ValueSubtracted

joined 1 year ago
MODERATOR OF
[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 4 points 1 month ago (6 children)

The Liberals are being insincere when they throw their hands up and say there’s nothing they can do because Poilievre won’t do something he’s made clear he won’t do.

I don't think they've said this?

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

All right, I have to ask - what did you do to get the scale right? It looks like you nailed it.

Poilievre and the Conservatives have been calling on Trudeau to release the names of allegedly compromised parliamentarians. They repeated that demand on Wednesday.

But law enforcement and national security agencies have been clear on this point: sharing any classified information is a crime.

"Anyone who reveals classified information is subject to the law equally and obviously, in this case, those names are classified at this time and to reveal them publicly would be a criminal offence," RCMP Deputy Commissioner Mark Flynn told MPs on the public accounts committee in June.

When CBC News later asked Flynn whether the names could be released in the House of Commons, where MPs enjoy certain legal protections, he suggested that could be a legal grey area.

"That's a question that should be asked, due to the complexities of parliamentary privilege, of a legal expert," Flynn said.

Stephanie Carvin, a former CSIS national security analyst, said there are several reasons why national security agencies wouldn't want the names made public — starting with the fact that it could compromise ongoing investigations.

"We don't want foreign governments knowing how we are collecting information. That's why we protect our sources and methods," she said.

squints

Oh yeah, you're right.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 3 points 1 month ago (8 children)

“Did it advance the cause of national security? Did it advance the interest of the inquiry and the commissioners’ work? I’m not so sure.”

If it leads to Polievre getting his fucking security clearance, I would argue it does.

There would be no "partisan turn" to take if he would meet this basic expectation.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 6 points 1 month ago (3 children)

Phaser. Lightphaser.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 5 points 1 month ago (10 children)

When questioned by Conservative Party lawyer Nando De Luca, Trudeau also said the names of Liberal parliamentarians and individuals from other parties are on the list of parliamentarians at risk of being compromised by foreign interference.

Wow, what a cudgel.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 18 points 1 month ago (6 children)

That would be irresponsible - this is intelligence, not evidence that would hold up in court.

Trudeau himself says that some of the intel could be wrong.

Of course, if they have irrefutable evidence regarding any individuals, I agree with you.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 11 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It seems like JT is handling the situation just about as well as could be expected.

[–] ValueSubtracted@startrek.website 22 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Indeed - for those who may not be aware, Lower Decks season posters tend to be based on the corresponding film.

We're now up to Star Trek V.

A red theatre seat with a seat belt, floating in space with the USS Enterprise in the background. Text on the poster says, "Why Are They Putting Seatbelts in Theatres This Summer?" Star Trek V: The Final Frontier

Yeah, the Delta arc is pretty laser-focused on the Vaadwaur, but it's a little surprising they didn't do a payroll or something.

 

In addition to the recently announced news that the U.S.S. Enterprise-D from Star Trek: The Next Generation would be featured as part of Universal Fan Fest Nights, Universal Studios Hollywood has revealed that the actual bridge set piece featured in the third and final season of Star Trek: Picard will be a major component of the experience, inviting guests and fans to enjoy a unique opportunity to see it as part of this all-new event.

 

Washik, 58, told The Canadian Press earlier this month that she was having a playful water gun fight with a child during a neighbourhood gathering when she accidentally sprayed Rochester in the chest.

Washik said that, despite her apologies, he called police. After Ontario Provincial Police (OPP) arrived, Washik said the officers didn't ask her "a single question" and charged her with assault with a weapon. But Rochester's security footage appears to show a different version of events.

Around 6 p.m. ET, Rochester is setting up his lawnmower on his front lawn when Washik walks over, the footage appears to show. No other people can be seen.

She stands at the end of his lawn and is heard saying, "Hey, how's it going?"

Rochester doesn't appear to respond and begins mowing his lawn while Washik watches him for several minutes, occasionally waving.

"It was very strange and creepy," he told CBC.

Then, a boy crosses from the other side of the street and Washik appears to ask him for a water gun, making a flicking motion with her hands in the direction of Rochester.

The footage doesn't capture the side of the house, where Rochester alleges he was intentionally sprayed.

view more: ‹ prev next ›