11 Comments

Maybe you should read “Wilful Blindness”, Sam Cooper. Years of research, documentation. See Amazon books. I guess you chose to overlook the fact that Johnston only addressed 3 issues not the 10 reported. He did not touch the 11 candidates regarding election interference reported. Completely overlooked is the Trudeau Foundation and the CCP funding they accepted resulting in the dissolution of the board. Most would find it odd that 80% of political donations to Trudeau’s riding were from BC, all with Chinese names. Notwithstanding CCP police departments in Richmond, Toronto, Montreal, still operating. Notwithstanding CCP military conducting military exercises on Canadian soil, courtesy of Trudeau until finally stopped by senior military.

These are only a few issues that come to mind. Maybe look at the BC Cullen Commission, money laundering, whereby billions are laundered into Canada yearly, primarily from China. Where do you think that ends up? This has been going on since 1986 beginning in BC. As for Cooper, he is the best and primary source of investigation into these matters. No, he is not silent. You just have not heard him. Time to pay closer attention.

The only question in my mind is how this has managed to stay out of the limelight for so many years, since I have known about it for years. I guess that’s why leaking was the only solution. The “Ottawa Bubble” definitely lives up to its name. Time it was “popped” for good.

Expand full comment

re: Mr. Johnston surprises himself And us

I recoil when I read "us" or "we all" because it unfortunately often reveals a bit more of the writer than the content.

Who exactly is "us". It certainly wasn't me. I also doubt that Johnston from the outset had any other motivation than to shelter the Laurentian elite poster boy and his entourage from further scrutiny. Johnston wasn't surprised.

Perhaps the only person surprised was you. I'm disappointed.

Even if a public inquiry was hobbled by exaggerated definitions of "sensitive information", it would at least make Canadians aware of how much more information is readily available to the CCP than to "us".

Expand full comment

Maybe if PP hadn't been so petulant he could have found out some more information for us.

Expand full comment

Factually, the one who knew about it was Erin O’Toole who sent every member a communication prior to the last election entitled “The Influence of Communist China in Canada”. It was eye opening. Pretty sure it was shared within the Conservative Party. Oddly, or not, Johnston had his report already at the printer before interviewing O’Toole, as was reported. “Petulance” a derogatory term is not the case here. Lending credibility to an obvious and misleading study serves no purpose. Should Poilievre agree, he would also be bound by confidentiality. Why he won’t do it. As he clearly stated when asked. Guess you didn’t hear it. Read ‘Wilful Blindness”, Sam Cooper. An apt title I think.

Expand full comment

The petulance comes, always, from the arrogant, smug, narcissistic, truth-deficient, unethical, devisive, destructive Trudeau, who consistently gives Canada the middle finger. That Pierre Poilievre doesn't buy the bs Trudeau tries to sell, does not make him petulant.

Expand full comment

I stand by my choice of words. "arrogant, smug, narcissistic, truth-deficient, unethical, devisive, destructive" can all be used to describe Poilievre. Everything is about campaigning and spin for him. Referring to a former Governor General chosen by Stephen Harper as Justin's "ski buddy" is unseemly. PP is all about showboating. If he got the clearance and examined the documents he then could then say with some actual authority that Johnston's report is a whitewash. But that means he may have to do some real governing and that's not his thing.

Don't get me wrong, I would love to have a better PM than Justin Trudeau. This iteration of the conservative party has yet to offer one.

Expand full comment

I also stand by mine. So far, we’re allowed to express different opinions.

Expand full comment

Johnson’s plan sounds sensible and has the potential to start a process to improve our outdated system.

Expand full comment

Johnston writes that, "It needs to be someone’s job (or multiple identified peoples’ job) to decide what goes to the NSIA and what gets briefed to the political levels (i.e., to Ministers and their offices)." Perhaps he is proposing something akin to the US National Intelligence Council (NIC)?

Expand full comment

There could easily be a public inquiry. If a topic comes that needs to be protected, proceedings can be moved in camera.

Expand full comment

Nonsense.

Expand full comment