in fact help out foreign governments to what extent no one knows yet... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 27 minutes ago, Army Guy said: I'm saying that CSIS is the author of the report, and reported facts that one or more MP's did help foreign agents... .... I stopped reading your post after the first sentence. Somehow you seem to indicate that you know the content in the CSIS report, regardless that it is top secret. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 16 minutes ago, ExFlyer said: I stopped reading your post after the first sentence. Somehow you seem to indicate that you know the content in the CSIS report, regardless that it is top secret. You always were one to stick your head in the sand when you hear something you don't like. It IS a REPORTED FACT that the report details cases of MP's aiding foreign agents. That is true. That has been reported in the media. So to stop reading at that point just because he said something that is true is disingenuous. Why don't you reply to his points. They're entirely valid. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 On 6/11/2024 at 10:45 AM, I am Groot said: In other words, the Liberals won't tell her the names, even though she has this glorious clearance the Left is frantically demanding Poilievre get. She's telling us more than anyone else that knows what the report says. If there's still a list that Liberals are withholding despite May's clearance and assertion there is no list it'll be interesting to see how that plays out. $10 says the un-named former MP that May fingered is a Conservative. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CdnFox Posted June 12 Report Share Posted June 12 1 minute ago, eyeball said: She's telling us more than anyone else that knows what the report says. If there's still a list that Liberals are withholding despite May's clearance and assertion there is no list it'll be interesting to see how that plays out. $10 says the un-named former MP that May fingered is a Conservative. May said there was a list. She just said that only one name on that list looked like it may have been treason. The others didn't appear to have looked like they intended to help other nations intentionally. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Army Guy Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 4 hours ago, ExFlyer said: I stopped reading your post after the first sentence. Somehow you seem to indicate that you know the content in the CSIS report, regardless that it is top secret. Somehow you seem to know what is "NOT" in the report...Why would CSIS produce a "top secret "report on MP's that may have been involved in foreign interference if it had no merit...Are they known for producing reports that make accusations that are not valid ?...are they working for the conservatives?...Are you telling readers that May has seen ALL the info on the subject or just what is in the report.....you tell us YOU are the one saying the report is false news...what do you know that we do not... What we DO know is that CSIS produced a report that casts one or more Canadian MP in a very bad light...your seem to be telling everyone move on nothing worth your time here...when the subject is worth everyone's time if true, and if it proves to be false then CSIS report authors need to be looked fired .... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ExFlyer Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 (edited) 11 hours ago, Army Guy said: Somehow you seem to know what is "NOT" in the report...Why would CSIS produce a "top secret "report on MP's that may have been involved in foreign interference if it had no merit...Are they known for producing reports that make accusations that are not valid ?...are they working for the conservatives?...Are you telling readers that May has seen ALL the info on the subject or just what is in the report.....you tell us YOU are the one saying the report is false news...what do you know that we do not... What we DO know is that CSIS produced a report that casts one or more Canadian MP in a very bad light...your seem to be telling everyone move on nothing worth your time here...when the subject is worth everyone's time if true, and if it proves to be false then CSIS report authors need to be looked fired .... I do not know anything that is in the report except what was said by Elizabeth May in her press conference.. I do know the report is top secret and only persons with top secret clearance can see it. I do know that one person that has that clearance has openly said there were no list and only one person was named and that person, an ex MP, should be investigated and charged. As I understand, the CSIS investigation and resulting report was to determine if there were any MP's engaged with foreign countries that may have interfered with our elections. As the one person willing to discuss it said, no sitting MP was mentioned. I am not "telling everyone move on nothing worth your time here" at all, what I am telling is that, as the person that read the report said there was no sitting MP's named in the report and and only an ex MP was named.is an ex MP. Speculation is just that, speculation. If you wish to call Elizabeth a liar, by all means, be my guest. Edited June 13 by ExFlyer Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Queenmandy85 Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 (edited) The thing to give us comfort is: 1. Very few MP's have access to anything a foreign government would be interested in or any influence that would be useful. This is a tempest in a teapot. Edited June 13 by Queenmandy85 Not sure who is listening in... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 (edited) 1 hour ago, ExFlyer said: I am not "telling everyone move on nothing worth your time here" at all, what I am telling is that, as the person that read the report said there was no sitting MP's named in the report and and only an ex MP was named.is an ex MP. It should be obvious Elizabeth May is saying there is nothing here to see folks, move on. That is not what the media has been reporting for many days now. For some reason she is playing the "nothing here to see" card. What she is up to is not clear. "May was the first party leader to read the entire report by the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP) that found that some parliamentarians were “semi-witting or witting” participants in foreign interference efforts in Canadian politics." Elizabeth May says there is 'no list' of MPs in NSICOP report | National Post If some MPs were "semi-witting or witting" participants in foreign interference efforts, who is Elizabeth May to play it down and dismiss it? I don't believe her take on it. You can if you want. Unless we know exactly what has been going on and what these MPs have been doing, we are not really in a position to dismiss it as a nothing burger as Elizabeth May has done. I wouldn't trust her in anything she says. She says there is "no list" of MPs. The fact that the names are not listed does not mean there are no MPs who participated in foreign interference. The report says there are MPs who participated. She is playing loosely with words to make it sound like there is nothing to be concerned about. Edited June 13 by blackbird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 (edited) " For now, the government and opposition parties agree with the Bloc Québécois’ motion to ask Justice Marie-Josée Hogue to look into the allegations contained in the NSICOP report as part of her work as commissioner of the public inquiry into foreign interference. May said that while she was intending to vote in favour of the Bloc’s motion, she changed her mind after reading the unredacted version of the NSICOP report. The motion was adopted by all parties, with only May and Green MP Mike Morrice voting against." Elizabeth May says there is 'no list' of MPs in NSICOP report | National Post Elizabeth May and one other MP voted against asking Justice Marie-Josee Hogue to look into the allegations in the report. They were the only two MPs who voted against it. What is wrong with them? Why would they oppose looking into the allegations? I wouldn't trust May with anything. Why is she trying to dismiss the whole thing? What makes her think she is an expert and has all the answers? I see two reasons why May has come out in opposing investigating these allegations and trying to downplay the whole thing: 1. She is a long time Anglican which is a type of social gospel church. It is not a fundamental Bible-believing church. They are divided over things like blessing same-sex couples and LGBTQ. She believes in a social gospel which is contrary to the gospel in the Bible. She supports Socialism. That means she believes in wealth redistribution by providing social programs for the rest of the world. She is also a strong environmentalist. Her ideology may have something to do with trying to downplay the foreign interference part by some MPs. The foreign interference allegations does not look good for the liberals and left, which is the camp the Green Party would be part of. This is her chance to try to throw a monkey wrench into the allegations. 2. She may also have seen an opportunity here to take centre stage and get more attention for her fading Green Party which is probably desperate to get more support. There is a good chance the Green Party will become extinct in the next election. This may be an attempt to get back in the limelight. Edited June 13 by blackbird Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eyeball Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 26 minutes ago, blackbird said: She is playing loosely with words to make it sound like there is nothing to be concerned about. Why would she do that? What possible benefit would she get from making it sound like something else? 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 8 minutes ago, eyeball said: Why would she do that? What possible benefit would she get from making it sound like something else? Did you read my comments. I explained that in my post just above this one. She leans toward Socialism and the left. Therefore she is more of an ally of the liberal-NDP coalition which is under threat from the foreign interference allegations. Her Green party which has two MPs is in danger of being eliminated in the next election and she needs to find a way to get as much attention as possible now. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
blackbird Posted June 13 Report Share Posted June 13 I would have to say my views are very much contrary to Elizabeth May's views on politics and religion. This interview with her reveals a lot of what she believes, which I would disagree with. That is only my opinion. Everyone has a right to their opinion in a free country. quote A number of Canadian Christians are concerned about issues such as abortion and same-sex marriage. What are your policies in those areas? May: The number one difference with the Green Party is that we really do believe that these issues — as difficult and emotional and divisive as they may be — should be treated with respect. I think that it is wrong to be less than respectful when someone says they have a problem with abortion because they recognize from their point of view that life is sacred at all points from conception forward. The Green Party, at the same time, absolutely supports that we need a legal right to abortion in this country. In the same way, same-sex marriage, as a secular legal issue, is a rights issue and a Charter issue. Still, any church community must be able to make its own decisions and its own determinations about whatever forms of marriage are recognized within that religious community. So, to keep it separate between secular and church is really quite critical. I am not unhappy with the policy of the Green Party in these areas, but I think abortion should be safe, legal, and rare. CC.com: You have in some cases been accused of believing in “earthism” — that you worship the earth rather than the Creator. May: Oh no, that is silly. If people want to accuse me of paganism, they can, but it is completely off base. As I have mentioned, I have been a practicing Christian, and I am pretty clear in my theology. In fact, I have studied theology as a part-time effort. I am interested, in the long term, in becoming ordained as an Anglican priest, so I am certainly not a pagan. unquote Elizabeth May: an exclusive interview - Canadian Christianity This interview was from May 3, 2007. While that was quite a number of years ago, I have no reason for believing she has changed her beliefs much since then. She was also Executive Director of the Sierra Club of Canada from 1989 to 2007, which is 18 years. That means she is a die hard environmentalist and believes in climate alarmism. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.