I'm not sure why I got the negative rep Chev. Was it because you don't think Klein would be better than Harper or because you don't think Klein would be better than Jack?
Your honest assessment of the Canadian Alliance and Steven Harper
- Thread starter cranky
- Start date
I'm not sure why I got the negative rep Chev. Was it because you don't think Klein would be better than Harper or because you don't think Klein would be better than Jack?
Your 'friend' Chris has an agenda?
Are you saying he has expressed a different opinion to you, than the one contained in his report, the one he expressed to the media?
You have an agenda. If I was a business person that catered to First Nations, I would be very leery about what I said to you. After all, you think people that want equality are bigots so it shows your thinking isn't particularly rational. If you walked into my business, I'd tell you whatever you wanted to hear so I could get you out and get back to work.
So you're saying Chris did offer you a completely different opinion than the one in his report, and the one he presented to the media?
I'm saying if I was a business person that catered to First Nations, I would be very leery about what I said to you. After all, you think people that want equality are bigots so it shows your thinking isn't particularly rational. If you walked into my business, I'd tell you whatever you wanted to hear so I could get you out and get back to work.
If I were a guy on a forum I would be very leery about giving out information and either quoting them or offering their names or numbers. Doing so could get me in a pile of dung and contradicting them in print could lead to all sorts of legal issues. You may want to re-think your debating tactic here Cannuck and bail before this ends up being a major pain in your backside.
On the other hand, you can continue to play whatever game it is you're playing putting words in peoples mouths without their presence and running the risk of having a simple debate turn into a bigger issue.
If it is your intent to push it, let me know and I'll put some popcorn on.
Absolutely correct RCS. What Cannuck has done, is place Chris's integrty in doubt. That, and he's stated that Chris filed two false reports, one with the provincial authorities, and the other with the federal panel on water quality. Since his report states nothing like what Cannuck said Chris's opinion is. But does in fact state that there is a resource gap, and a serious lack of adequate training.
Northern Water Works, is set up to provide that training, making them a substantial amount of money, from First nations communities. When by Cannucks claim, based on what he was told by Chris, is unnecessary.
If Cannuck does not retract that statement, with an explanation, I'll be forced to pass on this information to Dennis Stark of the Tansi newspaper. He'll run with it, and I might get another byline.
I've already saved screen shots of the appropriate posts.
Northern Water Works, is set up to provide that training, making them a substantial amount of money, from First nations communities. When by Cannucks claim, based on what he was told by Chris, is unnecessary.
If Cannuck does not retract that statement, with an explanation, I'll be forced to pass on this information to Dennis Stark of the Tansi newspaper. He'll run with it, and I might get another byline.
I've already saved screen shots of the appropriate posts.
I'm going to feel sorry for Chris, if this turns out to be BS, on Cannucks part. A mans integrity is in the balance.
And unlike the silly claims by people like EAO, what Cannuck has done, is actionable, by Chris. If Cannucks actions, cause Chris to become the focus of an investigation, or to lose standing with the authorities or First Nations communities he services. Cannuck could be on the hook in a civil suit.
I wonder if he hopes I'll forget about all this, if he ignores me long enough.
I'm giving him until Friday midnight. He's annoying, not a nutter, so I'm giving him a chance, because I still believe he may be a decent guy.
with liable cases, its it the plaintiff must also prove damages, it's difficult to prove damages that the average blue collar worker, but not that difficult to do if you are in the public eye and make money based on your rep
Well this might be true, but sometimes dragging a smuck through court is enough to drive the point home. Once I had a person with whom I'd never been alone with, claim that I had made advances after I moved to have them evicted from a property I was managing. Upon meeting this person I immediately told my wife that this person posed a risk of making unfounded claims and was sure to always have someone present during interaction. When that person made the claims I had a lawyer send out a cease and desist and that pretty much crunched it. At any rate I was wiling to incur the expense to drive the point home that I would not stand idly by while someone spread innuendo regarding my reputation.
If you are going to put words in peoples mouths or say things that can potentially damage their reputation it's alway best to have your facts straight.
Otherwise you are apt to suffer the consequences.
I don't know whether Cannuck is wrong or right, but if he's simply hedging his argument with innuendo that could potentially damage someones reputation he should consider retracting the statement or lend it to conjecture or nothing more. There is no shame in admitting you overstepped your boundaries, but plenty in letting arrogance lead your thinking.
Well said.
That's you, as well as I. But I bet Chris Leblanc and Northern Water Works, have the funds to do so, and that would be money well spent, to protect a family business, and their combined integrity.
What I find kind of humourous in all this is, Cannuck sees himself as better than the bulk of members here, and most definitely superior to RCS, Unf, DaS, yourself and myself. But he doesn't have one key component of being a superior person in general. The ability to concede to fact, or admit an error. In this case particularly, he would rather his comments go on record, throwing a shadow on someone who has likely never done Cannuck any wrong, and may or may not have ever said what Cannuck has claimed is his opinion. At this point, I fully believe that Cannuck has made the whole thing up, but I can't be sure.
With that said, tonight I will author an email, to the Kashechewan Band Council, and Dennis Stark, a First Nations journalist/activist. And let them act on it as they will.
I hope Cannuck isn't relying on the anonymity of the net to protect him. He forgets I'm close friends with the past owner of Ranters roost. Who has records of IPs, off that board. That person is all for free speech, and privacy. But I know him well, and if you place an innocent third party in the position Cannuck has placed Chris Leblanc. He won't have an issue turning over the required information to a court. If it goes that far.