Talk:Canadian Security Intelligence Service

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Canada Portal
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada and related WikiProjects, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles on Canada-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project member page, to join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
??? This article has not yet been assigned a rating on the quality scale.
Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
Canadian law
This article is part of the Canadian law WikiProject (Discuss/Join).
To-do list for Canadian Security Intelligence Service: edit · history · watch · refresh

Here are some tasks you can do:
  • Requests: info on Maher Arar, Air India bombing, historical operations, more pictures
  • Wikify: references, infobox
  • Expand: The section on history, sections for famous cases

Contents

[edit] UK equivalent

"CSIS, like its UK (BSIS, BSS) counterparts"

What are BSIS and BSS?

Well there ya go. Hope this is useful to someone.

-Ghoest

[edit] That things logo...

...is HORRIBLY HORRIBLY UGHLY! Even worse then the Order of Canadia one!!! Thanx 69.142.2.68 19:43, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

That may be, but this isn't the place to debate it. --Image:Ottawa flag.png Spinboy 14:58, 5 September 2005 (UTC)
Enhh, give 'em a break; at least they didn't blank the articel with that sentiment. 68.39.174.238 04:22, 29 July 2006 (UTC)
Pfft, it's way better than the Order of Canada Sherurcij 01:23, 28 November 2005 (UTC)


Who can I talk to to get a job with CSIS? Please email me back... Peace

KilpatrickH 16:11, 14 September 2006 (UTC)HANDI

CSIS is a branch of the Canadian Military, so Int Ops and Int Officers both come from the Canadian Forces. Intelegence Operators are mainly promoted from other branches of the forces, but Int Officers are sometimes picked up from the 'Direct Entry Officer Program' (university degree in select humanities studies is required). Apart from that, like most branches of the military, they employ some civilians as well. The CF has information about their hiring processes, but industry magazines, or monster.ca could both be consulted. Check out classifieds from ottawa or Kingston (where there is a large training facility). —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 74.119.25.242 (talk) 05:15, 28 December 2006 (UTC).


CSIS is not part of military intelligence, it is a strictly civilian organization. If you want to work for them go to thier website. Once again this has nothing to do with the direct officer entry program of the Canadian forces. CSIS and CF are independant of each other but cooperated when required. The whole point of CSIS was to insure civilian oversight, as the RCMP is a military organization. But what you said is accurate about the Canadian Forces officers entry program. http://www.recruiting.forces.gc.ca/v3/engraph/jobs/jobs.aspx?id=82&bhcp=1. But you will find no information on the CSIS hiring process. The CSIS process can take up to a year.

Perhaps they were thinking of CSE instead of CSIS, it's part of National Defense.Dan Carkner 14:08, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
And the RCMP is not a military organisation; it is a paramilitary organisation. Taroaldo 19:53, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Lacking Information...

For such an important page it is sorely lacking information. TDS (talk • contribs) 02:15, 24 November 2005 (UTC)


I would also state that, not only the fact that they aren't well known and that they are much more sneaky than the CIA, but that they aren't very involved in canadian affairs, or well tied in to the prime minister respectively. May 06, (capn' canada)

[edit] Covert Entry

Shouldn't this article mention the allegations made by the book Covert Entry? -- Asdquefty 14:23, 15 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] Source?

The last sentence of the first section makes a bold statement, "In 2003, CSIS, unlike intelligence services of Canada's allies, determined that Iraq likely was not a threat." What is the source for this?

--I believe it was a new release... I remember seeing it.  Give me a few days, I'll try to track it down.


Can y'all sign your comments please? Taroaldo 19:48, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Foundation and RCMP

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't CSIS founded as a direct result of what were deemed to be "abuses" committed by RCMP's Special Branch/Security Service in connection with their investigations into Quebecois separatist movements? DragonRouge 21:51, 27 September 2006 (UTC)

yes, it's true. Dan Carkner 18:59, 7 November 2006 (UTC)
This article is not nearly critical enough. There is no "Criticism" section even? No mention of the reason why CSIS was founded, or its abuses for example during the first gulf war? I'm going to try and read some books about this and come back to it. Dan Carkner 19:02, 7 November 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Copy Violation

This article violates section 12 of the Canadian Crown Copyright. I do believe that this page was copy pasted from this website from the start. I nominated it for speedy deletetion.

Flubeca 00:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

I don't really have anything invested in the article, but it does seem a significant topic. Seems much more appropriate to axe all but the LEAD or a new LEAD and downgrade to stub, leaving the See Also, Infobox, and Images in tact to prevent their having to be recreated from scratch. Keep in mind that non-admins would instantly lose access to that info if it were deleted. Are there any sections of this page that don't match the aforelinked site? MrZaiustalk 01:57, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Also hold on as there is some question as to how much, if any, text matches between the specified URL and the article (i.e. how valid is this copyvio claim?). Many passages in the article don't appear in the claimed copyvio URL and vice versa. There is also a long history of many different types of edits, citations, etc. Also need to follow alternatives to deletion per WP:CP, such as deleting any text that is provably copyvio. Dl2000 03:23, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I honestly don't see the copyvio here, and it's definite not an "unquestionable" copyright violation of the linked site. Furthermore, the nominator believes that an earlier version of this article was a copyvio - that's no reason to tag this one. --Haemo 03:28, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
I agree that a little bit looks like a copyvio, but give us about 10 minutes and we'll probably have it pruned. -Royalguard11(Talk·Review Me!) 03:50, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Let's redo this whole kit and kaboodle - I have time now that exams are over, and I think if we stick a "work in progress" tag on the article, and re-write it. I'll head down to the library to dig out some physical sources for this - I was thinking about using CIA as a model, since it's been rated a "good article". --Haemo 03:58, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
In that case, it just might be better to do it as a /temp. -Royalguard11(Talk·Review Me!) 04:04, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
Well, I'm just going to be bold and start now. I killed all, or most, of the copyvio material - since it was also massively redundant. I've also tagged it as being in progress. I'll start chipping away at it tonight. --Haemo 04:12, 9 May 2007 (UTC)