Page 3 of 4
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 15th, 2017, 6:13 pm
by maryjane48
John himself said when announcing site c he was going to move on other areas . I know bclibs wont like the choices more than i dislike site c but its the world we live in now .
He said himself he wants to implement un declaration on first nations. That includes not buildung mines on their land unless they want it there . It isnt rocket science to figure out why this mine and teasko one rejected
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 15th, 2017, 7:20 pm
by Trumpeter
600 jobs, 600 jobs, 600 full time jobs!!!
Lots of big mines in Canada where the mine is right in town so 10 km away should have been no problem.
Just another NDP anti business anti job brain fart.
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 15th, 2017, 8:23 pm
by Cactusflower
Trumpeter wrote:600 jobs, 600 jobs, 600 full time jobs!!!
Lots of big mines in Canada where the mine is right in town so 10 km away should have been no problem.
Just another NDP anti business anti job brain fart.
Jobs should never trump the environment. All we've heard from our federal and provincial politicians is, "We can't have a strong economy without a healthy environment." Yet when the BC government rejects a mine because they can't pass the environmental assessment test, all we hear from the usual Castanet suspects are howls of indignation.
Get with the program, guys, or move back to Alberta where they don't care about the environment. (I heard on the news tonight that Jason Kenney won his seat in the by-election back there. If you hurry, you can be back there in time to vote for the TBP again).
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 15th, 2017, 8:25 pm
by maryjane48
Trumpeter wrote:600 jobs, 600 jobs, 600 full time jobs!!!
Lots of big mines in Canada where the mine is right in town so 10 km away should have been no problem.
Just another NDP anti business anti job brain fart.
Its native land .you want mine in your land get to digging
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 15th, 2017, 10:31 pm
by Veovis
maryjane48 wrote:John himself said when announcing site c he was going to move on other areas . I know bclibs wont like the choices more than i dislike site c but its the world we live in now .
He said himself he wants to implement un declaration on first nations. That includes not buildung mines on their land unless they want it there . It isnt rocket science to figure out why this mine and teasko one rejected
I don't think John aspires to your level of vengeance. He may make biased decisions however not for the reasons you desire. You want vengeance for losing against something you disliked, however the choices aren't one vs the other at this point. He may have made the wrong choice that you support, but not for simple hate as you want.
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 16th, 2017, 10:39 am
by Jflem1983
maryjane48 wrote:Trumpeter wrote:600 jobs, 600 jobs, 600 full time jobs!!!
Lots of big mines in Canada where the mine is right in town so 10 km away should have been no problem.
Just another NDP anti business anti job brain fart.
Its native land .you want mine in your land get to digging
Maybe the natives need to move along. After all they were always moving around before white people came and built a country .
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 16th, 2017, 11:15 am
by Urban Cowboy
Veovis wrote:maryjane48 wrote:John himself said when announcing site c he was going to move on other areas . I know bclibs wont like the choices more than i dislike site c but its the world we live in now .
He said himself he wants to implement un declaration on first nations. That includes not buildung mines on their land unless they want it there . It isnt rocket science to figure out why this mine and teasko one rejected
I don't think John aspires to your level of vengeance. He may make biased decisions however not for the reasons you desire. You want vengeance for losing against something you disliked, however the choices aren't one vs the other at this point. He may have made the wrong choice that you support, but not for simple hate as you want.
Johnny would appear to be attracting fair weather supporters, given that just a short week ago, to listen to them, you'd have to believe he could walk on water, now after the Site C decision he's the devil, so that flip flopping will likely keep manifesting itself in many of the things he does, or doesn't do.
More "doesn't" would be my guess.
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 16th, 2017, 11:23 am
by Cactusflower
Any government that had an iota of concern for our environment would have rejected the Ajax proposal. That thing was akin to the Alberta tar sands, albeit on a smaller scale. BTW, why has no one answered my question about the Taseko mine saga up at Fish Lake?
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 16th, 2017, 11:32 am
by maryjane48
Lol only in bclibs is there high drama. John said what his plans were . Its fairly straight forward .i was,for ajax as i had stated before . But i suggested why he said no . Clark could have said yes but she didnt .
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 16th, 2017, 7:17 pm
by Trumpeter
Cactusflower wrote:Trumpeter wrote:600 jobs, 600 jobs, 600 full time jobs!!!
Lots of big mines in Canada where the mine is right in town so 10 km away should have been no problem.
Just another NDP anti business anti job brain fart.
Jobs should never trump the environment. All we've heard from our federal and provincial politicians is, "We can't have a strong economy without a healthy environment." Yet when the BC government rejects a mine because they can't pass the environmental assessment test, all we hear from the usual Castanet suspects are howls of indignation.
Get with the program, guys, or move back to Alberta where they don't care about the environment. (I heard on the news tonight that Jason Kenney won his seat in the by-election back there. If you hurry, you can be back there in time to vote for the TBP again).
Jobs always Trump Stupidity!
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 16th, 2017, 7:30 pm
by Jlabute
Rwede wrote:The N in NDP stands for NO!
Hahaha, and with Horgan and Weaver together, the DP stands for double-p..... to us all.
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 16th, 2017, 9:04 pm
by twobits
maryjane48 wrote:Prove it had nothing to do with it . I said he be doing some tough choices bclibs wont like .
*removed*
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 16th, 2017, 9:08 pm
by Cactusflower
Trumpster wrote: "Jobs always Trump Stupidity." I wonder if putting 'Trump' and 'stupidity' in the same sentence was a Freudian slip? Those two words really do belong together though. Trump is the only leader (and I use that term loosely) on the planet who would be stupid enough to approve the Ajax dam.
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 17th, 2017, 8:53 am
by Jflem1983
So sad the mine got cancelled. Just think of all the jobs lost. For what.
Re: Ajax rejected
Posted: Dec 17th, 2017, 10:51 am
by Jlabute
500 FT jobs and 1200 jobs during the 2 year construction period. Sad to see them go. It could have been an opportunity for the chronically unemployed to make a good clean living in the Kamloops wastescape.
“Environment Minister George Heyman said the potential for significant adverse effects of the Ajax mine included poor air quality and risk to human health.” Another decision to please the Green Party and environmentalists... although the excuse is not the environment, but culture and harm to humans. George Heyman was executive director of the Sierra Club and is an environmental socialist nutjob who believes in something that does not exist, catastrophic climate change.