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

Canadian Foreign Interference (General)

We’ll see how quickly JT actually publishes names, for fear of more names getting out than were just on the NSICOP report…

Perhaps the NSICOP report isn't a fulsome account of the depth and seriousness of the compromise.
 
Perhaps the NSICOP report isn't a fulsome account of the depth and seriousness of the compromise.
I don’t think NSICOP is deliberately shirking its duties, and for as much of not a fan of his brother as I was for Ontario reasons, I think David McGuinty has been doing a worthy job as Chair of NSICOP from what I have heard. I just think that there is knowledge out there of the situation that even Canada and its agencies doesn’t have (or have ‘rights of source ownership’ of) the depth of knowledge about the depth/extent of compromise (more on the collaborator side, vs victim of influence) for a variety of reasons. I get the sense that in the coming weeks, we will hear more about Canadian citizens/not just parliamentarians who have been known to certain organizations as being able to be confirmed as having collaborated with China. I also get the sense that some will be (or pretend to be) shocked, but many will say ‘well yeah., tell us something we didn’t already know!’ There will also no doubt be some that we don’t hear about, but that for a number of reasons, some mentioned earlier, we may not hear about.

On verra…
 
I don’t think NSICOP is deliberately shirking its duties, and for as much of not a fan of his brother as I was for Ontario reasons, I think David McGuinty has been doing a worthy job as Chair of NSICOP from what I have heard. I just think that there is knowledge out there of the situation that even Canada and its agencies doesn’t have (or have ‘rights of source ownership’ of) the depth of knowledge about the depth/extent of compromise (more on the collaborator side, vs victim of influence) for a variety of reasons. I get the sense that in the coming weeks, we will hear more about Canadian citizens/not just parliamentarians who have been known to certain organizations as being able to be confirmed as having collaborated with China. I also get the sense that some will be (or pretend to be) shocked, but many will say ‘well yeah., tell us something we didn’t already know!’ There will also no doubt be some that we don’t hear about, but that for a number of reasons, some mentioned earlier, we may not hear about.

On verra…

That part is where I was leaning.
 
... I just think that there is knowledge out there of the situation that even Canada and its agencies doesn’t have (or have ‘rights of source ownership’ of) the depth of knowledge about the depth/extent of compromise (more on the collaborator side, vs victim of influence) for a variety of reasons ...
Well put. I'd add the detail I've seen in the public info out there so far that some of this seems to be because while some people in some places seem to know some stuff, I haven't seen a credible or accessible explanation re: why the ultimate bosses can't seem to get even a consensus position.

I understand the political filters/fences in place re: people not wanting to know, but it also seems there's still a load of silos out there needing at least some mouse-holing to connect.
 
…there’s a rumbling that the US may declassify names and provide Poilievre with an unclassified/FOUO list of compromised parliamentarians, which would be entirely up to the US if it is the source of the intelligence.

Things may get spicy in the coming days/weeks.
He'd probably get more honest information from the Yanks.

I so want to see them do this. It would be even better if they named everyone, including red and orange liberals. Even better if they didn't put any publication restrictions on the briefing.

Here's my question. Say they told PP everything, unrestricted, would Canada be able to impose conditions on PP about what he was told by the US? Would they be able to stop him from revealing the names by saying it would screw up their sources?

I still want to see them give PP the briefing and do an end run on trudeau and blow up his game. Especially, if trudeau's name is on the list.
 
Here's my question. Say they told PP everything, unrestricted, would Canada be able to impose conditions on PP about what he was told by the US?
I honestly don’t know. I don’t think they should be able to, but I don’t know. Even if they tried, it wouldn’t be a good look…but it seems that the Government and not being a good look aren’t to be found any where near each other on a ‘GAF Venn diagram’…
 
He'd probably get more honest information from the Yanks.

I so want to see them do this. It would be even better if they named everyone, including red and orange liberals. Even better if they didn't put any publication restrictions on the briefing.

Here's my question. Say they told PP everything, unrestricted, would Canada be able to impose conditions on PP about what he was told by the US? Would they be able to stop him from revealing the names by saying it would screw up their sources?

I still want to see them give PP the briefing and do an end run on trudeau and blow up his game. Especially, if trudeau's name is on the list.

One problem I see is the issue of those same sources holding information on some high level US individuals. From both US parties. And for that matter on Brits, Aussies and Kiwis. Let alone all our other allies. Where does it end?
 
One problem I see is the issue of those same sources holding information on some high level US individuals. From both US parties. And for that matter on Brits, Aussies and Kiwis. Let alone all our other allies. Where does it end?
It would end when representatives or servants of the citizens stopped collaborating with foreign states.
 
It would end when representatives or servants of the citizens stopped collaborating with foreign states.

Only assuming that everybody agreed that the source was a trusted source. Half of Canadians (my guess) would not consider any info coming out of the US to be valid. That half would be more likely to vote for the listed names.
 
Only assuming that everybody agreed that the source was a trusted source. Half of Canadians (my guess) would not consider any info coming out of the US to be valid. That half would be more likely to vote for the listed names.
No doubt. Some Canadians would rather live in ignorance and trust a Government that hides information from them, and gaslights those who seek the information to be released, or as we saw last year, go as far as to threaten suing Parliament itself over its insistence over release of the information.
 
No doubt. Some Canadians would rather live in ignorance and trust a Government that hides information from them, and gaslights those who seek the information to be released, or as we saw last year, go as far as to threaten suing Parliament itself over its insistence over release of the information.

Unfortunately it is not solely a Canadian affliction. Try telling a Clydesider MI5 has info on his union boss.
 
Only assuming that everybody agreed that the source was a trusted source. Half of Canadians (my guess) would not consider any info coming out of the US to be valid.
I'm not as pessimistic as you are about the bit in yellow, but I agree with you that way more than a few people would question anything coming from the U.S. Mind you, there's also a segment of the population that would assume the U.S. or any other allied country leaking such information would NEVER ever have bad intentions or ulterior motives behind such moves.

I guess it depends on whether you like what's being leaked or not - as well raised here ...
... Try telling a Clydesider MI5 has info on his union boss.
As was said in other related threads, one person's leaker is another's traitor while also being someone else's whistleblower and yet another's hero.
 
Meanwhile, elsewhere ...
 

Is Trudeau so shallow and vain that he thinks his apparent flaunting of a Hindu red kalava somehow shows genuine respect to Hindi Indians?
 
Back
Top