Campbell has to go..

BC's provincial election and STV referendum takes place Tuesday May 12th.
User avatar
hellomynameis
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3172
Joined: May 17th, 2007, 5:22 am

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by hellomynameis »

steven lloyd wrote:That would almost certainly seem to be the case. However, it would have been interesting to see what would have happened if Ujjal Dosanjh was elected premier over Herr Gordon Campbell. I mean there still would have been increased global demand for our raw resources (like the Liberals had anything to do with that –LOLOLOL). There would have still been increased employment because of that as well (as well as a real estate boom), however, there is a really good chance we would have been putting people from NDP employment preparation programs to work instead of having to advertise out of province for laborers. No worries though -there has always been room on the street for folks who don’t vote Liberal.

I whole heartedly agree!
It’s good that we help the ultra-rich figure out how they are going to survive past this crisis (you do know we are in a global economic crisis right now right?). After all, once we help the rich and powerful, we know they will help us next – right?

Well there is truth to the idea of investing our collective(provinces) wealth with the rich and by rich I mean the people with the intelligence to make a good return on said investment, but we cannot do this at the exclusion of the poor.
"Books tap the wisdom of our species -- the greatest minds, the best teachers -- from all over the world and from all our history. And they're patient."
- Carl Sagan
User avatar
kingsandman
Übergod
Posts: 1752
Joined: Dec 1st, 2007, 4:47 pm

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by kingsandman »

BoyzMommy wrote:
kingsandman wrote:Wow, aren't we bitter. The guy's guilty of driving while impaired, something that 95% of the population has done, but just never got caught for. He surrendered his B.C. license (which there was no legal requirement to do) for one year, and got on with his life. Do you spend your days wondering where you went wrong, or are you just that bitter after 50 years? You claim intelligence, yet just bash everyone who opposes your opinion. This government has done absolutely nothing to lessen my lifestyle. I make more, I'm worth more, and I pay less taxes. I merely express how I kind of like the guy, and you go off on some mudslinging tangent. I don't envy the job, or the condition the province was in when he came to power. Many factors outside of the liberal party have contributed to our current prosperity, just as many have contributed towards a down turn in certain sectors. I just think they've done a better job than previous governments. There's an election coming, throw your name in the ring as an independant, good luck.


Wow I'm glad you make more, keep more, and live better now. I have to assume that you were in the upper echelons of society to begin with because the rest of us living in middle, lower middle and lower income families sure as hell aren't doing better. And with increased taxes at the pump, you certainly won't be keeping as much of your money now. The rest of us who live in the real world are making less in relation to the cost of living as the price of everything requiring transportation goes through the roof. Our tax burden hasn't changed a whole lot because we don't make as much as you apparently do, and we certainly aren't worth more money because we spend everything we have just trying to make ends meet. Wait times are up at hospitals, so god forbid if I need medical attention. Education is continually underfunded. (unless you believe the spin doctors from Ms. Bond's office who will tell you that money falls from the sky on the school grounds and the money problems come from greedy teachers requiring a paycheck, and school boards not being able to make one dollar pay for ten dollars worth of materials...) Social services are underfunded. Programs for the mentally ill, battered women, people with addictions, etc, etc, have been cut. In fact, the only programs that seem to get MORE money are those related to the almighty Olympics. If that's what Gordon has given me, then he can kiss my *ss.

