• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

Active Shooter In NS. April 19 2020

Eaglelord17

Sr. Member
Reaction score
431
Points
810
I'm not convinced holding the higher ground, having the notes to back your position or being on the side of the angels is a shield against the long knives. With the PM, a Minister and the Commissioner publicly embarrassed, as Russel Peters says, 'somebody's gonna get a hurt'.

People not directly involved in operations, including senior command like the Commissioner, should know enough that they should not have granular information of an ongoing operation, and should be competent enough to defend or explain that to civilian oversight.
Last person that kept detailed records on the Liberals, proving they were lying was Jody Wilson-Raybould and it absolutely killed her political career.
There is a divorced expectation when it comes to chiefs of police- the chief doesn’t know tactics etc. he relies on advice- part of the issue is chiefs presenting themselves as knowing mouths from assholes when they don’t- and the public thinking that a chief or a commissioner is in that spot because they were the “best” at each rank prior,

Police executives are administrators- and should manage and lead police. When asked for their opinion from politicians they should be Finding experts to help them put together their opinion. Set expectations and a mission and seek results.

In this case the allegation is the commissioner wanted the details, in a certain way, so she could help the government with their legislation to keep Canadians safe.

There are several issues in that. Canadians should be free firstly, and kept safe from things and people that would take that liberty. The commissioner should be most concerned with appearing to be an honest and fair person. Not willing to compromise the truth to make people “safe”.

If we need to make a story richer to help a law along- we didn’t need the law. Otherwise it would be evident on its own.

Anyhoo. It’s an allegation. But the wording of the notes raise my eyebrow because it’s formed in a way that is plausible.
Another question I have at this point is why is the PMs office getting so involved in a criminal investigation as it is ongoing. This is having a lot of shades of the SNC-Lavalin affair where the PMs office attempted to interfere in the judicial system. I think we are learning a leopard doesn't change its spots, and that the PM is lucky the RCMP answer to him as he should have been charged with Fraud at least once (Aga Khan incident).
 

lenaitch

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,175
Points
1,040
There is a divorced expectation when it comes to chiefs of police- the chief doesn’t know tactics etc. he relies on advice- part of the issue is chiefs presenting themselves as knowing mouths from assholes when they don’t- and the public thinking that a chief or a commissioner is in that spot because they were the “best” at each rank prior,

Police executives are administrators- and should manage and lead police. When asked for their opinion from politicians they should be Finding experts to help them put together their opinion. Set expectations and a mission and seek results.

In this case the allegation is the commissioner wanted the details, in a certain way, so she could help the government with their legislation to keep Canadians safe.

There are several issues in that. Canadians should be free firstly, and kept safe from things and people that would take that liberty. The commissioner should be most concerned with appearing to be an honest and fair person. Not willing to compromise the truth to make people “safe”.

If we need to make a story richer to help a law along- we didn’t need the law. Otherwise it would be evident on its own.

Anyhoo. It’s an allegation. But the wording of the notes raise my eyebrow because it’s formed in a way that is plausible.
One of the defining traits of a good leader is to know your limits and when to listen.

In my former service, the OPP, 5 of the last ten Commissioners came up through CIB (senior major crime case management branch) - four in a row. Of the remaining 5, one came up through forensic ident., so was equally familiar with investigative processes. It certainly doesn't guarantee that they were great leaders; clearly a couple were anything but, but in situations such as this - complex, high profile investigations - they knew enough to not get in the way.

I was lucky to work for a couple of strong, highly skilled division commanders in criminal operations. I sat in on one meetings with a not-one-of-the-above-five who only stopped pressing for sensitive information they didn't need to have when it was 'indicated' to them that their name would be in the Crown Brief and they can expect to be cross-examined.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
8,327
Points
1,360
Another question I have at this point is why is the PMs office getting so involved in a criminal investigation as it is ongoing. This is having a lot of shades of the SNC-Lavalin affair where the PMs office attempted to interfere in the judicial system. I think we are learning a leopard doesn't change its spots, and that the PM is lucki the RCMP answer to him as he should have been charged with Fraud at least once (Aga Khan incident).
FTFY… 😉
 

Jarnhamar

Army.ca Myth
Reaction score
3,675
Points
1,060
I wonder if RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki's friend Justin Trudeau will rescue her if shes called to testify at the commission.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,688
Points
1,140
Another question I have at this point is why is the PMs office getting so involved in a criminal investigation as it is ongoing. This is having a lot of shades of the SNC-Lavalin affair where the PMs office attempted to interfere in the judicial system.
Involved? Yes.

Commissioner Lucki all but confirmed that the "assault style" firearms ban OIC was drafted and ready to launch. The PMO and Blair were hoping the evidence regarding the type and source of the firearms used and the licence status of the killer could be used to further their political agenda. The killer didn't play into their game plan, being unlicensed, under a firearms prohibition order as well and using illegally obtained firearms. Had the killer been licensed and the firearms he used to start his rampage and kill Cst Stevenson been legally owned, I'm confident that the OIC would've been hastily redrafted to ban a lot more.

Interfered? Not yet.
 
