What's a little light Treason between friends?

[CdnFox]

13 minutes ago, eyeball said:

You don't understand what I'm talking about.

I'm talking about cameras recording politicians in conversations involving the  public's business, not their own.

Christ on a stick...why can't you people pay better attention?

So if I, a regular constituent, go to my mp to talk about something that concerns me then I have to have that conversation recorded and my personal information has to be shared with everyone? Basically you're looking for an end to privacy in Canada?

What about all of the MPS aIDS and assistance? They meet with people on their behalf all the time so I guess their personal life has to be recorded as well.

It's so stupid it beggers the imagination that you would even think of it.

[blackbird]

6 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

I find it odd that so many people are demanding the names be made public, even though they know anyone doing so will wind up in Prison. Demanding the names be made public is stupid. It will cause our allies in the 5 Eyes to cut us off.

A due process must be followed such as an RCMP/CSIS investigation of all the details and then if warranted charges must be laid.  After that the names of politicians that have been charged with an offence would probably be made public.  But until that time, I don't think the names can be made public.  

[eyeball]

24 minutes ago, blackbird said:

There is no right to have cameras recording what are private conversations in the political world.

We shouldn't need a right, just some due consideration. But if you'd prefer oh lets say, lobbyists from a big pharmaceutical corporation privately discussing public funding and vaccine safety with a politician behind a closed door, who am I to argue?

I'll just mark a piece of paper with all the other Schmoes come election day I guess.  Or maybe I'll just make a paper airplane out of it.

[Queenmandy85]

11 hours ago, Queenmandy85 said:

Whether it is the NKVD, GRU, Mi5/6, the Abwehr or the CIA, none have ever been reliable. If CSIS gives you a sunny weather report, pack and umbrella

In my haste to post, I left out the exceptions. Canada's CSE, the UK's GCHQ and the US NSA are reliable sources.

[blackbird]

1 hour ago, eyeball said:

We shouldn't need a right, just some due consideration. But if you'd prefer oh lets say, lobbyists from a big pharmaceutical corporation privately discussing public funding and vaccine safety with a politician behind a closed door, who am I to argue?

I'll just mark a piece of paper with all the other Schmoes come election day I guess.  Or maybe I'll just make a paper airplane out of it.

There are lobbyists or advocates for every cause under the sun talking to politicians or MPs.  That is how a democracy works.  I don't know what kind system you think should replace it.   The idea of having every conversation recorded on camera between a citizen or activist and his MP or some politician is totally contrary to our democratic system.  Everyone has the right, be it a private citizen wanting to talk about his own beliefs about problems in society or some big shot CEO of a pharmaceutical corporation to talk to politicians. It is just nuts to suggest otherwise. 

Private conversation is a basic human right.  It is none of your business what someone else wants to say to an MP.

[CdnFox]

2 hours ago, eyeball said:

 

I'll just mark a piece of paper with all the other Schmoes come election day I guess.  Or maybe I'll just make a paper airplane out of it.

Why break the habit of a lifetime. You don't think for a moment about who you're voting for. If you would you be trying to get Justin out but you don't care.

So let's not pretend that you give a crap about accountability or anything like that. Just another left is virtue signal with horrible morals.

[I am Groot]

On 6/6/2024 at 12:09 PM, Goddess said:

Good grief, this is breaking news.

It's a little too early to just throw your hands up, give up and say, "Oh well, let the politicians commit treason, nothing we can do."

There will be no charges. Just like the MPs who are known to have benefited from Chinese help in the previous election won't be charged - or named. Just like the unnamed MPP who took money from China and then distributed it to pro-China candidates in the federal election. Heard anything about that other than crickets?

[I am Groot]

Andrew Coyne's take on this is somewhat like my own. Which is that the absence of patriotism, the absence of any loyalty to Canada on behalf of these MPs - most if not all of whom are likely immigrants - ought to be fairly predictable and understandable. They grew up in 'real' countries, and are just here to earn some money. Not because they love Canada. And who's fault is that but us? We demand nothing of them. We do no screening to try to sift among the mass of applications for those who truly want to reject their old life and start a new one and are adaptable enough to do so. And we tell them from the moment they get off the plane that we're a racist society and they're being oppressed.

The case of the traitorous parliamentarians raises an intriguing question: Is it possible to commit crimes against the national security of a country that does not believe it is a nation and makes no effort to defend its security?

