|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 5, 2005 6:34:55 GMT -5
There is an information blackout in Canada about the level of CORRUPTION in the Liberal Government. It is SO BAD that they had to keep the news out of the public eye. How is THAT for third world politics? What's next? Are they going to bury the news and collect everyone who knows about it into a stadium and shoot them? And we talk about the Americans....... Apparently the information is so damning that it is expected to bring down the Liberal Government. I was trying to find some US sites that contain this information but so far, no luck. Does anyone know where thery are? Here is one link but I did not have time to go through it. U googled it under: gomery inquiry corruption www.technorati.com/tags/corruption |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Apr 5, 2005 6:42:17 GMT -5
Heh. Coincidence. Here's an email I received an hour ago from a friend:
Doit-on rire d'une telle histoire ..... ?
HOW BUSINESS IS DONE IN OTTAWA
The steps at the Parliament Hill building needed some repairs so bids are taken from contractors from across the country.
First a contractor from Toronto looks it over.
After a session of measuring and figuring he presents his bid.
I can do it for $19,000, he says.
I'd need $9,000 for materials, $9,000 for my crew, and $1,000 profit for me.
Next, a redneck from Calgary does his measuring and calculating then says,
I'll do it for $17,000.
$8,000 for materials, $8,000 for my crew, and $1,000 profit for me.
Last a Liberal-friendly advertising firm from Montreal steps up.
Without even looking at the job site he says, I'll do it for $57,000.
Surprised at how high it is, the man taking the bids asks him to explain it.
It's simple, he says, $20,000 for me, $20,000 for you, and we hire the guy from Calgary.
*
Yeah, those Americans, they just can't ever seem to stay out of the news. It's like they invented television or something.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Apr 5, 2005 7:32:06 GMT -5
Careful, careful . . . or we'll be needing to start a collection for the Cranky Defense Fund -- no links allowed or you may be found in contempt for ignoring the media blackout. Be that as it may, thanks for doing the work for me -- I was eventually going to do a search to find out the poop myself but you have saved at least a minute of my time for googling for me. Ah, the joys of slagging the government. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Apr 5, 2005 7:45:32 GMT -5
This installment of the testimony of Jean Brault at the Gomery Commission comes from Friday and follows the first installment. Today;s testimony is still being rebuilt from notes and may not be ready until tomorrow. Again, I want to caution people that this is a single source of information, although I did receive independent confirmation about the first installment from two separate sources. Bear in mind that the witness has not yet been cross-examined as well.
There is more. I don't think that anything here will cause HabsRus trouble . . . but there is more, much more to be read if you go to the proper web site. However, I shall not link you to the site -- you would have to discover it for yourself. However, captains, if you will go to your quarters and blog -- as long as you dotcom/mt you never know what you might find. Lots to read about all sorts of things. Enjoy.
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Apr 5, 2005 7:46:18 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by HabbaDasher on Apr 5, 2005 16:17:25 GMT -5
For God's sake, clean up this criminal embezzlement of our tax dollars, and throw the bums in jail.
And give the Auditor General a police badge, a gun, and a team of commando accountants....
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 5, 2005 20:09:53 GMT -5
Welcome to the Banana Republic of Canada. Please present your passports and $50.00 for our beloved King Idi Martin Dada. $100 extra will get you freedom for your left nut to travel our beloved country. Bananas extra.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Apr 5, 2005 21:28:00 GMT -5
From the US blogger's site:
Adscam And Media Updates
My source for the testimony for the Gomery Inquiry has told me not to expect an update today on yesterday's or today's hearings tonight. The actions of the Attorney General have spooked some people in the courtroom, and apparently Justice Gomery has threatened to clear out the spectators and the TV feeds if the leaks continue. Things may change tomorrow, or even later on tonight. If I get an update, I will post it as soon as I'm able.
Just as yesterday, I did a number of interviews with Canadian media today. Most of the questions were the same, but the people with whom I spoke were uniformly friendly, courteous, and gracious. This has been true across Canada, as I believe I have spoken with media in almost every province now. It's been quite impressive. The last Canadian interview I did was for a magazine in Montreal, and they asked me what kind of impression I have of Canadians after this, and I told him that after doing a number of interviews and reading the thoughtful comments and e-mails from my site, I have a new appreciation for Canada.
