babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » national news   » Mulroney & Schreiber II

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Mulroney & Schreiber II
Noops
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8227

posted 28 November 2007 08:59 AM      Profile for Noops     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
This is not exactly what Schreiber had in mind when he launched his suit against Mulroney. He was hoping to testify at a public inquiry which would mean a two to five year delay in his extradition to Germany.

Do you think he'll be a hostile witness and refuse to testify to the ethics committee?

CBC News story


From: Guelph | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Buddy Kat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13234

posted 29 November 2007 06:34 AM      Profile for Buddy Kat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't think he has much choice...the neocons are so guilty and scared they want him out so bad..they have tried everything in there power to get him out.

I think he will sing like a canary and nail mulrony to the cross and then some.Canadians are going to find out the real truth about the Canadian politician hopfully.

Orange jumpsuit or not they didn't call mulroney ly'n brian for nothing...today we find out why.

I HOPE


From: Saskatchewan | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
farnival
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6452

posted 29 November 2007 06:43 AM      Profile for farnival     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
shall we start the clock ticking on how long it takes Harper and his minions to unequivocally hang mulroney out to dry?
From: where private gain trumps public interest, and apparently that's just dandy. | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Noops
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8227

posted 29 November 2007 08:49 AM      Profile for Noops     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Boy Schreiber's got a lot of nerve.
Asking Mulroney to do him a favour after he tore Mulroney apart in the CBC documentary!

Elmer MacKay


From: Guelph | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 29 November 2007 09:59 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Surprise, surprise, Schreiber is refusing to testify until he finds out how long his extradition to Germany will be delayed:

Schreiber asks for a little cheese.

There's no doubt in my mind that Mulroney will claim "you can't trust a jailhouse snitch" when he's in front of the ethics committee next week. Especially if Schreiber asks for his extradition to be delayed indeterminantly. These two crooks are still working together.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 29 November 2007 10:27 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
No kidding. This is completely expected as far as I'm concerned. It's just that the horse trading is in public view rather than behind closed doors.
From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Buddy Kat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13234

posted 29 November 2007 11:54 AM      Profile for Buddy Kat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So the man from Germany ...coudn't produce Z papers!

Surprise surprise...now it looks like the neocons are really trying to hide something...doing all they can possibly do to deny him access to his documentation. Funny how in doing that,they say they are in support of these hearings.

They (neoconic conservatives) sure haven't come out of this day one, smelling like a rose. Now the Mckay name is being flung around as well as Harpy and his close and possibly corrupt tyes with the mulroney neocons. Sounds like a bit of influence peddling in the immigration department. Even a liberal name was flung...lalonde.

Hope he gets to document his truck full of info, but he had to reveal where it all is...now will harpy send his csis people and seize it all? black it all out? That will be the next excuse...the incriminating documents have disappeared.


From: Saskatchewan | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 29 November 2007 05:40 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
There are so many angles to follow up here, it will surely take months. The Ethics committee has barely started.

For example, what the heck is this about?

quote:
27. I informed Mr. Mulroney about statements made by Mr. Frank Moores and Mr. Gary Doucet regarding . . . the earlier request by Mr. Fred Doucet to transfer funds from GCI to Mr. Mulroney's lawyer in Geneva related to the Airbus deal.

But most of all, if Schreiber withdraw millions in cash from his famous Swiss bank accounts, who else did he pay cash to? And since he kept meticulous records of everything he did, can we not infer that he paid cash only when the recipients wanted no records?

This is the same man who gave 1-million-DM in cash in August 1991 in Germany to former CDU treasurer Walther Leisler Kiep, and in 1994 a cash donation of 100,000 DM to CDU party chief Wolfgang Schäuble to be passed on to the party treasurer, Brigitte Baumeister.

Schreiber is known to have been paid some $20 million, $600,000 per plane. His bank records show that about half this amount was doled out, by means of his labyrinth of bank accounts, to various "Canadian friends." Some of these are known. Some are not.

No one is immune, and the cast of characters may be unlimited. Elmer McKay is heavily involved. Did he never talk to his son Peter about Schreiber? Isn't this the sort of thing Peter and his dad would have discussed? Let's ask Belinda Stronach. And on it goes.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Noops
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8227

posted 29 November 2007 07:39 PM      Profile for Noops     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Wilf Day:

But most of all, if Schreiber withdraw millions in cash from his famous Swiss bank accounts, who else did he pay cash to? And since he kept meticulous records of everything he did, can we not infer that he paid cash only when the recipients wanted no records?