And yes, many people have driven drunk (although 95% is a pretty ridiculous stat to just throw around considering how many non-drinkers there are in society), but most of us had the brains to stop doing it when we were 20 years old, not 45 or 50!! And none of us were the premier of the province at the time. When one is elected to office, there should be a basic standard of decency and respect for the law. When the person we have elected to make the laws shows blatant disregard for laws, that is a problem. And before you get all "get off your soap box" on me, yes, when I was younger, I did drive home on several occasions when I had had more than the legal limit. Am I proud of that? Not for a second. How old was I the last time it happened? In my early twenties. Now, however, as a GROWN ADULT with children and responsibilities, I would never do it. He should have known better. He should have resigned when he did it. He was too arrogant to do so.[/
Now you seem to be an expert on my life as well. I'd consider myself squarely in the middle class bracket, not rich, but not starving. I can hardly blame Gordon Campbell for the price of fuel, or for being human and making a huge personal mistake. I've just found business to be better since the liberal era has begun.There have been cuts in areas, but those are the hard decisions that need to be made. Take a family that's spending more in a month than they're bringing in, financial disaster is the ultimate outcome. Cut out the luxuries like golfing and beer, the father's *bleep* off. Cut out movie night and video games, the kids are *bleep* off. Cut out the spa days and shoe shopping, the mother's *bleep* off. Bottom line, someone's lifestyle has to change for the greater good. A few years down the road when things settle out, the family can enjoy some of life's luxuries. People need to spend less time looking for a scapegoat and more time making the most of what they have. I don't drink, I don't smoke, I don't eat out often. My decision years ago to be mortgage/debt free before I turn 45 is right on track, and I won't apologize to you for it. 2 majority governments in a row tell me I'm not the only one who has no problem with Gordon Campbell. Voice your opinion on election day and hope for the best, I already know who I'm voting for.
Model citizen......zero discipline.
User avatar
steven lloyd
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 20817
Joined: Dec 1st, 2004, 7:38 pm

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by steven lloyd »

I can hardly blame Gordon Campbell for the price of fuel, or for being human and making a huge personal mistake. I've just found business to be better since the liberal era has begun.There have been cuts in areas, but those are the hard decisions that need to be made… Bottom line, someone's lifestyle has to change for the greater good.


It makes sense not to put the entire blame for the current price of fuel on Gordon Campbell, because aside from a completely unnecessary and what will ultimately prove to be an unfair and ineffective carbon-tax, Campbell and his policies have little impact on global macroeconomic factors that would affect fuel price. However, for that same reason (ie; Campbell and his policies have little impact on global macroeconomic factors), it is also makes no sense to credit him with improvements to business. No matter what government were in power right now, global demand for our raw resources would have risen just as they did, the real estate market would have boomed just as it did, and we would still be preparing for the Olympics. Giving Campbell credit for any of that is simply erroneous and ill-informed.

On the other hand, we can, for example, directly attribute the rise in homelessness to Gordon Campbell. That’s quite an accomplishment (I could also thank him for an increase in my business - because after almost eight years of Liberal social-economic policy in this province, those of us working in the criminal justice system have never been busier). In fact, we can thank him for a number of completely unnecessary and short-sighted cuts to services that accomplished nothing other than to widen the income gap, destroy people’s lives and decimate small communities. But hey, someone’s lifestyle has to change for the greater good.

2 majority governments in a row tell me I'm not the only one who has no problem with Gordon Campbell. Voice your opinion on election day and hope for the best, I already know who I'm voting for.


Two majority governments in a row might tell you you’re not alone, but it certainly doesn’t say you’re smart. The Americans elected George Bush twice. History is replete with examples of electorates that have been duped into electing incompetent and criminal governments. I’m so happy for you that you’ll be able to say you were a part of that.
A Trump presidency would be Putin's wet dream
User avatar
kingsandman
Übergod
Posts: 1752
Joined: Dec 1st, 2007, 4:47 pm

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by kingsandman »

steven lloyd wrote:

Two majority governments in a row might tell you you’re not alone, but it certainly doesn’t say you’re smart. The Americans elected George Bush twice. History is replete with examples of electorates that have been duped into electing incompetent and criminal governments. I’m so happy for you that you’ll be able to say you were a part of that.
No, but it does tell me that more people were happy with the Liberals than not. Let's not forget that the U.S. election system got Bush elected in the first place, he lost the popular vote. Only time will tell what the future holds for the Liberals.
Model citizen......zero discipline.
User avatar
steven lloyd
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 20817
Joined: Dec 1st, 2004, 7:38 pm

