Politics in 2016

[George Wallace]

It's not a "official" state dinner.

So you are questioning the President's advisers?

 

[Altair]

So you are questioning the President's advisers?

https://ipolitics.ca/2016/03/08/official-visit-vs-state-visit-state-dinner-vs-just-dinner-our-handy-primer/

When Prime Minister Justin Trudeau arrives in Washington tomorrow, he’ll begin an official visit, not a state visit. When he and Sophie Grégoire-Trudeau have dinner at the White House Thursday night, they’ll be honoured with a state dinner.

The visit is official, not state, because Trudeau is a head of government, not a head of state. But, over the years, the nomenclature for state dinners has evolved to avoid the distinction between the role of head of state — a largely ceremonial, less political role in many countries — but maintain the diplomatic allure of the state dinner.

A state visit is the highest ranking visit and can only be offered to a head of state, like the president of a country or a reigning monarch like Britain’s Queen Elizabeth, according to research from Radio Free Europe.

The confusion hasn’t been contained to media reports. The Conservative Party generously granted Trudeau a protocol promotion in a press release issued Tuesday afternoon, referring to the bilateral as a state visit.

According to The White House’s blog, the term “state dinner” was originally used to denote any affair that honoured the President’s Cabinet, Congress, or other dignitaries in the 19th century,  however, “President Ulysses S. Grant changed the meaning of the term when he welcomed King David Kalakua of the Kingdom of Hawaii in 1874. Now, State Dinners are grand affairs hosted by the President to welcome a visiting head of state.”

In 2012, President Barack Obama honoured British Prime Minister David Cameron with a 19-gun salute on the South Lawn of the White House and a state dinner. At the time, the Guardian reported that Obama was “pushing the boundaries” of protocol because Cameron is a head of government, so he cannot be treated to a full state visit, but that the White house found a way around the rules by designating the trip as an official visit with state dinner.

That designation applies to the Trudeau visit.

Raymond Chretien, who was ambassador to the United States during a state dinner for his uncle, Prime Minister Jean Chretien, in 1997 and is now a partner and strategic advisor with law firm Fasken Martineau, concurred that technically Trudeau’s visit is an official visit — not a state visit.

“Technically speaking, it’s not a state visit. A state visit would be for, in our case, the Governor General. So the Americans treat it as a state visit — they give it all the perks and the surrounding privileges of such a visit — but technically speaking, you can call it a state visit but it is not a state visit,” said Chretien.

“They call it a state dinner. That you can call a state dinner because it’s their designation,” he added.

According to The White House, a state dinner requires at minimum of six months of preparation. “From the guest list and invitations, to the menus and seating arrangements, all require the careful attention of the First Lady, State Department, and White House Social Secretary,” states The White House blog.

 

 

[Fishbone Jones]

The best thing about the whole thing was CBC's coverage. I thought Peter Mansbridge was going to cream his jeans with his over the top fawning of the PM. Also how they are trying style Sophie as the First Lady and gushing about her designer cloths and jewelry. At least the PM is getting what CBC was payed for.

 

[George Wallace]

Thank you Altair for admitting your mistake.

“They call it a state dinner. That you can call a state dinner because it’s their designation,”

 

[Fishbone Jones]

https://ipolitics.ca/2016/03/08/official-visit-vs-state-visit-state-dinner-vs-just-dinner-our-handy-primer/
 

Who cares what the dinner and visit were called. Move along, nothing to see here.

 

[Altair]

Thank you Altair for admitting your mistake.

meh. Head of state is the queen technically, but he'll,  if David Cameron gets a state dinner, so can trudeau I guess.

 

[George Wallace]

The best thing about the whole thing was CBC's coverage. I thought Peter Mansbridge was going to cream his jeans with his over the top fawning of the PM. Also how they are trying style Sophie as the First Lady and gushing about her designer cloths and jewelry. At least the PM is getting what CBC was payed for.

First thought that came to mind is that she must live in one of those outrageous bright purple or pink houses found in Quebec or the North Shore of New Brunswick. 

Now hearkening back to the Harper years, wasn't the media all up in arms over Harper cozening up to the US?

 

[Altair]

Who cares what the dinner and visit were called. Move along, nothing to see here.

Loachman, George Wallace and Rick goebel

 

[Fishbone Jones]

Loachman, George Wallace and Rick goebel

Every mixture needs a catalyst. Don't forget yourself and your stir spoon. :stirpot:

 

[Altair]

Every mixture needs a catalyst. Don't forget yourself and your stir spoon. :stirpot:

well, if someone frames it as trudeau taking the role of head of state from the Queen. ..

Let's face it, you weren't going to defend him.

 

[George Wallace]

well, if someone frames it as trudeau taking the role of head of state from the Queen. ..

Let's face it, you weren't going to defend him.

:

Who needs to defend him?  There is no need to.  The Americans call it a "State Dinner" and that is all there is to it.  IT IS THEIR DINNER and they can call it what they want.  They also don't include the letter "u" in many of the same words that we use, not nor do they put anything other than "STOP" on those red octagonal signs at street corners.