The last interview of the day was with News.com's Declan McCullagh, who interviewed FEC commissioner Bradley Smith and touched off the blog reaction to the new Internet regulation that the FEC proposed. The interview became more of a chat, and Declan has already posted his take on our talk:
Morrissey now has laryngitis as a result of a rapid-fire series of interviews from Canadian news organizations. He's found them a bit bizarre. "They can't ask me about the case itself because they can't reproduce anything that has to do with the testimony," Morrissey said in an interview. "They can't ask me about my blog because they can't reproduce the URL."
Canadian publications and bloggers have been left in the difficult position of attempting to describe the violation of a judicial order without revealing which Web site did it. The National Post claimed it could not mention Morrissey by name, and one blogger in Toronto wrote that "I have avoided linking to the U.S. blogger in question. I also deleted a comment someone posted" with alleged Adscam testimony.
Canada's attorney general is investigating the legality of the U.S. blog posting. Government lawyers may charge Canadian Web publishers with contempt of court if they reproduce some of the Adscam testimony or perhaps even link to Morrissey's blog, the Toronto Sun reported.
|
|
|
|
Post by franko on Apr 5, 2005 21:32:20 GMT -5
And more . . . Canada's AG To Take On Bloggers In an odd display of twisted priorities, Canada's Attorney General may start investigating the Canadian blogosphere to find bloggers who have linked back to CQ and broken the publication ban:
CANADA'S attorney general is probing possible breaches of a publication ban set up to protect explosive testimony at the AdScam inquiry. Justice spokesman Patrick Charette said federal lawyers are looking into the Internet sites reproducing excerpts of Montreal ad exec Jean Brault's testimony and providing a link to a U.S. blog featuring more extensive coverage of the hearing.
"We have to decide what the best course of action is," Charette said, adding federal lawyers could charge Canadian bloggers and website owners with contempt of court or suggest AdScam Justice John Gomery issue warning letters.
So instead of chasing down felons or prosecuting violent criminals, or perhaps investigating government corruption, the AG intends to start delivering contempt citations ... or even sillier, warning letters. For what? Writing about testimony to which their politicians have complete access and the media can watch but not report.
Don't get me wrong; American AGs often have their own screwed-up priorities, too. It just seems to me that prosecuting Canadian bloggers for creating a hyperlink to my site realistically ranks rather low on the threat level for most Canadians. However, perhaps the chilling effect on Canadian bloggers from this government intimidation should be taken as an ominous sign about the future of free speech in Canada by all of its citizens.
UPDATE: People keep asking me if I worry about the Canadian government cracking down on my blog. Not with these guys on my side, I don't... |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Apr 6, 2005 8:01:45 GMT -5
I hate the Liberals. Still makes me sick that I had to vote for one of them in the last election.
|
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Apr 6, 2005 11:55:06 GMT -5
I hate the Liberals. Still makes me sick that I had to vote for one of them in the last election. What do you mean BC? I've heard of that old phrase " holding your nose with one hand & voting with the other" but there are always choices. |
|
|
|
Post by BadCompany on Apr 6, 2005 12:13:22 GMT -5
Pre-election polls indicated in my riding (which has never before voted for a separatist party, either at the Federal or Provincial level), that there was a heavy split between federalists who intended to vote Liberal, and those who intended to vote Conservative. The Conservatives were never any threat to win the riding, but there were analysts who predicted they would draw enough votes away from the Liberals to ensure a Bloc Quebecois victory. My options were to hold my nose and vote Liberal, vote Conservative (which I wanted to do), even though I knew they wouldn’t win, and could conceivably bring about a Bloc victory, or vote NDP (bwah-hahahah!! Sorry).
Since it looked like a close election, and I really didn’t want the Bloc to win (she openly disdained the anglo vote during the campaign), I felt I had no choice but to vote Liberal, lest my anti-Liberal vote inadvertently bring about a Bloc victory.
Didn’t work though. She took the riding, even though more people voted for the Liberals and Conservative (and NDP – bwah-haha-haha! Again, sorry), than voted for the Bloc. Despite my best efforts, the Federalist vote was effectively split. So my riding, which is heavily Federalist (it includes Hudson for goodness sake!), is now represented by a separatist who refuses to send out English/bilingual newsletters to her constituents.
