USTR Ambassador “Offended” By TPP Transparency Concerns
3 Comments
Recent Posts
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 273: Rebroadcast of the Globe and Mail’s The Decibel on Canada’s First Steps Towards a Social Media Ban 
Midnight Madness: The Government Rushes Lawful Access Bill Through the House Without Debate or a Recorded Vote 
One Step Forward, Two Steps Back: Bill C-36 Modernizes Canada’s Privacy Law, Then Delays It to 2030 
Gary Anandasangaree’s Vic Toews Moment Shows the Government Has Lost Its Way on Lawful Access 
Government Moves to Shut Down Lawful Access Hearing In Order To Fast Track Passing the Bill This Week
It’s perfectly transparent, if your one of the people they decide to be transparent with. Otherwise, it’s none of your business so why should you care? Go away, you’re just trying to make the country less secure.
All respect to Mr. Kirk’s office…
…but his assessment of the situation is, I strongly suspect, in error. Grievous error.
That sounds like a “term of art”
When diplomats fence, they do so politely: can anyone put this exceedingly odd response into context?
I could interpret it as “you’re a liar, pants on fire”, or as “I have no reply, I’ll pretend to be insulted”.
Anyone speak ambasadorese?
–dave