Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Support Canadian snark!
Syndicate
Blog Archive
-
▼
2010
(806)
-
▼
March
(181)
- 'Climategate': Much ado about squat.
- Words fail me.
- HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
- Hello, North Texas!
- Dumbth.
- The bullshit of Ezra Levant.
- Helena Guergis: Comedy gold.
- Even with illiteracy, you too can lead a semi-norm...
- Canada's Blogging Tories: All the news that's fit...
- Religious Extremists Sow Terror
- Geek humour.
- Rahim and Helena, meet ball and blanket.
- Ah, irony, where is thy boot to the head?
- How many people think Lawrence Cannon is a total d...
- Um ... what?
- Wait for it ... you know it's coming.
- Dear "Iceman": Are you sure that's the argument y...
- And here's where we juxtapose ...
- BREAKING NEWS! Stephen Harper still total fucking...
- When really stupid Blogging Tories blog.
- Terrorist Arrests In Michigan
- Who is the "Daily Bassinet" ...
- Awesome.
- Apparently, you're entitled to my opinion.
- Dear Brenda: Have I got a deal for you!
- Good boy, Stephen. Here's a biscuit.
- Mandatory Viewing
- Ignatieff Closes Canada 2017 With A Whimper
- Canada 150
- You should listen to the grownups, Walker.
- The Ann Coulter brouhaha, in a nutshell.
- Should Blogging Tories "Hunter" and Maria "Dodo" N...
- Yeah, about that whole "civility" thing ...
- Kathy Shaidle: All mouth, no follow-through.
- Regarding civility and blowing goats.
- Whoopsie.
- What do you do with such irredeemable wastes of sk...
- Because total dickishness should be recognized.
- Christian AND conservative: A lethally stupid com...
- Sure, let's talk about "hate speech."
- Ah, irony, where is thy boot to the head?
- Whoops, I guess that should have been redacted, too.
- You want the truth!?
- OFFS!
- Whingers, start your eliminationism.
- Dear conservatives: STFU.
- Ezra Levant: Dishonest as usual.
- Dear U of Calgary: Brace yourself.
- When truly stupid people blog.
- The level of stupid is truly awesome.
- If you want to sue Ezra Levant, you'll have to sta...
- HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
- Don't forget -- Ezra's pulled this kind of shit be...
- WATBs!
- That overpowering stench of urine? Yeah, that wou...
- The embarrassing history of Ezra Levant.
- The unbearable vacuity of Ann Coulter.
- Military secrecy for me, but not for thee.
- Here, let me tighten that up for you.
- Ann Coulter: Live by the sword, die by the sword.
- And here's where we juxtapose ...
- She's just skankerrific!
- Revisionism!
- For the love of God, ...
- Here, let me tighten that up for you.
- I'll take door number three, Suzie.
- When evil, deranged, retarded web designers go bad.
- Apparently, Blogging Tories think Muslims should b...
- Ron from UWO, take it away!
- Sure, let's talk about civility.
- Here, let me tighten that up for you.
- New Album Debut!
- "And now, an eliminationist that needs no introduc...
- As opening lines go, ...
- "Don't hate me because I'm a desperate, two-faced ...
- The joy of Sitemeter, 2009.
- When stupid Blogging Tories blog stupidly.
- This is the definition of "stones."
- Great moments in Conservative accountability.
- Pope: "Shocked, I am, by these accusations!"
- Dear bocanut: Let's talk about stalking.
- The joy of journamalism!
- Conservatives to grieving widow:
- You go, Chris!
- Compassionate conservatism, as it were.
- Conservative ministers behaving assholishly.
- Ask a stupid question, Margaret ...
- What you won't read in the news
- Paging Captain Canada Stephen Taylor! Captain Can...
- They were for 10 percenters, before they were agai...
- Awwwwwwwkward.
- Baby's got her brand new shots.
- Those popping sounds you hear ...
- Journamalism!
- Don't rush him.
- Apparently, even useless, sycophantic wingnuts hav...
- Easy there, big fella.
- I need a word more demeaning than "retarded."
- Conversation around the punch bowl must be awkward.
- As long as she didn't spit on a reporter or punch ...
-
▼
March
(181)
10 comments:
Unbelievable. The supremacy of Parliament is an "arcane view." A reference to the SCC will still, somehow, include Iacobucci.
If the Libs have the stones--always an open question--they'll just put an end to the BS and have Harper arrested. Iacobucci shouldn't even be a player, and Parliament doesn't have to sit around waiting for a SCC reference case.
I'm still not clear about one thing; someone obviously has to have the right to redact information. No country in the World operates on a different basis.
If the Opposition is calling for unredacted documents and then Derek Lee insists MP's have the right to make them public, then what choice does the government (and by that, I mean any Canadian government) have but to seek clarification...somewhere?
We've gotten a lot of similar examples from the US in the past decade, but unless I'm mistaken, congressthingies don't have the right to make public what still remain official secrets. Admittedly, that is also how the American administrations have been getting away with war crimes, so...
...ah fuck it. To repeat what Daniel Ellsberg called for recently: Whistleblowers...Leak!
I'm curious -- did Lee really claim that Parliament had a right to anything it wanted, and also had the right to make any of that public? Did he seriously say that? Because, yes, that strikes me as a moronic thing to say.
Transcript, anyone?
According to Norman Speculum, he did:
"On CBC radio last week, Liberal MP Derek Lee argued strenuously that he and any of his colleagues had the right to obtain any Afghan detainee document, and that MPs also had the right to make the documents public. No ifs, no doubts and no restrictions, according to Mr. Lee."
As for transcripts, the CBC doesn't provide them automatically.
I've gotten behind listening to The Current lately, one reason being what Speculum himself mentions:
"This being The Current, his argument went unopposed."
The other reason was "Olympics, Olympics, Olympics, Haïti, Haïti Haïti."
I just spent a few minutes with Teh Google and I have yet to find any corroboration that Lee was demanding the right to share anything Parliament wanted with the Canadian public, totally unredacted. So I think this needs to be resolved.
Either Lee was overreaching in a ridiculous way, or Norman Spector lied. I'd actually like to know which of those two is true.
Lee is saying that the MPs with security clearances have every right to see what the government is doing with taxpayers' money.
I see nothing wrong with that position, but that's not what Norman Sphincter was claiming. I want to know the accuracy of this claim:
"On CBC radio last week, Liberal MP Derek Lee argued strenuously that he and any of his colleagues had the right to obtain any Afghan detainee document, and that MPs also had the right to make the documents public. No ifs, no doubts and no restrictions, according to Mr. Lee."
Is that what Lee said? It's a simple question.
Well, you'll have to wait 'til I get caught up The Current.
wv: "pedardal" That just has to refer to Conservative. Has to.
Ok, it's the March 3rd episode of The Current, part 1, "Previously on Parliament." I listened to a bit and it sounds like Speculum misrepresented what Lee said. He basically stated that Parliament (not MP's) has the right to make anything public if it decides to and that no existing statute (such as the Evidence Act) binds it.
I have to rush to the grocery store before it closes. I'll listen to the rest on the way.
"in to"?!
KEvron
Post a Comment