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by steven lloyd »

kingsandman wrote:
steven lloyd wrote:
Two majority governments in a row might tell you you’re not alone, but it certainly doesn’t say you’re smart. The Americans elected George Bush twice. History is replete with examples of electorates that have been duped into electing incompetent and criminal governments. I’m so happy for you that you’ll be able to say you were a part of that.
No, but it does tell me that more people were happy with the Liberals than not. Let's not forget that the U.S. election system got Bush elected in the first place, he lost the popular vote. Only time will tell what the future holds for the Liberals.


In actual fact, in our last election the majority of people in BC voted for anyone else beside the criminal Gordon Campbell as our premier. More people in this province are definitely unhappy with the current criminal regime in power than not (and they are not referring to the premiers criminal conviction for drunk driving, but the numerous allegations of fraud, insider trading, graft and racketeering). Unfortunately, our electoral system has flaws similar to the Americans, and in their arrogance, the criminal Liberals continue to ram it to the average person in this province. Some recognize this and are angry. Others are too duped to recognize it and continue to be Campbell lapdogs. Again, with a critically flawed electoral system, it is entirely possible that this unpopular criminal regime will get elected yet a third time. It is our misfortune that we, as a collective, are so ill-informed, and quite frankly, so collectively ignorant and stupid. We do get what we deserve.
A Trump presidency would be Putin's wet dream
User avatar
usquebaugh
Guru
Posts: 8984
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 3:17 pm

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by usquebaugh »

For anyone who doubts Steven's claim that the majority of British Columbians voted for anyone other than the Liberals, I found these stats here: http://www.cbc.ca/bcvotes2005/

Overall Election Results
Party and its Vote Share
LIB = 46.03%
NDP = 41.27%
GRN = 9.11%
DR = 0.84%
OTH = 2.76%
Where oh where’d my body go?
Africa or Mexico?
Where or where’d my body go?
Where’d my body go?
Have you seen my ghost?
Staring at the ground?
Have you seen my ghost?
Sick of those *bleep* clouds
Ranger66
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2337
Joined: Jul 5th, 2007, 11:42 am

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by Ranger66 »

“but the numerous allegations of fraud, insider trading, graft and racketeering).”

The key word here is allegations, present your proof of this fraud, insider trading, graft and racketeering and I for one will back you up. A case for or against anyone should be based on fact not opinion or allegation.

“Overall Election Results
Party and its Vote Share
LIB = 46.03%
NDP = 41.27%
GRN = 9.11%
DR = 0.84%
OTH = 2.76%”
This is a fact
“Some recognize this and are angry. Others are too duped to recognize it and continue to be Campbell lapdogs”
This is an opinion.
To cool to live, to smart to die or no good deed should go unpunished
User avatar
usquebaugh
Guru
Posts: 8984
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 3:17 pm

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by usquebaugh »

A case for or against anyone should be based on fact not opinion or allegation.


Strictly speaking, in legal cases the word "alleged" is used to describe the suspect's part in any activity, even if there are facts to support the allegations. Hence, a person who has perpetrated a crime is referred to as "the alleged suspect" (even if there is video footage to show exactly who did what).

There are clearly allegations of wrongdoing against the BC Liberals, or do you not remember the RCMP's raid on the legislature?

For that matter, read these sections of Bill 29 and ask yourself if ripping up union contracts isn't illegal (because the Supreme Court of Canada says it is!):

http://www.leg.bc.ca/37th2nd/3rd_read/gov29-3.htm#section9
Layoff and bumping

9 For the period ending December 31, 2005, a collective agreement must not contain a provision that

(a) restricts or limits a health sector employer from laying off an employee,

(b) subject to paragraph (c), requires a health sector employer to meet conditions before giving layoff notice,

(c) requires a health sector employer to provide more than 60 days' notice of layoff to an employee directly or indirectly affected and to the trade union representing the employee, or

(d) provides an employee with bumping options other than the bumping options set out in the regulations.


http://www.leg.bc.ca/37th2nd/3rd_read/gov29-3.htm#section10
Part prevails over collective agreements

10 (1) A collective agreement that conflicts or is inconsistent with this Part is void to the extent of the conflict or inconsistency.