Yes, but just because a recipient asks for cash does not mean that Schreiber did not make a note of that recipient and how much he gave them.

It's entirely possible that he has kept records of every penny he paid out in cash.


From: Guelph | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Buddy Kat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13234

posted 29 November 2007 09:34 PM      Profile for Buddy Kat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Wilf Day:

No one is immune, and the cast of characters may be unlimited. Elmer McKay is heavily involved. Did he never talk to his son Peter about Schreiber? Isn't this the sort of thing Peter and his dad would have discussed? Let's ask Belinda Stronach. And on it goes.


Yeh , Shrieber mentioned peter mckay also ...apparently employed by one of shriebers companies. Neocons downplay that as an worker exchange program of some kind in there distancing efforts..oh we are so gullible...Who knows what else the mckays did for shrieber...besides writing letters to influence harper, that harper denys ( don't tell me we have a lyin harper now)..or for that matter peter serving harper first and foremost.

Then there is the defense contracts for a tank building facility in nova scotia...and the fact mckay is now the defense minister. Coincidence???What does he know about defense? What shrieber taught him? It's almost like a little neocon club..there all connected one way or another.What's next rituals?

There is a history in Canada of defense contractors, tax payers money and party contributions, and politicians..like a vicious circle that both liberal and neocon alike have benefited from in the past.Most of the contractors operate in Canada building parts for US war machines. So much for peace maker...more like ammunition and weapons maker.

Seems like the only trustworthy and untainted party nowadays is the NDP ...like it or not!

This inquiry may even expose that fact.


From: Saskatchewan | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Peppered Pothead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14772

posted 30 November 2007 01:30 AM      Profile for Peppered Pothead        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Buddy Kat:

Seems like the only trustworthy and untainted party nowadays is the NDP ...like it or not!


I generally give the NDP a B+ rating in how they objectively scrutinize the Liberals & Conservatives.

But I sure wish they wouldn't disproportionately target the Liberals, but instead, provide plenty of raw & accurate criticisms of the Harper clan as well.

There's no reason why the NDP can't hit them both equally hard, in situations where they equally deserve it.

Who knows, they might even score a double KO !


From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
Buddy Kat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13234

posted 04 December 2007 12:10 PM      Profile for Buddy Kat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Wow ..Lots to digest from round 2..now Charest is dragged into the mess...and possibly liberals.


I hope someone latchs on to some things he said..like how the Canadian government doesn't give a "shit" about the safety of soldiers..he actually said SHIT. He did allude to possible aerospace laws designed to protect and provide safety were doctored to allow (twin jet)airbus planes to fly over the atlantic. He dragged the US and Canada but mentioned Canada as a trojan horse in the matter.

The NDP pointed out that Liberals and conservatives (Neocons) have BASTARDIZED our democracy.....Hope Canadians can finally get a grip on what people have been saying for years now.

So it looks like the schemeing took place while ly'n brian was still in office..and I loved how he brought out that nickname "ly'n brian" to the forefront.

Whats with the rcmp not investigating matters? Who muzzled them? and who are they really protecting and serving?

All in all this is a good wake up and expose for Canadians to ponder ..now to listen to the neocon apologists and excuse makers of our media outlets put on their conjob of a show.


From that binder full of letters to do with harper ...it should be interesting to hear the Harper butt kissers make up excuses as to why he didn't have any knowledge of anything.

the truth is coming out... the people don't seem to care , they just keep electing crooks to office. Neocons are being exposed..
I got satellite to watch this stuff live.


From: Saskatchewan | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 04 December 2007 02:53 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It's a circus. Don't forget, the mandate of the committee is to investigate the $2.1million settlement to Brian Mulroney. Everything else is just a distraction, put there to keep himself (Schreiber) from being extradited to Germany.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
nicky
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10066

posted 04 December 2007 11:35 PM      Profile for nicky     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Schreiber maintains that the 300 Gs he paid to Mulroney had nothing to do with Airbus. Perhaps it didn't, but Schreiber's denial should not end the inquiry. Schreiber is charged with bribing German politicians over Airbus. He wd be a fool to admit he also bribed Canadian politicians over the same thing. This denial is clearly in his best interests and must be seen in that light.
From: toronto | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 07 December 2007 06:01 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Now Schreiber says that he did pay Mulroney for Airbus. Warning! Nazional Post link!

He spins me right round, baby, right round.

