[Brenda]

andyt andyt:

Unsound Unsound:

Holy over-reactions batman!!! Y'all are going a little overboard here.

Where did anyone claim that the sky was falling? All I said was that this was a security breach. Perhaps I should have said potential security breac, but be that as it may, the point stands. Yo don't need to be a spy master to realize that a high-level politician with access to state secrets shouldn't be having an affair with someone who works for a foriegn government.

You can downplay how serious the affair was by saying "it's just some flirty emails", but I dare you to try that with your wife...

I'm not saying that she was definatly a spy, or that he was definatly handing over state secrets, but the optics are bad. Very bad. And in politics, journalism, and security appearance is damn near as important as reality.

And if anyone wants to call me a partisan hack, I suggest you take even a cursory glance at my posting history. I'd say I fall pretty middle of the road, with a slight conservative lean.

Nah, they won't. They'll just go overboard with some newbie instead. That's how things work around here - it's not what you say but who's saying it.

Speak for yourself.
I don't care who the poster is. When someone talks crap, I will tell them they talk crap, whether they are newbies or not.

Calling me a partisan hack just because I do not think this is news worthy, is disrespectful to me. You would have had your ass kicked if you would have said it too.

[Gunnair]

andyt andyt:

Unsound Unsound:

Holy over-reactions batman!!! Y'all are going a little overboard here.

Where did anyone claim that the sky was falling? All I said was that this was a security breach. Perhaps I should have said potential security breac, but be that as it may, the point stands. Yo don't need to be a spy master to realize that a high-level politician with access to state secrets shouldn't be having an affair with someone who works for a foriegn government.

You can downplay how serious the affair was by saying "it's just some flirty emails", but I dare you to try that with your wife...

I'm not saying that she was definatly a spy, or that he was definatly handing over state secrets, but the optics are bad. Very bad. And in politics, journalism, and security appearance is damn near as important as reality.

And if anyone wants to call me a partisan hack, I suggest you take even a cursory glance at my posting history. I'd say I fall pretty middle of the road, with a slight conservative lean.

Nah, they won't. They'll just go overboard with some newbie instead. That's how things work around here - it's not what you say but who's saying it.

In other words.... Yeah hackery! Boo reason!

[Unsound]

Again, where is the hackery in saying that a member of government putting himself in this postition looks bad, and could very well be bad?

[andyt]

You got your panties all in a twist about McGuyver, and then you say this: "Agreed. The guy has shown some bad judgement. Not to be trusted with much past photocopying for Bev Oda." Guess you needed to have your little chloric attack, even if it meant attacking somebody who wasn't really saying anything much different than you believe, maybe just said it more forcefully.

[andyt]

Brenda Brenda:

Speak for yourself.
I don't care who the poster is. When someone talks crap, I will tell them they talk crap, whether they are newbies or not.

Calling me a partisan hack just because I do not think this is news worthy, is disrespectful to me. You would have had your ass kicked if you would have said it too.

Well, tell your buddy Gunnair he's talking crap, because he actually thinks that: "Agreed. The guy has shown some bad judgement. Not to be trusted with much past photocopying for Bev Oda." You don't think that's newsworthy?

[Brenda]

andyt andyt:

Brenda Brenda:

Speak for yourself.
I don't care who the poster is. When someone talks crap, I will tell them they talk crap, whether they are newbies or not.

Calling me a partisan hack just because I do not think this is news worthy, is disrespectful to me. You would have had your ass kicked if you would have said it too.

Well, tell your buddy Gunnair he's talking crap, because he actually thinks that: "Agreed. The guy has shown some bad judgement. Not to be trusted with much past photocopying for Bev Oda." You don't think that's newsworthy?

I personally think it is bullshit.

[Gunnair]

Unsound Unsound:

Again, where is the hackery in saying that a member of government putting himself in this postition looks bad, and could very well be bad?

You're in the middle of a different conversation.

[Gunnair]

andyt andyt:

You got your panties all in a twist about McGuyver, and then you say this: "Agreed. The guy has shown some bad judgement. Not to be trusted with much past photocopying for Bev Oda." Guess you needed to have your little chloric attack, even if it meant attacking somebody who wasn't really saying anything much different than you believe, maybe just said it more forcefully.

No, I disagreed with her massive over reaction and the massive series of assumptions being made. Add to that, the forum claim of expertise that she is unwilling to back up.

As noted, your ability to sashay into a thread to start a flamefest is duly noted as your ability to play the cute little cheerleader.

I guess that's all you got.

[Gunnair]

andyt andyt:

Brenda Brenda:

Speak for yourself.
I don't care who the poster is. When someone talks crap, I will tell them they talk crap, whether they are newbies or not.

Calling me a partisan hack just because I do not think this is news worthy, is disrespectful to me. You would have had your ass kicked if you would have said it too.

Well, tell your buddy Gunnair he's talking crap, because he actually thinks that: "Agreed. The guy has shown some bad judgement. Not to be trusted with much past photocopying for Bev Oda." You don't think that's newsworthy?

"Tell your buddy, Gunnair..."

Wow, Andy, you sound like a six year old here.

Can't you go through a day without having some crying hissy fit?

Didn't think so.

[andyt]

Well you had yours earlier, so I guess you're all relaxed now and all.

As for flame war, I'm calling you on your bullshit, is all. You know, just like you were doing with McGuyver. And jumping in - CKA SOP. But it only gets noticed, I guess when it goes against the prevailing norm.

[Gunnair]

andyt andyt:

Well you had yours earlier, so I guess you're all relaxed now and all.

As for flame war, I'm calling you on your bullshit, is all. You know, just like you were doing with McGuyver. And jumping in - CKA SOP. But it only gets noticed, I guess when it goes against the prevailing norm.

Please... now you really are whining. Quick, Andy, man up already and take the mods to task instead of your pissy little mutterings in the corner.

Act like you have a pair even if you don't.

[andyt]

WTF do the mods have to do with this?

Take a look at your reaction to Unsound. He actually challenged what you were saying more than I did, but you didn't accuse him of cheer leading McGuyver or jumping in. I'm just noticing how when you want to go after somebody, you take positions that you yourself don't really believe.

[Brenda]

Hey buddy (where's my batting lashes emoticon? )
Andy told me to tell you sumptin *insert batting lashes emoticon again*








(ok, really, now this thread turned me into a 6 year old. GEESH!!! )


I even typed like a 6 year old
Edited for spleling

[Hyack]

Flame wars, as this is turning into, are sure to be locked, to prevent that from happening here please get this thread back on topic, and try keeping it there...thanks.

[andyt]

Sure.

http://www.ctv.ca/CTVNews/Politics/20110910/dechert-flirty-emails-china-110910/

$1:

A parliamentary secretary to a cabinet minister was told to give an accounting of what he said to a journalist with China's official news agency who got flirtatious emails from him, a government source said Saturday.

Looks like even the Reformacons are not just shrugging this off. As the story says, Dechert had no secret info to give, so this is probably nothing. But it looks bad. He should be demoted, he obviously has poor judgement.


And

$1:

A memo by the head of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service that was made public this year warned of the threat of foreign interference from countries out to influence policy and politicians.

Canadians singled out by unfriendly powers may be "subject to threats, coercion or potential blackmail," warned the memo from CSIS director Dick Fadden to Public Safety Minister Vic Toews.

Fadden cited Canada's natural resources, scientific and technological sectors and its influence in the international community as reasons for it being a target of foreign influence.'

In a media interview in 2010, Fadden was cagey about the countries involved, but did not deny that China was a country of concern.

So McGuyver may not be as paranoid as was suggested here.