|
|
|
|
Post by Cranky on Apr 6, 2005 18:12:32 GMT -5
Pre-election polls indicated in my riding (which has never before voted for a separatist party, either at the Federal or Provincial level), that there was a heavy split between federalists who intended to vote Liberal, and those who intended to vote Conservative. The Conservatives were never any threat to win the riding, but there were analysts who predicted they would draw enough votes away from the Liberals to ensure a Bloc Quebecois victory. My options were to hold my nose and vote Liberal, vote Conservative (which I wanted to do), even though I knew they wouldn’t win, and could conceivably bring about a Bloc victory, or vote NDP (bwah-hahahah!! Sorry). Since it looked like a close election, and I really didn’t want the Bloc to win (she openly disdained the anglo vote during the campaign), I felt I had no choice but to vote Liberal, lest my anti-Liberal vote inadvertently bring about a Bloc victory. Didn’t work though. She took the riding, even though more people voted for the Liberals and Conservative (and NDP – bwah-haha-haha! Again, sorry), than voted for the Bloc. Despite my best efforts, the Federalist vote was effectively split. So my riding, which is heavily Federalist (it includes Hudson for goodness sake!), is now represented by a separatist who refuses to send out English/bilingual newsletters to her constituents. I am not exactly thrilled about the Conservatives Party but at least they start with a fresh slate versus the Criminal Liberal Party. As for the NDP (bwah-hahahah!! Sorry!......Hey, is that like the hiccups?), I wouldn’t vote for them if they were the last political party on earth and my only other choice was Monty Python and the Muppets. The-Little-Swindler -From-Shawinnigan ALWAYS struck me as a naked politico with ZERO vision for the country OTHER then POWER. Then we have Prince Martin, the Proince who wants to be KING for a decade. Of course, we are told that Martin and The Little Swindler had a falling out and they did not see eye to eye. Who are they kidding? They knew that the minute their filthy laundry got exposed, it would mean the Liberals would get slaughtered. I like to see an election and the Criminal Liberal Party get wiped. We need a cleansing once in a while. And while we are at it, what about 5 years in jail for The Little Swindler From Shawinnigan. He can always organize the new ThievesRus political party amongst his new “best friends”. If I have time this weekend, I will write about my run in with The Little Swindler and his secretary calling my company and demanding I "hand over" what was not his. In fact, if I had it it would be worth MILLIONS and I was just going to GIVE IT to him because it was "the Prime Ministers Office"....pfffft. By the way, I use to be a card carrying Quebec AND Federal Liberal (ahrut spit!)………shows how stupid one can be. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 6, 2005 19:55:39 GMT -5
I hate the Liberals. Still makes me sick that I had to vote for one of them in the last election. The Ontario Liberals lost my vote not only provincially, but federally as well. This federal government has one agenda only; to form the next majority government. PM Martin had no other agenda whatsoever. And, it's not like this wasn't predictable. And, while everyone seemed to feel a tad relieved when Mr. Chretien stepped down, many forgot how Paul Martin secretly lobbied for the PM's office back in the early-to-mid-90's. He was caught doing so by Chretien and the PM was so mad he kept him as finance minister. Fast-forward to just a few years ago. Martin goes back to his old tricks and gets caught again, but this time is promptly fired by Chretien. The feud between the two was so much of a distraction that the entire party suffers. Chretien is routinely blindsided by his ministers because he's focusing most of his energies in identifying a successor, or more specifically, a successor who can oust Martin at the Liberal leadership convention. His two candidates were; - Brian Tobin. The man who arrested the crew of a Spanish fishing trawler for illegally fishing in Canadian waters. Tobin even authorized the use of force, which did happen. A warning shot was fired across the bow of the Spanish ship. Then, with the ship in dock, he produces the evidence; many of the fish are smaller than the legal limit.
However, not only did the Newfoundland Premier betray the trust of his voters, but Tobin's tenure was short-lived when John "Beaker" Manley started making a name for himself and gains Chretien's support. After the emergence of Beaker, Tobin retires from federal politics and cannot return to his Premiership in NFLD.
- John "Beaker" Manley. Quickly came on the scene and was touted as a legitimate contender to Martin. However, his days in federal politics came to an abrupt end when Martin consolidated his camp. And make no mistake about it; Martin has a strong camp behind him. Those who aren't on his side, or who were supporters of Chretien, are soon swept away and sometimes in disgrace.
