

As I understand it : no


As I understand it : no
And all my dogs come to the yard


My point being that this Charles Burton seems to come from nowhere and don’t seems to have any history other than being the Burton’s Report’s author (which is itself a little thin)
And since most of the article you post is based on the authority and credibility of the author its seems (to me at least) that this guy doesn’t have any


I find incredibly suspicious that this guy is only mentioned two times in the Wikipedia on Canada-China relation(I think it’s this one so far I’m unable to link the aryicle) and don’t seems to have a Wikipedia page in English only in French (which is less than 10 line)
In 2005, Charles Burton, an associate professor at [Brock University]Burton’s report, commissioned by the Canadian Department of Foreign Affairs, was entitled *Assessment of the Canada-China Bilateral Human Rights Dialogueand released in an unclassified public version in April 2006. As revealed by [leaked US diplomatic cables], the “Burton Report” considerably affected Western policy approaches to engagement with China on human rights[[25]]
Each link (with the exception of the one of Brock University) go back to the article on China-Canada Relations, in short it’s cited itself so I clear them
In the first year of his prime ministership, Trudeau’s government agreed to talks on a bilateral [extradition treaty] with China in 2016.[[38]] Former diplomat [Charles Burton], presented as a critic of the government policy as the treaty talks were revealed, said in a New York Timesaccount:[[38]]
We don’t seem to have the linguistic and cultural expertise and political knowledge to defend our interests against a very sophisticated diplomatic engagement by China, which seems to always come out on top.
Once again each link (with the exception of extradition which go back to extradition) link to the article
I’ll search for that « Burton’s Report » (which is 11 pages long and don’t seems that important to judge international politics)
Final edit & my conclusion : Globe&Mail have a tendency to fall in obvious pitfalls and I think this is one. They fall so hard that in one piece they defend the Falung Gun and their spectacle. China is major player and we should fear them and be ready but it seems to me that the Globe&Mail is a source that we shouldn’t trust


Debbie McWilliams, who cast the previous 14 Bond films, said Ian Fleming “wrote a character, and that’s the character that stays”.
IIRC bond don’t look like Connery and he have a scar … so she failed right off the bat
Also this article is shit on paper. 4/5 are a nothing piece about MGM searching a new Bond and being acquired by Amazon
Not surprised about this one
I’m not even that old and OneDrive is fucking god awful

Neelix, that’s why

Wait till you learn about Tripoli

One of my friends shit himself at his birthday party a wild back. He ask for help, we’ve gotten out of the bar, clean him, make the proof disappear and come back without anybody noticing… and nothing happen so shut up


Forgot about this oil reserve, I was thinking he’s laundering Russian oil
Put a like because I find the cover really cool (will listen after work)


PSPP showing his cards as a conservative buttlicker once again.


I’m listening to Fraiser. I’m surprised by this one there’s calls on this one that will give high pressure to reactionnaries


I’ll say himself. Charlie Kirk made a career being an asshole. He reaped what he sow


I’ll call it right here : this will be a scam. They’ll ask for a monthly subscription card and never deliver
I think that the main NSFW instance have been defederated by a bunch of instances for publishing pedophilic content. So yeah you have to open an account on this instance since it’s alone in the sea