And the Conservatives offered money and perks to Chuck Cadman. So as I have said before, they are all corrupt and unethical. Chuck just refused to be bought, and he had enough integrity to not secretly tape the conversations. Why is it so wrong for the Liberals to talk to Grewal, but it's ok to try to bribe Cadman. Please do explain. You keep sidestepping my question, Blue.
Conservative Gurmant Grewal
- Thread starter peapod
- Start date
And the Conservatives offered money and perks to Chuck Cadman. So as I have said before, they are all corrupt and unethical. Chuck just refused to be bought, and he had enough integrity to not secretly tape the conversations. Why is it so wrong for the Liberals to talk to Grewal, but it's ok to try to bribe Cadman. Please do explain. You keep sidestepping my question, Blue.
:lol: :lol: :lol: Ethical politicians :lol: :lol: There is no such thing they are all corupt HELLO 
You people are making zero sense 8O
You people are making zero sense 8OTed said:
Not trying to sidestep anything. They offered to let him run unopposed in the nomination meeting. He still would have had to run as a candidate against the other parities. Quite a different story than buying somone, or trying to buy someone, and then either giving them a cabinet position (Stronach) or offering a position (Grewal). Apples and oranges.
Blue I heard Cadman on CKNW say that not only did they offer to not run anyone against him, they also offered him money for his campaign.
You can check this out. The statement is on the record.
I also wish that they would investigate whether Grewal lied to obtain entry and citizenship. I am sick and tired of people lying to come here. I also think it is highly unethical to ask people to post bonds to anyone that is not CIC. This guy is a lying corrupt scum bag.
You can check this out. The statement is on the record.
I also wish that they would investigate whether Grewal lied to obtain entry and citizenship. I am sick and tired of people lying to come here. I also think it is highly unethical to ask people to post bonds to anyone that is not CIC. This guy is a lying corrupt scum bag.
Ted said:
Had not heard of the money thing. And to your bond comment, the ethics commissioner, a liberal, cleared him in that regard. Hey, he is not my favorite bud either, but I get really tired of the left jumping all over any right winger who may or may not have been squeaky clean, when there are so many examples on the left that no one cares about. The hypocrisy of the media in particular is overwhelming on this issue.
Yeah, Blue, they are all corrupt. I wish there was the "None of the Above" option on the ballot. I am not right or left. These concepts are just inventions to perpetuate the myth of democracy. I vote for the best man or woman to represent my riding. And when they put their party before the constituents, I spam them with angry mail.
They all tell us what they think they need to say to get elected, and then they only care about keeping their power and increasing it. Each party has their own flavour of Kool-aid and we drink it and froth at the mouth at each other, spewing stupid partisan spin at each other. Instead, we should be standing together and demanding that they represent our interests in parliament. As long as we get caught up in the game, we will never be able to unite in the best interests of the country.
They all tell us what they think they need to say to get elected, and then they only care about keeping their power and increasing it. Each party has their own flavour of Kool-aid and we drink it and froth at the mouth at each other, spewing stupid partisan spin at each other. Instead, we should be standing together and demanding that they represent our interests in parliament. As long as we get caught up in the game, we will never be able to unite in the best interests of the country.
All right Ted your one of the few people on this forum that feels the same way I do .Its all one big scam to make sure they can control and steal the masses money :thumbleft:
Ted said:
So, I may agree with this in principle, but the question then remains: What do we do about it, or how do we fix it? These things have been discussed ad naseum, with no change. Eastern Canada still elects the government, policies are set for Eastern Canada because of this, not that I blame them the government, and the hinterlands outside of central eastern Canada gets ignored or belittled. I have long thought that this country is too big, geographically, to operate as a unified system, and perhaps a regional federal government is required. For example, and this is really basic, how about a Western government (BC, Alta, Sask, Man) a Central Govt (Ontario and Quebed) and a Maritime government, plus a territorial government? Representatives from each of these areas meet once, twice, three?? times per year, at the Parliament for issues relating solely to national interests, like military, immigration, to name two, and the rest of the time, these governments meet in their own regions to discuss their own regional interests. At least then, the regional governments would be dealing with regional interests, which to me, is the cause of much of the tension in the country today.
I know this is just a rough idea, and maybe the Maritimes could be lumped with Quebec and Ontario, and maybe the territories could be lumped with Western Canada, so you would only have two groups. At the very least, it would ensure that regional issues get discussed at a national level, and would also get the feds out of everything that pertains to the provinces.