I'm trying to discover how any of this clears Mulroney of malfeasance. Let's assume that the original statements are true, and that Schreiber only payed Mulroney for undue influence on the Bear Head/Thyssen deal (i.e. that Airbus was not the reason for the cash-filled envelopes). It turns out that Mulroney did squat to make the Thyssen deal happen. So, he (and Elmer "Boy's Daddy" McKay) accepted bribes with no intention of helping out the bribee. Honestly, do they think that accepting bribes without any intention of following through on the bribee's request makes them less corrupt than accepting bribes with the intention of exerting undue political influence? What kind of moral world do they inhabit?

[ 07 December 2007: Message edited by: Briguy ]


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Politics101
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8962

posted 07 December 2007 06:28 AM      Profile for Politics101   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I'm sure that Brian will clear up all the confusion which a straightforward detailed minute by minute presentation at the Commons Committee hearings next week and will submit all his correspondence and bank records to clear up the matter once and for all - after all unlike most of the committee members Brian is a lawyer and lawyers always keep notes of all there dealings and are sworn when admitted to the bar to always tell the truth in all there dealings.

Should be interesting at the hearings to see who gets the most aggressive towards lyin' Brian.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Buddy Kat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13234

posted 07 December 2007 07:02 AM      Profile for Buddy Kat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Yes it's pretty sick...all this lobbying and money changing hands and they get away with it. We elect them to office ..they make the laws that allow them to be morally corrupt criminals and we keep electing them to do it.

The NDP is the only party that doesn't seem to be tainted and corrupt. Canadians get what they deserve.

Besides all the swiss bank accounts and bribes etc. Shrieber does like to interject some comments along the way.This one got my attention as i believe the last federal election was interfered with by bush, the US ambassador , harper and the rcmp to bring down the liberals by investigating them during an election.


American Boeing pissed because air Canada buying France airbus’s…says airbus is spreading money around Ottawa ..complains to gov..fbi investigates ..asks rcmp why they don’t? they say "file a complaint and we will"????..fbi withdraws because an election is coming.

1) rcmp again take orders from the US

2) they know investigations cause election mishaps and investigating is interference.

Some other tidbits:

Shrieber says..” Mulroney is the worlds biggest fucken liar”..told afterword to use parliamentry language.

After the testimony the neocon outlets and politicans were flinging the word "conspiracy theory"...which usually means to me listen up .

I have to admit shrieber is using neocon tactic 2234-7 on fellow conservatives..the tactic of "order out of chaos" where you confuse the piss out of everyone and baffle them with so much bullshit they don't know what to believe while you escape up the middle with your agenda.

Could it be:
Being Shrieber is from Bavaria, home of the Illumunati ...He is a conservative ….using the tactic of "order out of chaos" ....If so,and shrieber is an illumaniti (if they still exist?) they will become minced meat.

I can see why the neocon media outlets and the pollsters are downplaying Canadian interest in this.

Shrieber is exposing there values and ripping them to shreds..the last thing they want is Canadians finding out how really corrupt the government is..how the rcmp take orders from the US and how Canadians are so gullible to spinning media they keep repeating the same mistake over and over again like complete morons.


The NDP are the only untainted and trustworthy party left..why isn't the media screaming that?

Shrieber does give a crash course on bribery tho..use cash only as paper leaves a trail that can be used for future blackmail.

I can't wait for episode 4


From: Saskatchewan | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
toddsschneider
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6280

posted 10 December 2007 07:52 AM      Profile for toddsschneider     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"Brian Mulroney's return to Ottawa"

http://tinyurl.com/yt9qtf

quote:
On the basis of explanations put forward on his behalf, he is expected to argue that post-politics concern for his family's financial well-being inspired his ill-advised decision to accept cash from Schreiber. As it happens, the MPs around the committee table probably know more about the economic insecurity attendant to a political calling than Mulroney ever did ...

Up to a point, the past few weeks have been a time to look at two decades of parliamentary life through the rear-view mirror and measure the considerable ethical distance that has been travelled between then and now.

It is a road on which the public is still light years ahead of politicians. On that basis, Mulroney is unlikely to get a sympathetic hearing in public opinion, regardless of the eloquence of his arguments. One way or another, his appearance in front of the committee will seal his transition from fatherly mentor of a rookie government to cumbersome relative of a prime minister who has put him out to pasture.



From: Montreal, Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Buddy Kat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13234

posted 12 December 2007 07:04 AM      Profile for Buddy Kat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Part 4 of the expose was not as revealing as the first 3 but some info came out. It is now official that shrieber was sent by Bavarian conservative neocons to finance the neocon cause not just here in Canada but other places. He used bags of money to do this.

