Wanna-B-Fanboy Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 A public inquiry would be a ******* **** show... tons of stuff is going to classified, secret, redacted and so forth... you know, for legit security concerns. Yet those people clamoring for the inquiry will just use it as more fuel for rage farming... To top it off... the same **** stains in suits will decry it all a waste of tax payers money and blame the Trudeau government for this excessive waste when the ordinary Canadians could have used that money for making their lives easier... That is exactly how its going to play out... none of the leaders crying for a public inquiry are interested in transparency for the masses- they know that there will LARGE swaths of information that will not be shown- they know this, because they are privy to that information. Fuel for rage farming. Fatty Liver, Noeller and TrueBlue4ever 2 1
SpeedFlex27 Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 (edited) 26 minutes ago, JCon said: You don't agree that the Gov't appointed a rapporteur? Say what? No, I never said that. I said that I'd never heard of the term rapporteur & neither had most Canadians. That is, until last week when Trudeau appointed Johnson, who is a family friend. A federal enquiry means an independent judge/commissioner completely separate from the government is appointed to investigate the claims. He/she may appoint other Commissioners to assist in making a report. They may enter any public building or department & demand to see any information they deem important to the investigation. They may subpoena information & they have the power to make any individual testify & cooperate with said inquiry. Which means the investigation is open & more far reaching. And there are hearings in public. A rapporteur appointed by the PM. Johnson will conduct his so called investigation in private & then come up with his findings. Wanna bet Hang Dong & the Liberals are let off the hook? It doesn't go far enough. This the democracy of our country that is at risk by foreign players from China, Iran & Russia. We all should be concerned about foreign interference. I just get the impression it's mostly, well My Guy Trudeau won so I'm still okay with it. Of course, there'd have been a different tune being sung here had Trudeau lost... Edited March 31, 2023 by SpeedFlex27 JCon 1
HardCoreBlue Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 25 minutes ago, Wanna-B-Fanboy said: not sure how you went from A and conclude B... you basically argue that people are too ******* lazy to follow politics, yet blame politicians for people's laziness. And one doesn't necessarily have to be 'hyper interested' on something to be a sound critical thinker and reasoner. Wanna-B-Fanboy 1
SpeedFlex27 Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Wanna-B-Fanboy said: A public inquiry would be a ******* **** show... tons of stuff is going to classified, secret, redacted and so forth... you know, for legit security concerns. Yet those people clamoring for the inquiry will just use it as more fuel for rage farming... To top it off... the same **** stains in suits will decry it all a waste of tax payers money and blame the Trudeau government for this excessive waste when the ordinary Canadians could have used that money for making their lives easier... That is exactly how its going to play out... none of the leaders crying for a public inquiry are interested in transparency for the masses- they know that there will LARGE swaths of information that will not be shown- they know this, because they are privy to that information. Fuel for rage farming. Sure, rage farming over the legitimacy of our democracy & elections when the final results are at stake. Trudeau knew about this since 2016 & did nothing. Other countres at least tightened things up once they found out it happened to them but not Trudeau. Why? Why would he let enemy foreign governments interfere in our elections & do nothing about it over the last two elections? Is this happening as well at the civic & provincial levels as well? Edited March 31, 2023 by SpeedFlex27
JCon Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 2 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said: Sure, rage farming over the legitimacy of our democracy & election when the final results are at stake. Trudeau knew about this since 2016 & did nothing. Other countres at least tightened things up once they found out it happened to them but not Trudeau. Why? Why would he let enemy foreign governments interfere in our election & do nothing about it over the last two elections? You don't know this at all. That's just your bias. It's Johnston. He was Governor General of Canada, appointed by Stephen Harper. Next time we'll ask the gov't to use smaller words. I love how you can just invalidate something because you don't know a word. Noeller and blue_gold_84 1 1