 

After decades of entertaining the idea that the whole thing could be wound up at any minute on the vote of a single province, and after years of being told that the Canadian experience was, from the start, a crime against humanity, it’s hard to get too worked up about a little light treason.

If, what is more, we cannot be bothered to defend ourselves, preferring, as we have for generations, to free-ride on the Americans, can we blame other countries for drawing the appropriate conclusions?

If we think so little of ourselves, if we ask so little of ourselves, if there is so little here here, is it any wonder that we should ultimately come to see this reflected in the people who represent us?

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-what-else-do-you-call-it-when-people-conspire-against-their-own/

[Michael Hardner]

4 hours ago, I am Groot said:

 Which is that the absence of patriotism, the absence of any loyalty to Canada on behalf of these MPs - most if not all of whom are likely immigrants - ought to be fairly predictable and understandable. 

Riiiight.  It's the damn immigrants like Trudeau and whomever benefitted in the Conservative leadership race...

 

🤔

 

Damn immigrants...

[CdnFox]

41 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

Riiiight.  It's the damn immigrants like Trudeau and whomever benefitted in the Conservative leadership race...

 

The one noticeable difference is the conservatives are front and center screening"Tell us who it is close quote while Trudeau is saying maybe we should be quiet for one more election.

A better question is why aren't you mad about this Mike? Every Canadian regardless of their political leaning should be furious. But you're obviously perfectly fine with it.

Can you explain why you're so okay with foreign governments having major impacts in our elections and sitting MPS behaving in a fashion that has them being investigated for treason?

And please don't waste our time with some cheesy thing about how you are genuinely really upset on the inside

[herbie]

18 hours ago, eyeball said:

I'm talking about cameras recording politicians in conversations involving the  public's business, not their own

hat would only work until we degenerate into not believing what we see or hear on the cameras. Fake news you know. I never said lock her up...

[eyeball]

6 hours ago, herbie said:

That would only work until we degenerate into not believing what we see or hear on the cameras. Fake news you know. I never said lock her up...

I think a lot of people probably imagine we're already there. How would you know the difference?

[herbie]

Hang around groups of people, you'll tire of rolling your eyes.

IMHO treason is a Canadian on a Canadian web forum promoting a lying scumbag for US President after he did nothing but f*ck over Canada for his last term.

Edited June 10, 2024 by herbie

[CdnFox]

1 hour ago, herbie said:

 

IMHO treason is a Canadian on a Canadian web forum promoting a lying scumbag for US President after he did nothing but f*ck over Canada for his last term.

It's true that Biden has been a complete dick to us. His first 5 minutes he canceled a major pipeline deal that cost Alberta billions and then he had the whole USA first thing where Canadians weren't allowed to bid on local projects and he has generally speaking been a bad neighbor for the last term. And as you know I am no fan of the guy, I think he's hurt America quite badly too.

But I think calling people that support him a traitor is probably over the top. I may disagree with them entirely and I think Biden would be a horrible choice for Canada but that's just an opinion And if somebody has a different opinion that they wish to express it's not being a traitor to the country. 

I think you're out of line there, and I say that as someone who's not a huge Biden supporter

[I am Groot]

23 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Riiiight.  It's the damn immigrants like Trudeau and whomever benefitted in the Conservative leadership race..

Damn immigrants...

Do you really think that the majority of the candidates China and India are influencing, and the Canadians they influence through social media and get to vote for these candidates are 'old stock' Canadians as opposed to their own expatriates? 

Seriously?

[Michael Hardner]

1 minute ago, I am Groot said:

Do you really think that the majority of the candidates China and India are influencing, and the Canadians they influence through social media and get to vote for these candidates are 'old stock' Canadians as opposed to their own expatriates? 

Seriously?

I don't know who was running in the conservative leadership race against Poilievre?

[I am Groot]

Just now, Michael Hardner said:

I don't know who was running in the conservative leadership race against Poilievre?

I said the majority. I'm talking about the MPs that the report says were elected with help from the PRC. The MPs who were giving information to another country's intelligence service and helping to influence their colleagues on behalf of another country.

As for the Conservative leadership, the report did not say which campaigns China and India interfered in or on behalf of or against which candidates. For example, I could see China interfering in the 2018 campaign to ensure Michael Chong did as poorly as possible. I'd have to look at the foreign policy positions of the candidates in the last few elections to see if anything they had there might have encouraged or irritated China or India.

