USTR Ambassador “Offended” By TPP Transparency Concerns
3 Comments
Recent Posts
Slick Videos Won’t Save Lawful Access: Why The Government’s Bill C-22 Defence Avoids the Charter, Privacy and Security Concerns Raised By Critics 
The Law Bytes Podcast, Episode 268: Sara Grimes on the Moral Panic Behind Banning Kids from Social Media and AI Chatbots 
U.S. Congressional Leaders Warn Canadian Lawful Access Plans Harm U.S. National Security and Economic Interests 
Make It Make Sense: My Appearance Before the Standing Committee on Public Safety and National Security on Bill C-22’s Lawful Access Plan 
Why Social Media and AI Chatbot Bans for Kids Are Bad Policy: Making the Case at the Senate Social Affairs, Science and Tech Committee
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