SpeedFlex27 Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 (edited) 4 minutes ago, JCon said: You don't know this at all. That's just your bias. It's Johnston. He was Governor General of Canada, appointed by Stephen Harper. Next time we'll ask the gov't to use smaller words. Neither do you. That is your assumption. All the more reason for a federal enquiry to clear it up & have things out in the open. So what if Johnson was Governor General? Does that give him some special pass or something? Trudeau appointed that former lady astronaut as GG & she turned out to be one of the nastiest people to ever hold down that job. She was forced to resign after being GG for less than 2 years. So, it means nothing to me if Trudeau appoints a former Harper GG at all as his "rapporteur". Edited March 31, 2023 by SpeedFlex27
JCon Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 5 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said: Neither do you. That is your assumption. All the more need for a federal enquiry to clear it up & have things out in the open. So what if he was Governor General? Does that give him some special pass or something? It means nothing to me if Harper appointed him or not. It's not my assumption. I read. Noeller and blue_gold_84 2
rebusrankin Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 David Johnston is a former Governor General of Canada, a post he was appointed to by former Conservative PM Harper. He's not some family friend of Trudeau. Seriously spend 5 minutes doing some research before you ***** and moan. Noeller and blue_gold_84 1 1
SpeedFlex27 Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 (edited) 5 minutes ago, JCon said: It's not my assumption. I read. So did I. 5 minutes ago, rebusrankin said: David Johnston is a former Governor General of Canada, a post he was appointed to by former Conservative PM Harper. He's not some family friend of Trudeau. Seriously spend 5 minutes doing some research before you ***** and moan. Check again, he is a family friend of Trudeau. And try to keep it civil. I'm not here to call anyone names or point fingers because they don't like what I'm saying. Those days for me are over. At least I'm trying to be more patient. https://nationalpost.com/opinion/carson-jerema-trudeau-family-friend-david-johnston-not-the-man-to-restore-election-confidence Edited March 31, 2023 by SpeedFlex27
Wanna-B-Fanboy Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 7 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said: Neither do you. That is your assumption. All the more need for a federal enquiry to clear it up & have things out in the open. So what if he was Governor General? Does that give him some special pass or something? It means nothing to me if Harper appointed him or not. Johnston is there to weigh the evidence to see if a federal public inquiry is needed or would actually shed any light... I honestly think that the amount of redacted and classified material that is going to come up (and REMAIN classified and redacted)in a public inquiry will just lead to a bigger **** show. "SEE TRUDEAU IS HIDING SOMETHING!!!!" No... that just remains classified and redacted because it is in the interest of national security.... *blink, blink* "SEEEEEE THEY ARE HIDING SOMETHING... BURN THEM, BURN THEM ALL!" Fatty Liver, SpeedFlex27 and Tracker 1 1 1
SpeedFlex27 Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 Just now, Wanna-B-Fanboy said: Johnston is there to weigh the evidence to see if a federal public inquiry is needed or would actually shed any light... I honestly think that the amount of redacted and classified material that is going to come up (and REMAIN classified and redacted)in a public inquiry will just lead to a bigger **** show. "SEE TRUDEAU IS HIDING SOMETHING!!!!" No... that just remains classified and redacted because it is in the interest of national security.... *blink, blink* "SEEEEEE THEY ARE HIDING SOMETHING... BURN THEM, BURN THEM ALL!" From what I've seen & read it seems most parliamentarians want a public enquiry. I don't tyhink that Johnson by doing things in private will satify anyone with his findings. Disappointed how partisan our democracy has become if there is political intereference by foreign players.
rebusrankin Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 Fair enough, missed the connection to the Trudeau Foundation. Still don't see him as biased since he was appointed GG by a Conservative pm. He also set the terms of the Oliphant inquiry in 2007 that looked at Mulroney's actions and whether there was foriegn interference. When one looks at his resume you find connections to both the Liberals and the Conservatives. Also major academic institutions and major businesses. Tracker 1
SpeedFlex27 Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 1 minute ago, rebusrankin said: Fair enough, missed the connection to the Trudeau Foundation. Still don't see him as biased since he was appointed GG by a Conservative pm. He also set the terms of the Oliphant inquiry in 2007 that looked at Mulroney's actions and whether there was foriegn interference. When one looks at his resume you find connections to both the Liberals and the Conservatives. Also major academic institutions and major businesses. Johnson may have all the qualifications but that connection to the Trudeau family will hang over him. Plus the fact Trudeau appointed him will also hurt is integrity as well. I've seen more than a few headlines about how accepting this position will just drag him down rather than help him.