I like that idea Blue but the problem with it is we'll end up paying even more taxes because we'll have more politicians and beuracrats :wink:
mrmom2 said:
Maybe, maybe not. I would see it as each region setting tax rates and collecting taxes to be used in their own regions, to go to programs that are an issue in their regions. So if Ontario wanted to have a program for, oh, gun control, but the western region did not, then the east could fund its own program, while the west could do something else.
This is a rough idea only, but there may be some merit to it. Any other thoughts on how this may, or may not, work? And reasonable ones, not some sort of cliched rhetorical response. 8)
This is just like Stockwell Day and his short tenure as party leader, the Conservatives can't resist becoming foot in the mouth clowns.
Harper charging ahead against a budget that is more popular than ever before. Instead of rewarding transnational and large corperate interests our money, at least some of it will reach the average person in need of a little help.
Belinda saw the electoral light, she saw that Harper was another loser, repeating the rantings of wester conservatism that will never fly across this country as a whole.
Then Mr. Grewal claims he made a tape of the Liberals offering him goodies to abstain from voting. No one knows for sure but I do believe the Liberals did not start the discussion, and Grewal was outside of Parliamentary laws himself, or he was engaged in some form of entrapment, that backfired.
Grewal then disgraces himself at the airport trying to encourage others to take a package on a plane, something else that flies in the face of aviation law these days. This guy is in a postion of crafting and amending the laws of our land, and he has no clue or he doesn't give a damn about the law or so it seems.
Then Harper gets caught napping at the finish line of the budget debate and the Liberals snooker him once again with the help of the other parties including Harpers new ally the Bloc.
The comics can't provide this many laughs for God sake, and we are expected to take the Tories seriously? They're done like dinner. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Liberals return with a majority and the NDP and the Bloc fighting it out for second place.
Haper can't figure out what Canadians want, he does not understand most of us don't understand the great scandal, or we don't care, and if thats all he has he has nothing.
What Canadians want is a different view to problem solving not name calling and finger pointing. Harper should have shoved Grewal out into the hall as quickly as possible, now he is stuck with the image that has been presented whether it is fair or not.
Harper charging ahead against a budget that is more popular than ever before. Instead of rewarding transnational and large corperate interests our money, at least some of it will reach the average person in need of a little help.
Belinda saw the electoral light, she saw that Harper was another loser, repeating the rantings of wester conservatism that will never fly across this country as a whole.
Then Mr. Grewal claims he made a tape of the Liberals offering him goodies to abstain from voting. No one knows for sure but I do believe the Liberals did not start the discussion, and Grewal was outside of Parliamentary laws himself, or he was engaged in some form of entrapment, that backfired.
Grewal then disgraces himself at the airport trying to encourage others to take a package on a plane, something else that flies in the face of aviation law these days. This guy is in a postion of crafting and amending the laws of our land, and he has no clue or he doesn't give a damn about the law or so it seems.
Then Harper gets caught napping at the finish line of the budget debate and the Liberals snooker him once again with the help of the other parties including Harpers new ally the Bloc.
The comics can't provide this many laughs for God sake, and we are expected to take the Tories seriously? They're done like dinner. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Liberals return with a majority and the NDP and the Bloc fighting it out for second place.
Haper can't figure out what Canadians want, he does not understand most of us don't understand the great scandal, or we don't care, and if thats all he has he has nothing.
What Canadians want is a different view to problem solving not name calling and finger pointing. Harper should have shoved Grewal out into the hall as quickly as possible, now he is stuck with the image that has been presented whether it is fair or not.
Well surprises of all surprises came in the mail today. Gurmant Grewal actually responded to a letter I mailed him March 14,2005 and the reply came today. I wrote to him saying I was a constituent and I supported ssm and him being a member of a minority group as well, why would he be against it?
I recieved a copy of the whole ssm debate from house of commons, a copy of the speech he made in his disapproval of it, a nifty little card telling me how to contact him and a copy of a newspaper article doing an interview with him titled "Dismantling Social Structures".
who hoo I feel special, only took him 9 months to reply, thankfully he is not running again.
BTW- You know way back in 1987 I was taking a welding course in Kamloops and was having problems with UIC (now called EI) I sent letters to all local politicians (Federal and Provincial) and the only politicians to contact me were NDP and Nelson Riis himself (The former NDP MP from Kamloops) called me at home personally to help me. (at 7 am but it was 10 in Ottawa) I was dumbfounded. My problem was resolved quickly. I was very grateful.