Again, whether it's through his campaign promises or by some recent ill-thought-out decisions, Martin has one mandate and that's to be re-elected. It's all about his office all of the time. Oh, and I didn't vote for Harper either. Sigh! |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 6, 2005 19:58:44 GMT -5
Welcome to the Banana Republic of Canada. Please present your passports and $50.00 for our beloved King Idi Martin Dada. $100 extra will get you freedom for your left nut to travel our beloved country. Bananas extra. Hmm ... sounds like a scam to me    Hold on ... I've got it! What better way to create work in Canada! If it's a scam I'll create the controversy and appoint myself as the head of the committee to solve it. Guaranteed four years work with this government ;D And, kick-a$$ pay to boot  Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 6, 2005 20:13:30 GMT -5
The-Little-Swindler -From-Shawinnigan ALWAYS struck me as a naked politico with ZERO vision for the country OTHER then POWER. Then we have Prince Martin, the Proince who wants to be KING for a decade. Of course, we are told that Martin and The Little Swindler had a falling out and they did not see eye to eye. Who are they kidding? They knew that the minute their filthy laundry got exposed, it would mean the Liberals would get slaughtered. It was solely because of the feud between these two cheeseheads (I doubt they like the Packers) that destroyed the Liberal party. At times the party was left leaderless as Martin continued to lobby for the PM chair and Chretien continued to devise ways to stop him. Wasted energy and wasted effort resulted in a wasted party. Not at all. At one point they were doing a pretty good job. But, one thing we have to remember. It wasn't so much that Chretien was the popular choice as it was more of removing a Mulrooney-influenced government. Mulrooney knew he was going to have his a$$ handed to him in the next election. The Canadian public wanted a change and Chretien was there at the exact right time. He was also charasmatic and, knowing the demise of the Conservatives, he also promised the world too. But, did Mulrooney stick around? Newwwwwwwwwww! He promptly left office and handed the riens over to the "media-elected-Kim-Campbell," who incidently even lost in her own riding. The Liberals were once a very efficient party. However now .... Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by franko on Apr 6, 2005 22:02:07 GMT -5
And Chrétien was worried about what his legacy would be . . .
|
|
|
|
Post by PTH on Apr 6, 2005 22:52:06 GMT -5
What do you mean BC? I've heard of that old phrase " holding your nose with one hand & voting with the other" but there are always choices. My default vote is the Green Party, if I feel that my vote won't be making a difference anyhow. In a tight race though, sometimes you have to compromise and figure out what you dislike least. |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Apr 7, 2005 14:39:28 GMT -5
Ah yes, the eternal Canadian voter's dilemma. Who does one place one's mistrust in, the Fiberals or the Conservatives? Maybe get down with the Nude Democrats Party?
|
|
|
|
Post by HabbaDasher on Apr 7, 2005 16:07:49 GMT -5
I've whittled down my choices to the Marijuana, Rhinoceraus, or Yogic Flyers Parties.
At least those Parties sound like fun....
|
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Apr 7, 2005 16:26:48 GMT -5
The Rhinoceros Party of Canada, also known as the Rhinos, was a registered political party in Canada from the 1960s to the 1990s. Operating within the Canadian tradition of political satire, the Rhinoceros Party's basic credo was to "promise nothing", although in fact they often promised outlandishly impossible schemes designed to amuse and entertain the voting public. The Rhinos were started in 1963 by Doctor Jacques Ferron, "Éminence de la Grande Corne du parti Rhinoceros", a famous separatist writer. In the 1970s, a group of artists joined the party and created a comedic political platform to contest the federal election. Ferron (1979), poet Gaston Miron (1972) and singer Michel Rivard (1980) ran against Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau in his Montreal seat. The party, which claimed to be the spiritual descendants of a Brazilian rhinoceros who had been elected member of São Paulo's city council in the 1950s, listed Cornelius the First, a rhinoceros from the Granby zoo east of Montreal, as its leader. The party claimed that the rhinoceros was an appropriate symbol for a political party since politicians, by nature, are "thick-skinned, slow-moving, dim-witted, can move fast as hell when in danger, and have large, hairy horns growing out of the middle of their faces." - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rhinoceros_Party_of_Canada |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 8, 2005 7:05:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 8, 2005 7:08:36 GMT -5
My default vote is the Green Party, if I feel that my vote won't be making a difference anyhow. In a tight race though, sometimes you have to compromise and figure out what you dislike least. The Ontario Liberals have ensured that my vote will not be going to the Grits, either provincially or federally, for many years to come. Or, at least until the present party is purged. I don't trust Steven Harper either. Habbadasher beat me to the Rhino Party. Sigh! |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 8, 2005 7:10:51 GMT -5