Last edited:

Eye In The Sky

Army.ca Legend
Reaction score
1,979
Points
1,060
At the end of the day, the public doesn't really care I think. They are seeing one-liner reports on the FB wall and assuming it's all truth. RCMP did bad things, they are responsible for XYZ. Canadians don’t need guns. They need to be taken away to save lives.

Liberals want to report something about firearm control (some would say the true agenda is to disarm the population...); it's much easier to take guns away from law abiding citizens than it is criminals. If all you want to do is "report numbers", the easier effort is the low hanging fruit - registered gun owners (of which I am one).

If anyone is surprised by anything this PM does at this point, and it angry about it, I think they should be directing their anger at the voting population; the PM has gotten away with a number of things and to no account.

We can only blame ourselves for letting the BS continue...
 
Last edited:

Fishbone Jones

Army.ca Myth
Subscriber
Donor
Reaction score
943
Points
1,060
I wonder if RCMP Commissioner Brenda Lucki's friend Justin Trudeau will rescue her if shes called to testify at the commission.

He's throwing her under the bus as usual. Our misogynist PM is chucking another female on the pyre that fuels his corrupt occupation of the the PMO.

"When asked if he or his office put pressure on Lucki, Trudeau responded “Absolutely not… we did not put any undue influence or pressure. It’s extremely important to highlight that it is only the RCMP, it is only the police that determines what and when to release information."

So, situation, no change.
 

lenaitch

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,175
Points
1,040
I'll ask for an example when any politician, of any stripe, at any level, ever said 'mea culpa, I interfered with the operation of the bureaucracy for political or personal advantage. It's all on me'.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,190
Points
1,140
I'll ask for an example when any politician, of any stripe, at any level, ever said 'mea culpa, I interfered with the operation of the bureaucracy for political or personal advantage. It's all on me'.
Harry S Truman.
On more than one occasion President Truman referred to the desk sign in public statements. For example, in an address at the National War College on December 19, 1952 Mr. Truman said, "You know, it's easy for the Monday morning quarterback to say what the coach should have done, after the game is over. But when the decision is up before you -- and on my desk I have a motto which says The Buck Stops Here' -- the decision has to be made." In his farewell address to the American people given in January 1953, President Truman referred to this concept very specifically in asserting that, "The President--whoever he is--has to decide. He can't pass the buck to anybody. No one else can do the deciding for him. That's his job.

The sign has been displayed at the Library since 1957.
 

Haggis

Army.ca Veteran
Reaction score
1,688
Points
1,140
Involved? Yes.

Commissioner Lucki all but confirmed that the "assault style" firearms ban OIC was drafted and ready to launch. The PMO and Blair were hoping the evidence regarding the type and source of the firearms used and the licence status of the killer could be used to further their political agenda. The killer didn't play into their game plan, being unlicensed, under a firearms prohibition order as well and using illegally obtained firearms. Had the killer been licensed and the firearms he used to start his rampage and kill Cst Stevenson been legally owned, I'm confident that the OIC would've been hastily redrafted to ban a lot more.

Interfered? Not yet.
Replying to my own post seems odd....but...

The PM and Blair knew the killer's licence status almost immediately (as this was released by the RCMP during a press conference) and sources of the firearms used by April 24, 2020. When asked on May 1st, 2020, "ban day", they declined to name them - deferring that to the RCMP - knowing that information went counter to their agenda. It wasn't until November 2020 that the makes and models were made public through a ATI request by a national newspaper.
 

KevinB

Army.ca Legend
Subscriber
Reaction score
8,190
Points
1,140
Replying to my own post seems odd....but...

The PM and Blair knew the killer's licence status almost immediately (as this was released by the RCMP during a press conference) and sources of the firearms used by April 24, 2020. When asked on May 1st, 2020, "ban day", they declined to name them - deferring that to the RCMP - knowing that information went counter to their agenda. It wasn't until November 2020 that the makes and models were made public through a ATI request by a national newspaper.
It’s Cultural genocide plain and simple.
So much for an inclusive government.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
8,327
Points
1,360

Booter

Full Member
Reaction score
685
Points
810
On the contrary, Blair did no wrong…


View attachment 71722
We ve really lost the plot on these things in our politicians. If you’re in a position of authority over someone- real or perceived asking questions at all, and their timing, is exerting pressure, especially right before explaining that there is new legislation in the pipe!

I really hate the semantical dishonesty written in the very fibre of these people. Speak plainly. Be honest. Do the right thing.
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
8,327
Points
1,360
We ve really lost the plot on these things in our politicians. If you’re in a position of authority over someone- real or perceived asking questions at all, and their timing, is exerting pressure, especially right before explaining that there is new legislation in the pipe!

I really hate the semantical dishonesty written in the very fibre of these people. Speak plainly. Be honest. Do the right thing.
Yup.

Some unlucki soul will pay the price,

1656601175368.gif

but it won’t be Fils de Pierre or Blair…

1656601236602.gif
 

Good2Golf

Moderator
Staff member
Directing Staff
Subscriber
Mentor
Reaction score
8,327
Points
1,360
Nope it's going to be Joe/Jane Double Double Canadian who likes to whack a deer or moose every fall and their buddy who likes to compete in shooting competitions.
Oh that’s the long term goal of «Fils et Cie», for sure. 😔 I was thinking more about the tactical scapegoat…
 
Top