 

[Michael Hardner]

3 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

1. I said the majority. I'm talking about the MPs that the report says were elected with help from the PRC.

2. As for the Conservative leadership, the report did not say which campaigns China and India interfered in or on behalf of or against which candidates. For example, I could see China interfering in the 2018 campaign to ensure Michael Chong did as poorly as possible. I'd have to look at the foreign policy positions of the candidates in the last few elections to see if anything they had there might have encouraged or irritated China or India.

 

1. Noted.  You're NOT talking about the others who benefitted and not talking about white Candidates who did.

2. Quite true.

[I am Groot]

3 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

1. Noted.  You're NOT talking about the others who benefitted and not talking about white Candidates who did.

I did not say there might not be some white Canadians who benefited. But it would not surprise me if 90% were immigrants. They are far more likely to be influenced on behalf of their native country.

[Michael Hardner]

35 minutes ago, I am Groot said:

I did not say there might not be some white Canadians who benefited. But it would not surprise me if 90% were immigrants. They are far more likely to be influenced on behalf of their native country.

Here's the thing: I don't think someone's status should be noted as anything but these two, in this affair:

Status 1: ON THE TAKE
Status 2: NOT ON THE TAKE

 

[eyeball]

Quote

What's a little light Treason between friends

Like I said until its proven with evidence it's just so much other lobbying that's unmitigated by any real rules or policies. This was a good read on the issue.  As the following makes it clear intelligence is not evidence. 

The alleged behaviour is not treasonous’: Former CSIS head Richard Fadden on foreign interference by MPs and Senators

https://thehub.ca/2024/06/10/hub-exclusive-the-alleged-behaviour-is-not-treasonous-former-csis-head-richard-fadden-on-foreign-interference-by-mps-and-senators/

One thing in the interview that stood out that resonated with my own experience was the idea that political parties will have to police themselves to some degree.

HARRISON LOWMAN: Some might hear that and say, “So…we should leave partisan, optics-obsessed politicians to sort a lot of this out amongst themselves?” What would you say to that response?

RICHARD FADDEN: I take your point about the possible reaction of some. What I am trying to get across is that policing of political parties should start with the parties themselves, perhaps in the short term, because we do not have ready alternatives. I am undoubtedly being naive but perhaps this responsibility would encourage greater transparency?

Fishermen were told we'd have to submit to monitoring for compliance and that it would be largely up to us to devise a system that worked and satisfied both DFO's requirements for disclosure and fishermen's rights to privacy.  The alternative was that we wouldn't be allowed to fish.  I realize we can't tell politicians they can't govern per se but from where I'm sitting their ability to govern us is so increasingly compromised by a sheer smothering weight of mistrust that we're becoming ungovernable.   

 

[CdnFox]

44 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Like I said until its proven with evidence it's just so much other lobbying that's unmitigated by any real rules or policies.

There is tons of rules and policies regarding lobbying, and treason is not lobbying. If you have done a treasonous act then it is still a treasonous act whether you have been caught or not.

I can understand your confusion, it is true that acts which seem treasonous and are in violation of the law are pretty much every day things for the liberals. However there is no such thing as Schrodinger's rat. Either the guy has broken the law and has committed a crime or he hasn't regardless of whether he's been caught or not and it sounds kind of like he has. 

That would not be lobbying. If he has committed treason it's still treason and not lobbying. It doesn't go from being lobbying to treason because he got caught.

Is there anything you won't apologize for the liberals for?

[ExFlyer]

Elizabeth May just had a press conference and said that there were no names and there is no list. There was only one person identified and that was of a former MP and she said he should be investigated

https://www.ipolitics.ca/news/green-leader-elizabeth-may-says-no-list-of-disloyal-mps-in-full-spy-watchdog-report

 

I still want to know why PP refuses to get security cleared so he can look at secret documents ? Is it so he can better criticize? Without knowing what he is criticizing?

[I am Groot]

18 hours ago, Michael Hardner said:

Here's the thing: I don't think someone's status should be noted 

Yes, but your thinking is guided by a desperate level of political correctness I do not possess. I can't ignore the reality that newcomers are VASTLY more likely to be influenced into helping their previous homelands. Especially when 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.

Edited June 11, 2024 by I am Groot

[I am Groot]

7 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

Elizabeth May just had a press conference and said that there were no names and there is no list. There was only one person identified and that was of a former MP and she said he should be investigated

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.

 

7 minutes ago, ExFlyer said:

I still want to know why PP refuses to get security cleared so he can look at secret documents ? Is it so he can better criticize? Without knowing what he is criticizing?

 

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.