HardCoreBlue Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 For what it's worth, here's something our Mayor put out to people to help filter the noise when deciding who to vote for in this upcoming Alberta Provincial election: https://sherwoodparknews.com/opinion/columnists/someones-knocking-at-the-door-somebodys-ringing-the-bell
SpeedFlex27 Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 11 minutes ago, Wanna-B-Fanboy said: Johnston is there to weigh the evidence to see if a federal public inquiry is needed or would actually shed any light... I honestly think that the amount of redacted and classified material that is going to come up (and REMAIN classified and redacted)in a public inquiry will just lead to a bigger **** show. "SEE TRUDEAU IS HIDING SOMETHING!!!!" No... that just remains classified and redacted because it is in the interest of national security.... *blink, blink* "SEEEEEE THEY ARE HIDING SOMETHING... BURN THEM, BURN THEM ALL!" I can accept what you say is correct. However, Johnson's reputation will suffer if he doesn't recommend an enquiry. It's really a lose-lose for him.
rebusrankin Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 So to be clear @SpeedFlex27, you want an investigation done by a Parliamentary Committee or an investigation done by an independent investigator who is appointed by Parliament who has no ties to any of the party leaders or the parties at all? bigg jay, Tracker, Noeller and 1 other 2 2
SpeedFlex27 Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 In 2012, an AB PC govt Minister Thomas Lukazek was door knocking in his Edmonton constituency during the AB provincial election. Somehow things went sideways at the door of one of his constituents in Edmonton & he got into a fist fight with the Homeowner. He was charged with assault but I think he got off as he was claiming self defense as he claimed the guy in the house attacked him. Like, this is Alberta, folks. The entertainment is just beginning. Yeeee Haaaa! 2 minutes ago, rebusrankin said: So to be clear @SpeedFlex27, you want an investigation done by a Parliamentary Committee or an investigation done by an independent investigator who is appointed by Parliament who has no ties to any of the party leaders or the parties at all? Johnson was appointed by Trudeau. With ties to the Trudeau Foundation. As well as Trudeau also having appointed him to another position in government is my understanding. But yes to answer your question, someone who is separate from government & politics. Someone who has no political ties with any party.
Wanna-B-Fanboy Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 18 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said: I can accept what you say is correct. However, Johnson's reputation will suffer if he doesn't recommend an enquiry. It's really a lose-lose for him. True. I dont envy his task.