(2) A provision of a collective agreement that

(a) requires a health sector employer to negotiate with a trade union to replace provisions of the agreement that are void as a result of subsection (1), or

(b) authorizes or requires the labour relations board, an arbitrator or any person to replace, amend or modify provisions of the agreement that are void as a result of subsection (1),

is void to the extent that the provision relates to a matter prohibited under this Part.


http://www.leg.bc.ca/37th2nd/3rd_read/gov29-3.htm#section13
Collective agreements

13 (1) A provision of a collective agreement that is based on or derived from an accord is void.

(2) A provision of a collective agreement that

(a) requires the government or a member of the CSSEA to negotiate with a trade union to replace provisions of the collective agreement that are void as a result of subsection (1), or

(b) authorizes or requires the labour relations board, an arbitrator or any person to replace, amend or modify provisions of the collective agreement that are void as a result of subsection (1),

is void to the extent that the provision relates to paragraph (a) or (b).
Where oh where’d my body go?
Africa or Mexico?
Where or where’d my body go?
Where’d my body go?
Have you seen my ghost?
Staring at the ground?
Have you seen my ghost?
Sick of those *bleep* clouds
Ranger66
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2337
Joined: Jul 5th, 2007, 11:42 am

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by Ranger66 »

“There are clearly allegations of wrongdoing against the BC Liberals”

I am very clear on the allegations of wrongdoing, what I asked for was facts not opinion’s. While I agree ripping up union contracts is illegal.

” but the numerous allegations of fraud, insider trading, graft and racketeering).”

This is a statement that you should back up with facts. I know the temptation will be to slander people who question opinions and just take the easy way out or you could back up what you say with facts.
To cool to live, to smart to die or no good deed should go unpunished
User avatar
usquebaugh
Guru
Posts: 8984
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 3:17 pm

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by usquebaugh »

Ranger66 wrote:“There are clearly allegations of wrongdoing against the BC Liberals”

I am very clear on the allegations of wrongdoing, what I asked for was facts not opinion’s. While I agree ripping up union contracts is illegal.

” but the numerous allegations of fraud, insider trading, graft and racketeering).”

This is a statement that you should back up with facts. I know the temptation will be to slander people who question opinions and just take the easy way out or you could back up what you say with facts.


Please refer to the person who should be backing those statements up with facts, or use the word "one." "You" sounds accusatory, when I am not the person who made the statements. Thanks.

It is a fact that the legislature was raided. In order to obtain a search warrant to do so, the RCMP had to have provided a judge with enough evidence (aka facts) as grounds for such a search.
Where oh where’d my body go?
Africa or Mexico?
Where or where’d my body go?
Where’d my body go?
Have you seen my ghost?
Staring at the ground?
Have you seen my ghost?
Sick of those *bleep* clouds
Ranger66
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2337
Joined: Jul 5th, 2007, 11:42 am

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by Ranger66 »

Sorry that” you” is more like a royal “we”.

“fact that the legislature was raided”

While this is a fact it needs to be expanded on with related facts if you want someone agree with you in any context other then what is self evident.

The RCMP need only have a "reliable informant" who can supply a "reasonable suspicion." To get a search warrant a fact is not needed.
To cool to live, to smart to die or no good deed should go unpunished
User avatar
usquebaugh
Guru
Posts: 8984
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 3:17 pm

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by usquebaugh »

Ranger66 wrote:Sorry that” you” is more like a royal “we”.