 

[Altair]

:

Who needs to defend him?  There is no need to.  The Americans call it a "State Dinner" and that is all there is to it.  IT IS THEIR DINNER and they can call it what they want.  They also don't include the letter "u" in many of the same words that we use, not do they put anything other than "STOP" on those red octagonal signs at street corners.

I thought that was obvious as well, however it was framed as a justin trudeau doing something he shouldn't

 

[Fishbone Jones]

well, if someone frames it as trudeau taking the role of head of state from the Queen. ..

Let's face it, you weren't going to defend him.

And why would I. It's an even stupider discussion than what's already going on here.

Men's Christmas Dinner, Soldiers Appreciation Dinner, Soldier's Holiday Dinner, State Dinner, Head of State, who gives a fuck. Sit down, eat your rubber chicken and move on.

Everyone should just drop this right now and quit wasting bandwidth.

 

[Scott]

No shit.

Fun police here.

Everyone can quit with the semantics about the fucking picnic.

Staff

 

[Kilo_302]

I don't get it. A few posts ago, the discussion was centred around the fact that many Canadians (including a lot of the media) were unhappy with Trudeau.

Now it seems a lot of you can't get over how much adulation he's receiving.

The common thread here  seems to be no one can accept that the majority of Canadians (including our media) like him. He reflects (rightly or wrongly) what Canadians want to see in our government. Harper did too, but for far fewer people.

Again, there's very little daylight between the NDP, the Liberals and the Green Party compared to the Conservatives (as they were under Harper) and the rest of Canada. So this is just a return to normalcy.

I'm in full agreement that this dinner thing is pure spectacle over substance. But for a lot of Canadians, this is a celebration of the end of the Harper years. Canada is returning to its normal place in the world. Most Canadians were extremely embarrassed by our stance on climate change under Harper, so it's no coincidence that the one thing of substance to come out of this visit was a joint announcement on climate action.

Face it, Harper was disliked around the world as much as he was disliked at home. And I'm saying this as someone who also dislikes Trudeau.

 

[Good2Golf]

I was waiting for Dinnergate to settle down so Kilo would let me know why male nurses being under-represented was okay, but women in business and politics wasn't.

op:

G2G

 

[Jarnhamar]

Harper had the balls to send Canadians to kill terrorists and freedom-haters. Trudeau wants to cuckold them.

I just read the Canadian government through the RCMP is now "forgiving" Canadian citizens who traveled to Syria & Iraq and partook in the orgy of rape and murder there if they say sorry and promise not to do it again.

Canadians are in for an awesome surprise.

 

[Altair]

Harper had the balls to send Canadians to kill terrorists and freedom-haters. Trudeau wants to cuckold them.

I just read the Canadian government through the RCMP is now "forgiving" Canadian citizens who traveled to Syria & Iraq and partook in the orgy of rape and murder there if they say sorry and promise not to do it again.

Canadians are in for an awesome surprise.

Source? Not seeing this anywhere

 

[larry Strong]

Source? Not seeing this anywhere

Posted in accordance with .......
http://www.torontosun.com/2016/03/08/rcmp-not-charging-jihadis-who-say-sorry

RCMP not charging jihadis who say 'sorry' 

The RCMP is focusing on "direct interventions" with the dozens of known jihadis on Canadian soil, instead of laying charges, Commissioner Bob Paulson has revealed.

CSIS director Michel Coulombe told a Senate committee on Monday there are currently 60 Canadians known to have returned home from going abroad to participate in terrorist activities. Their activities range from engaging in paramilitary exercises to providing logistical support to receiving jihadist education and training. On top of this, there are another 180 Canadians who remain abroad for such purposes and could eventually return home.

According to the Criminal Code, leaving the country or attempting to leave to participate in terror is illegal.

"If we're not getting the evidence, are we satisfying the safety issues by surveillance and other techniques while we collect the evidence or are there alternative ways of keeping communities safe by direct interventions with the individual or his family?" RCMP Commissioner Bob Paulson told reporters following his testimony Tuesday before the House of Commons public safety and security committee.

In some cases it appears the RCMP is simply choosing not to lay charges based on expectations that the individual won't further pursue terrorist activities.

"In other cases, we've assessed that they're back, they're sorry, they're working to try to get their heads straight and we're relying on family members or other professionals," Paulson added.

A Senate report from 2015 recommended the government enforce the Criminal Code. It appears the Liberals agree.

"Where the grounds exist for specific legal action that action will be taken," public safety minister Ralph Goodale said Tuesday. "If people have committed offences under Canadian law, then the appropriate legal consequences need to flow."

Goodale would not comment on any specific cases.

Cheers
Larry

 

[Altair]

Posted in accordance with .......
http://www.torontosun.com/2016/03/08/rcmp-not-charging-jihadis-who-say-sorry

RCMP not charging jihadis who say 'sorry' 



Cheers
Larry

weird. Seems like the liberals want charges to be laid? I'm confused.