If Elections Canada is so concerned about results in Eastern time-zones affecting outcomes in Western time-zones, don't publish any results anywhere in Canada until the last polls close on the West coast.
This has always been an idiotic system. Occasionally Elections Canada goes after somebody for publishing results, but why are there results available to publish in the first place? If we're trying to be so pure and high minded about the election being fair, I don't think it's asking too much for Elections Canada themselves to hold onto any and all results until the last polling station closes.
Last time I checked, and sadly showing my age, CBC Radio International on short-wave broadcasts, or used to broadcast, results live to the world as they came available. CBC? Government run? Really? How is, or was, that legal? I admit I don't even own a short-wave radio at present, but in the '80s and '90s it was so simple to defeat the publication ban that I always treated it for the joke that it was, and is.
It is Elections Canada who really must be called to account, as they have all of the ballots, and all the discretion in the world. Why are they making results available before the polls close?
I, for one, can't wait for the drug-abusing misogynistic warlock to move to his new location under a bridge somewhere. How many months until the public loses interest in the immature drug-adled rantings of Mr. Sheen? Who'd hire him now anyway? Soon enough he'll burn up all his cash, and the show will be over. He's just another celebrity joke.
It's off-topic, but I thought it was hilarious that he made a fuss about Chuck Lorre's name not being real when Charlie Sheen is the stage name of Carlos Estevez. Props to Mr. Lorre for not engaging on the issue, though it seems in retrospect like the obvious winning move.
Kate Durkin will only be able to exploit the public interest in Mr. Sheen while the spotlight is on him, and proceeds presumably go to a good cause, so wtf? Why doesn't she make a more blunt statement by pointing out the obvious: Mr. Sheen likes to beat up girls?
If they signed an agreement stating that the requests had to be specific, then responded to requests that were vague, why are they complaining? It seems to me that that is the EU's problem. Further, why on earth would the EU care if a [citizen|resident|pleb] wanted to know if the US government had looked at their financial data? Why wouldn't the hi-IQ-EU just notify anybody who's data has been accessed that it's happened as a means curtailing a US government over-reach of authority? The bigger question is, why did the EU agree to it in the first place? If they're so concerned about terrorism, why don't they deal with it themselves?