I've whittled down my choices to the Marijuana ... N'uff said ... it's Canada after all. |
|
|
|
Post by jkr on Apr 15, 2005 7:27:50 GMT -5
I live in southern Ontario & I have seen an unfortunate response to this inquiry. The response comes in the form of letters to the editor of supposedly informed individuals. The writer will cite some personal experience that may have happened years ago & then go on to raise the old stereotype of Quebec politics- that bribery & corruption are standard practice. I haven't lived in Quebec for many years but I still find in infuriating. I am now composing a letter to the editor of my local paper in response to such a letter. I have to cool off a bit first so that it doesn't sound like a rant.  |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Apr 15, 2005 7:35:51 GMT -5
I live in southern Ontario & I have seen an unfortunate response to this inquiry. The response comes in the form of letters to the editor of supposedly informed individuals. The writer will cite some personal experience that may have happened years ago & then go on to raise the old stereotype of Quebec politics- that bribery & corruption are standard practice. I haven't lived in Quebec for many years but I still find in infuriating. I am now composing a letter to the editor of my local paper in response to such a letter. I have to cool off a bit first so that it doesn't sound like a rant. To say that patronage existed and exists in Québec is a truth. To say that it doesn't exist and never existed throughout the rest of the country is fantasy. Stereotyping is easy. People are lazy. They don't think... |
|
|
|
Post by Disgruntled70sHab on Apr 15, 2005 12:04:29 GMT -5
Stereotyping is easy. People are lazy. They don't think... Or, they are brainwashed by what the editor of any given newspaper, or news channel gives them to read or see. Case in point; the Ottawa Sun has been traditionally anti-Liberal Conservative. Why? Not sure. Maybe the Liberals have given them enough sensationalism for their tabloid. Conversely, the Ottawa Citizen has been tradionally Liberal. Why? Because the family who owns the paper is traditionally Grit. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on Apr 15, 2005 12:24:59 GMT -5
Or, they are brainwashed by what the editor of any given newspaper, or news channel gives them to read or see. Case in point; the Ottawa Sun has been traditionally anti-Liberal Conservative. Why? Not sure. Maybe the Liberals have given them enough sensationalism for their tabloid. Conversely, the Ottawa Citizen has been tradionally Liberal. Why? Because the family who owns the paper is traditionally Grit. Cheers. And Al Strachan is always wrong because, after all, he is Al Strachan; whether or not he happens to be right. And black people can't skate because...and a European will never captain an NHL team because...etc... |
|
|
|
Post by Toronthab on Apr 23, 2005 10:21:26 GMT -5
To say that patronage existed and exists in Québec is a truth. To say that it doesn't exist and never existed throughout the rest of the country is fantasy. Stereotyping is easy. People are lazy. They don't think... People think as well as they drive the 401 in Toronto. The pressures that led to the apparent malfeasance which has not yet been adjudicated, we should keep in mind, are traceable to the general situation the federal forces (the liberals) found themselves in. Out of power, out of influence, out of money. While there no doubt is personal corruption for venal motives, personal greed. This I suspect will as seems to be the case is usually found on the business side of the equation, the ad agencies. As all adults know, in business, in all interactions the devil you know is the devil you deal with. I rather believe, that the corrupt practices were largely undertaken for what some have referred to as "the cause", Quebec as an integral founding part of Canada without which there could not be a Canada. I don't believe Chretien or most if not all politicos gained much or at all personally, in all of this unfortunate stuff, but rather saw it as and almost necessary means to a good end, saving Canada. I am a little but not much disturbed by it. Let the commission do its work. I do try not to get swept away by the media event du jour, and view Canadians as having much more serious, if less salacious things to address. While I strongly agree as do many liberals with the so-labelled "socially conservative" "moral issues", the thought of anyone electing the Reform party in drag on the basis of this bit of corruption is, well highly repugnant. They are morons who would govern like they drive on the 401. I hope Canadians can grow up enough, be mature enough to not be stupidly swayed by this titillating diversion from the at least half-human course we are following, and fall off the deep and stupid end. Having seen more than a few virtually stop traffic across Toronto so that they can gawk at a car accident on the side of the road, I am not everly optimistic. The right is infamously unreflective. |
|
|
|
Post by M. Beaux-Eaux on May 11, 2005 9:29:36 GMT -5
Ah yes, the eternal Canadian voter's dilemma. Who does one place one's mistrust in, the Fiberals or the Conservatives? Maybe get down with the Nude Democrats Party?  |
|