blue_gold_84 Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 (edited) 1 hour ago, SpeedFlex27 said: What is a special rapporteur? Don't agree. If there's nothing to hide then why not approve a federal enquiry? All parliamentarians except Trudeau are calling for it. Then do it. That's simply incorrect: https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en/votes/44/1/267?view=part 31 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said: From what I've seen & read it seems most parliamentarians want a public enquiry. I don't tyhink that Johnson by doing things in private will satify anyone with his findings. Disappointed how partisan our democracy has become if there is political intereference by foreign players. See the above link. More voted against than for Cooper's assclown motion. I mean, read the premise: Quote ...given the many reports of foreign interference in Canada’s democratic processes by, or on behalf of, the communist regime in Beijing, the Standing Committee on Access to Information, Privacy and Ethics be empowered and instructed to study all aspects of foreign interference in relation to the 2019 and 2021 general elections Many reports? Nope. Is there even one? A vague statement based on hearsay doesn't count - or at least shouldn't. Also: his name David Johnston. And he isn't doing anything privately. He'll be doing it within the framework of the applicable legislation and reporting his findings to the PMO. Just because some braindead CSIS employee broke their oath, violated protocol, and presented nothing doesn't mean anyone else should. It's pretty unsettling how little some actually understand about how our democracy actually operates, while then trying to claim everything is a partisan issue and that a "public inquiry" is necessary based on the conjecture of an unhinged public servant and not so much as a shred of evidence. 21 minutes ago, SpeedFlex27 said: I can accept what you say is correct. However, Johnson's reputation will suffer if he doesn't recommend an enquiry. It's really a lose-lose for him. What exactly does he have to lose? It isn't like he currently holds office, and I doubt he'd even care about anyone who'd **** on his reputation for taking on the responsibilities of rapporteur. Edited March 31, 2023 by blue_gold_84 Noeller, Tracker and WildPath 1 2
Noeller Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 wasn't sure what thread to put this in (comedy stuff??) but let's lighten up this thread a bit: Wanna-B-Fanboy, MOBomberFan and blue_gold_84 1 2
Fatty Liver Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 57 minutes ago, blue_gold_84 said: That's simply incorrect: https://www.ourcommons.ca/members/en/votes/44/1/267?view=part See the above link. More voted against than for Cooper's assclown motion. I mean, read the premise: Many reports? Nope. Is there even one? A vague statement based on hearsay doesn't count - or at least shouldn't. Also: his name David Johnston. And he isn't doing anything privately. He'll be doing it within the framework of the applicable legislation and reporting his findings to the PMO. Just because some braindead CSIS employee broke their oath, violated protocol, and presented nothing doesn't mean anyone else should. It's pretty unsettling how little some actually understand about how our democracy actually operates, while then trying to claim everything is a partisan issue and that a "public inquiry" is necessary based on the conjecture of an unhinged public servant and not so much as a shred of evidence. What exactly does he have to lose? It isn't like he currently holds office, and I doubt he'd even care about anyone who'd **** on his reputation for taking on the responsibilities of rapporteur. Johnston is also 81 years old, he doesn't have much left to lose and probably doesn't give a **** if he does. blue_gold_84 1
17to85 Posted March 31, 2023 Report Posted March 31, 2023 Yeah my impression of Johnston is that he is held in high regard by everyone in Ottawa which is why he's involved in everything. A guy like that isn't biased and the outrage is just more rage farming by the conservatives since it is literally all they bring to the table. Noeller and WildPath 2
GCn20 Posted April 1, 2023 Report Posted April 1, 2023 (edited) 5 hours ago, 17to85 said: What are you on about? It's not bloody hard to see the difference between biased pieces and impartial reporting. It's all in the language that is used. Critical thinking is a skill that is sadly very under used. There is a reason that the usual suspects call educated people "woke" or other things. It's because no matter what degree you get you are taught how to think critically in order to get that degree. As a result the educated are less likely to support the lunatics and why the ones who see through the bullshit are so disdainful of the people who lap it up. I have never heard anyone summarize all educated people as woke. There are many woke people of little to no education. Just as there are many people who wouldn't consider themselves woke that are highly educated. Saying that woke equals educated is simply not necessarily true. You say it's easy to spot bias. Is it? There are many on here who defend a clearly biased CBC on their accuracy for instance. Edited April 1, 2023 by GCn20 Noeller 1
rebusrankin Posted April 1, 2023 Report Posted April 1, 2023 I'll bite @GCn20 which sources do you consider to be unbiased or perhaps reliable sources is a better way to word it? Noeller and blue_gold_84 2
GCn20 Posted April 1, 2023 Report Posted April 1, 2023 14 minutes ago, rebusrankin said: I'll bite @GCn20 which sources do you consider to be unbiased or perhaps reliable sources is a better way to word it? None of them. That's the problem. It's why I wish the horse's mouth was a little more forthcoming.
Recommended Posts