- Reaction score
- 1,454
- Points
- 1,260
I read that in The Buffalo Chronicle.Nothing is not known in Ottawa included the marital status of the PM.
Sophie Gregoire has separated from Justin Trudeau | The Buffalo Chronicle
![buffalochronicle.com](https://i0.wp.com/buffalochronicle.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/08/cropped-Slide1-1.jpg?fit=32%2C32&ssl=1)
I read that in The Buffalo Chronicle.Nothing is not known in Ottawa included the marital status of the PM.
I'm assuming it was sat on until Vance was replaced as CDS.The GG, the CDS. Does that take the taxpayers focus on Trudeau's failure to deliver vaccines? Doubt it wasn't deliberately planned to drop when needed by the Liberals. Nothing is not known in Ottawa included the marital status of the PM.
...other than allegedly a pair of someone’s...Nothing is not known in Ottawa included the marital status of the PM.
A lot of people would have avoided a lot of trouble if they followed this.Well this is why I follow the Billy Graham rule.
Call me a dreamer.You mean they aren't already doing that?![]()
Yea no. I respect your opinion and understand what you are saying but lots of people live honourable lifes completing resisting "nature's" urges and act like normal human beings.We are all human. We make rules and laws and regulations so we behave in a somewhat appropriate fashion.
IMO the laws of nature and what's in our DNA will outweigh the laws we make as people. This is one of those cases.
There is also a pattern establishment which is the real problem. Everyone makes bad judgement calls, they learn from them and carry on. It's when they don't that it becomes an issue.Yea no. I respect your opinion and understand what you are saying but lots of people live honourable lifes completing resisting "nature's" urges and act like normal human beings.
I chalk this up to nurture as he clearly felt that it was appropriate to respond in the manner he allegedly did. So it is clear, by nurture, I am calling out the CAF writ large that has allowed this behaviour to percolate to the point that a MGen thought that was an appropriate email to send ( allegedly). Even as a joke that email has no place in the CAF.
There is a reason we have Op HONOUR and hateful conduct as an ongoing priority, as we have trouble removing it from our culture through years of silent acceptance. Culture is hard to change and takes years. Having these efforts undercut by the very soldier that should be leading the charge is not going to help.
This is all that came to mind...I bet it's been that way since time immemorial.
I bet it's been that way since time immemorial.
I think you're technically right. But I think if you perused through DAOD 5019-1 & 7021-1 you might find some borderline violations as well.
I've seen some cpls in relationships with WOs and MWOs attempt to, and in some cases succeed to, throw around the weight of their relationships. It's awkward as hell, especially when leadership goes out of their way to turn a blind eye to it and JNCOs are the ones with the courage to say something.
Is a troop or young officer that a MGen or CDS dating or messing around with going to get preferential treatment? Absolutely. We've all seen how junior - mid level officers gush and trip and fall all over themselves when there's a high ranking officer visiting. No officer is going to play Russian roulette with their career by upsetting someone a general is dating.
I have a couple of points/observations. I am not excusing the alleged behaviour however, there are things to consider:
1- I don't think I have ever seen a Major-General managing his own emails. Could this have come from his EA or AA?
2- I find it odd that a Corporal is asking for advice on career to a Major-General (although the MSM could have the rank wrong).
3- We also have to put this in context. These kids of "jokes" were tolerated, wrongly, a lot more back in 2012. We cannot entirely judge his actions of 2012 against the 2021 backdrop.
I sincerely hope there is an investigation in the matter if only to find the truth.
Sure, I'll buy that, but there's a bigger point. The sexually harassing response by that senior CAF member on a Corporal who highly likely thought he was genuine in his offer to provide her advice is where a line was not just crossed, but spit on. It's this exact conduct that erodes the trust in the leadership of the CAF that a General Officer would act in such a manner.2 - Depending on the unit, there can be close relationships between different ranks; it is not all that odd for senior CAF members to offer to help or advise more junior ones with their careers.
This specific comment was sexual harassment in 2012, much as it's sexual harassment now. This isn't 2 folks fairly close in rank where it could be joke between friends out of context.3- We also have to put this in context. These kids of "jokes" were tolerated, wrongly, a lot more back in 2012. We cannot entirely judge his actions of 2012 against the 2021 backdrop.
Then let’s go back in all emails from 2012 and investigate all who could have construed harassment. Yes, it was reprehensible, even by 2012 standards. But it was more tolerated and sometimes even accepted. Who tells you they didn’t have some form of friendly relationship? Going direct to a MGen for career advice is weird to me. Even at my rank, I would need to know the person personally or professionally well to engage them.This specific comment was sexual harassment in 2012, much as it's sexual harassment now. This isn't 2 folks fairly close in rank where it could be joke between friends out of context.
If the Cpl felt comfortable reaching out directly to a MGen there had to have been a relationship already established or he would have had have indicated in some way that this was acceptable. The fact he responded would indicate that he thought this was OK.A few thoughts:
1 - Have written emails for senior pers, but some items do get them personally drafting replies. So not particularly unusual.
2 - Depending on the unit, there can be close relationships between different ranks; it is not all that odd for senior CAF members to offer to help or advise more junior ones with their careers.
Yeah it is wierd with that rank disparity, but regardless of any personal relationship the comment was completely out of line with the facts that are out there. You're looking for assumptions to "whitewash" this or make it seem OK. If we're going to make assumptions, they can easily go the other way. It's possible Gen Vance used his rank and position to make a Cpl he felt attracted to comfortable enough to email him directly asking for career advice, and used that opportunity to make a sexual advance. A sexual advance that was unwanted as evidenced in the complaint to the Ombudsman.Then let’s go back in all emails from 2012 and investigate all who could have construed harassment. Yes, it was reprehensible, even by 2012 standards. But it was more tolerated and sometimes even accepted. Who tells you they didn’t have some form of friendly relationship? Going direct to a MGen for career advice is weird to me. Even at my rank, I would need to know the person personally or professionally well to engage them.
Just wondering, what ever happen to Norman after the case was dropped?Wonder what Norman is thinking?