“fact that the legislature was raided”

While this is a fact it needs to be expanded on with related facts if you want someone agree with you in any context other then what is self evident.

The RCMP need only have a "reliable informant" who can supply a "reasonable suspicion." To get a search warrant a fact is not needed.


In the warrant the judge released with regard to the raid on the Legislature, the RCMP had documentary evidence when they applied for the warrant.

http://www.cbc.ca/bc/news/20060403_warrant-one.pdf

The informant says that indictable offences have been committed, namely,

THAT, on or between April 01, 2002 and December 31, 2003, at or near Victoria,
British Columbia, Udhe Singh BASI, being an official, specifically a Ministerial
Assistant for the Minister of Finance, Provincial Government of British Columbia,
did accept from Erik BORNMAN, for himself a benefit, to wit in connection with a
matter of business relating to the government, contrary to Section 121(l)(a) of
the Criminal Code of Canada.

THAT, on or between April 01, 2002 and December 31, 2003, at or near Victoria,
British Columbia, Udhe Singh BASI, being an official, specifically a Ministerial
Assistant for the Minister of Finance, Provincial Government of British Columbia
did commit a Breach of Trust in connection with the duties of his office, contrary
to Section 122 of the Criminal Code of Canada.



Furthermore,
35. That on September 14, 2004, I viewed documents seized by IPOC
investigators from a bank account held by BASI. This evidence supports
the witness testimony about money paid to BAS1 via Aneal BAS1 supplied
to investigators by Erik BORNMAN as well as other bank documents
seized and reviewed.
These documents were cheques written as payable
to BAS1 by Aneal BASI:
a) #005 dated December 20,2002 in the amount of $2000
b) #009 dated April 28, 2003 in the amount of $3000
c) #011 dated June 10,2003 in the amound of $1990
d) #012 dated June 16,2003 in the amount of $2000
e) #014 dated July 17,2003 in the amount of $1500
f) #015 dated August 20,2003 in the amount of $1 500
g) #016 dated September 11,2002 in the amount of $4500
Where oh where’d my body go?
Africa or Mexico?
Where or where’d my body go?
Where’d my body go?
Have you seen my ghost?
Staring at the ground?
Have you seen my ghost?
Sick of those *bleep* clouds
Ranger66
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2337
Joined: Jul 5th, 2007, 11:42 am

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by Ranger66 »

“The informant says”

This is what you would base your whole case on.
To cool to live, to smart to die or no good deed should go unpunished
User avatar
usquebaugh
Guru
Posts: 8984
Joined: Mar 19th, 2005, 3:17 pm

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by usquebaugh »

Well, since you obviously didn't bother to click on the link... Here's the link again... http://www.cbc.ca/bc/news/20060403_warrant-one.pdf

This is the Information of:
Corporal Andrew Thomas Cowan
A member of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, Peace Officer, of the City of
Victoria, in the said Province of British Columbia, hereinafter called the
"informant", taken before me, the undersigned Judge in and for the Province of
British Columbia.


I: GROUNDS FOR BELIEF:
That I, Corporal A.T. COWAN, am a Peace Officer and Regular Member
of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, hereinafter referred to as the
RCMP. My current duties are with the Commercial Crime Section, Victoria,
BC. I have personal knowledge of the matters hereinafter save and
except where on information received, in which case I believe this
information to be true.
II: SYNOPSIS:
1. That based on the information detailed in this Information to Obtain, I
believe the following is an accurate synopsis of this complex and ongoing
investigation.
2. That on or about October 07, 2003, 1 became actively involved in RCMP
Island District Drug Section investigation identified as Project
"Everywhichway", hereinafter referred to as the Project. My Project duties
were the monitoring of telephone intercepts relating to named target Udhe
Singh BASI.
3. That Udhe Singh BAS1 (B:1966-08-07) is also known as, and referred to in
the investigation as David BAS1 or Dave BAS1 (hereinafter referred to as
"BASI") by targets, friends, family and associates. BAS1 was, at the
investigations onset, a Ministerial Assistant, Ministry of Finance, Provincial
Government of BC.
4. That BAS1 was an identified person named in a Part VI Authorization (P.
6712003 and P.73/2003, Vancouver Registry) for the period of October 13,
2003 to December 11, 2003. These Authorizations included BASl's
residence, BC Government office, and BC Government cellular
telephones, as well as BASl's home computer internet account. BASl's
business telephone number could not be intercepted due to technical
problems. These Authorizations included several other identified targets
and relate to investigations in the following alleged criminal offences:
drugs, proceeds of crime, conspiracy and breach of trust.