Of all political parties and I know from experience the NDP is the only party that gives a dam about people or the little guy. Of all the mail I send to various MP's the NDP are always the first and quickest to write back and offer to help resolve issues.
I recieved a copy of the whole ssm debate from house of commons, a copy of the speech he made in his disapproval of it, a nifty little card telling me how to contact him and a copy of a newspaper article doing an interview with him titled "Dismantling Social Structures".
who hoo I feel special, only took him 9 months to reply, thankfully he is not running again.
BTW- You know way back in 1987 I was taking a welding course in Kamloops and was having problems with UIC (now called EI) I sent letters to all local politicians (Federal and Provincial) and the only politicians to contact me were NDP and Nelson Riis himself (The former NDP MP from Kamloops) called me at home personally to help me. (at 7 am but it was 10 in Ottawa) I was dumbfounded. My problem was resolved quickly. I was very grateful.
Of all political parties and I know from experience the NDP is the only party that gives a dam about people or the little guy. Of all the mail I send to various MP's the NDP are always the first and quickest to write back and offer to help resolve issues.
RE: Conservative Gurmant
Phil Eidsvik is the conservative running in his place. Actually he was the only one to get nomination papers in on time. Doug McCallum the former 3 term Surrey Mayor who got his ass kicked in municipal elections last month was late in submitting his papers. Ha Ha he was a big a dork as Grewal.
McCallum out of the race after missing deadline
A teaser:
Former Surrey mayor Doug McCallum says he's finished with politics after failing to file his nomination papers on time, in his bid to replace Gurmant Grewal as the Conservative candidate in the riding of Newton-North Delta.
McCallum says he had been asked to run in Newton-North Delta by Conservative campaign co-chair John Reynolds earlier in the week. He notes that the former MP for the riding, Gurmant Grewal, had also offered his support.
But he doesn't think he was the type of Conservative the local riding executive felt comfortable with.
"And I think that they looked at me – they are a very, very strong Reform part of the Conservatives, the riding association and the president – and I don't think they liked the moderate sort of Conservative that I am."[/teaser]
SURREY/CKNW(AM980) - A Conservative nomination candidate for Newton-North Delta is taking some heat from the Aborigonal Fisheries Commision.
The Commision's Arnie Narcisse, says possible Tory candidate Phil Eidsvik is also the Exectutive Director of a group called the British Columbia Fisheries Survival Coalition, which has spoken against First Nations only fisheries, "The intent of the whole effort was to provide some economic opportunity to those tribes that were engaged in the pilot sales fishery. Unfortunately, Phil and others within the Survival Coalition couldn't agree to the institution of this fishery."
Narcisse says Eidsvik and the Coalition challenged the Minister responsible for the fishery.
Phil Eidsvik is the conservative running in his place. Actually he was the only one to get nomination papers in on time. Doug McCallum the former 3 term Surrey Mayor who got his ass kicked in municipal elections last month was late in submitting his papers. Ha Ha he was a big a dork as Grewal.
McCallum out of the race after missing deadline
A teaser:
Former Surrey mayor Doug McCallum says he's finished with politics after failing to file his nomination papers on time, in his bid to replace Gurmant Grewal as the Conservative candidate in the riding of Newton-North Delta.
McCallum says he had been asked to run in Newton-North Delta by Conservative campaign co-chair John Reynolds earlier in the week. He notes that the former MP for the riding, Gurmant Grewal, had also offered his support.
But he doesn't think he was the type of Conservative the local riding executive felt comfortable with.
"And I think that they looked at me – they are a very, very strong Reform part of the Conservatives, the riding association and the president – and I don't think they liked the moderate sort of Conservative that I am."[/teaser]
SURREY/CKNW(AM980) - A Conservative nomination candidate for Newton-North Delta is taking some heat from the Aborigonal Fisheries Commision.
The Commision's Arnie Narcisse, says possible Tory candidate Phil Eidsvik is also the Exectutive Director of a group called the British Columbia Fisheries Survival Coalition, which has spoken against First Nations only fisheries, "The intent of the whole effort was to provide some economic opportunity to those tribes that were engaged in the pilot sales fishery. Unfortunately, Phil and others within the Survival Coalition couldn't agree to the institution of this fishery."
Narcisse says Eidsvik and the Coalition challenged the Minister responsible for the fishery.