That the criminal investigation of BAS1 initially concerned proceeds of
crime and corruption.
That during the investigation, Erik BORNMAN (B:1976-05-20), hereinafter
referred to as BORNMAN, an associate of BASl's became a person of
interest. BORNMAN is a partner with a Victoria and Vancouver based
lobby firm known as Pilothouse Public Affairs Group, hereinafter, and
commonly referred to as Pilothouse. He had contact with BAS1 and
received information and documents from BAS1 in exchange for payments
which were made to Aneal Basi for forwarding to BASI.
That during the investigation, Aneal BAS1 (B:1980-11-15) became a
person of interest. Aneal BAS1 is the cousin of BAS1 and is employed by
the Provincial Government of British Columbia as a Public Affairs Officer,
Ministry of Transportation.
That this lnformation to Obtain a Search Warrant pertains to items and
grounds for belief based on Aneal BASl's involvement in the passage of
funds from Erik BORNMAN to BASI. These funds were in the form of
cheques written to Aneal BASI, deposited to the account of Aneal BAS1
and it is believed, dispersed to BAS1 as part of the arrangement with Erik
Bornman.
This lnformation to Obtain arises from evidence recovered from search
warrants executed on July 22, 2004 (the supporting lnformation to Obtain
dated July 22, 2004 has been attached as Appendix I ) and August 04,
2004 (the supporting lnformation to Obtain has been attached as
Appendix 2). Both search warrants were executed on TD Canada Trust
and relate to the accounts of Aneal BASI.
That information received during this investigation pertaining to Aneal
BAS1 and BAS1 has been the result of intercepted telephone
conversations, open source inquiries, interviews and investigation from
reviewing documents.
That due to the complexity of the investigation and the Project, facts are
still being gathered.
OFFENCES:
That, I believe that criminal offences pursuant to Sections 121 ( I )(a),
121 (1 )(e) and 122 of the Criminal Code of Canada have occurred.
That pursuant to Section 121(l)(a) of the Criminal Code of Canada, I
believe that:
a. BAS1 is an official as defined by Section 118 of the Criminal Code
of Canada;
14. That pursuant to Section 122 of the Criminal Code of Canada, I believe
that:
a. BAS1 is an official, as defined by Section 118 of the Criminal Code
of Canada;


The Crown has also provided a good deal of documentary evidence:

The Crown has already provided about 250,000 pages of documents over and above those seized during the legislature raid.

http://canadianpress.google.com/article ... qIBx6p8Q_w
Where oh where’d my body go?
Africa or Mexico?
Where or where’d my body go?
Where’d my body go?
Have you seen my ghost?
Staring at the ground?
Have you seen my ghost?
Sick of those *bleep* clouds
Ranger66
Grand Pooh-bah
Posts: 2337
Joined: Jul 5th, 2007, 11:42 am

Re: Campbell has to go..

Post by Ranger66 »

“This is the Information of:
Corporal Andrew Thomas Cowan”
We all know the police don not lie.


“The case itself is scheduled to proceed Monday”
They are guilty when you say they are or when the courts do.
To cool to live, to smart to die or no good deed should go unpunished

Return to “B.C. Provincial Election 2009”