In Canada's case he funded the election of brian mulroney and poor honorable Joe Clark didn't have a chance against the sneaky underhanded tactics of the neocon (doucumented in another thread).

He was still persitant that the rcmp are lying bags of fecal matter and that they never interviewed him . As amatter of fact you get the impression the rcmp and the neocons are in it together...corrupt and rotten to the core. I have to wonder if it is still this way ...with political appointments made to control what is and what should be investigated.

Shrieber mentions it's still like this today...nothing has changed.

The only party smelling like a rose is the NDP!


It should be interesting to see part 5...will there be a choir singing oh Canada in the background when mulroney appears ? Will he be flanked with his family in full view? Will he be wearing shackles or handcuffs? Will his fellow neocons show there colors and kiss his hind and piss themselves in his presence? Will the neocon media apologize and make excuses for him and somehow make him look honorable?

Can't wait to see it unfold!


From: Saskatchewan | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Politics101
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8962

posted 12 December 2007 08:42 PM      Profile for Politics101   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I was just reminded by a Conservative friend of mind - the fiscal type - he's a retired banker - that Jack Layton's father was a member of Brian Mulroney's cabinet during his time in power.
From: Vancouver | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
sgm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5468

posted 12 December 2007 10:52 PM      Profile for sgm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Politics101:
I was just reminded by a Conservative friend of mind

Your Conservative is no friend of the mind.

Rather the opposite, really.


From: I have welcomed the dawn from the fields of Saskatchewan | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 13 December 2007 03:27 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Politics101:
I was just reminded by a Conservative friend of mind - the fiscal type - he's a retired banker - that Jack Layton's father was a member of Brian Mulroney's cabinet during his time in power.

Tee-hee! An oxymoron (f.c.) and a sins-of-the-father swipe all in one sentence! Bravo.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 13 December 2007 03:33 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And Robin Sears, who has some NDP cred, is now working for Brian Mulroney at the moment, according to a short segment on "Politics" Tuesday.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Scott Piatkowski
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1299

posted 13 December 2007 05:17 AM      Profile for Scott Piatkowski   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
And Robin Sears, who has some NDP cred, is now working for Brian Mulroney at the moment, according to a short segment on "Politics" Tuesday.

1) When did Robin Sears gain credibility in the NDP?
2) I believe that Sears is a partner in a firm that now spins for Mulroney. I think it's really Jaime Watt, another partner, who is doing the work for Mulroney.


From: Kitchener-Waterloo | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 13 December 2007 05:33 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
My mistake, Scott. I thought Robin Sears, when he was on "Politics", was identified as an NDP strategist. I'll accept 40 lashes with a wet noodle.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
oldgoat
Moderator
Babbler # 1130

posted 13 December 2007 05:55 AM      Profile for oldgoat     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Hold off on the 40 lashes there Boom Boom (unless of course your just into that sort of thing).

Robin Sears was involved with the NDP at the federal level from 1974 to 1981. It's Scott who gets the wet noodle treatment.


From: The 10th circle | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 13 December 2007 06:39 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Thanks for the rescue! I'm not really into self-flagellation.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 13 December 2007 07:23 AM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Just watching a bit of the proceedings. You know, ever since Mulroney came into the political scene, I got a bad vibe from him-- and it's because he's a perfect liar. And by that I mean you can't get a feel for when he is telling the truth and when he isn't. I think because he has that talent where he can believe his own lies.

I believe the only indication there is of his difficulties with the truth is when he starts to wrap himself up in explanations of honour and truth telling.

It strikes me an honourable person who tells the truth doesn't have to belabour, or instruct others on the point.

I believe Schreiber is a liar, also. A fairly obvious one.

But, a person who supposedly values honour and truth as Mulroney does, would never have taken cash in a brown envelope in the first place.

ah, I hear laughter. Time to peak in again.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 13 December 2007 07:35 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Not having a TV (mine died this morning) I'm not subject to Muldoon's blarney. I really can't stand Muldoon's voice at all - the man also comes off as condescending and paternalistic at times (always?).
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 13 December 2007 08:32 AM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sadly, you just missed Joe Comartin come within a whisker of tripping Mulroney up in his lies.

I was impressed by Comartin's line of questioning. I wonder if Comartin knows something about U.S. tax law that may find Mulroney running afoul of those authorities?


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Maritimesea
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8953

posted 13 December 2007 08:37 AM      Profile for Maritimesea     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
One things for sure the Conservatives DO NOT want any questions to be put to Mulroney regarding Quebecor. Everything seems to flow fairly smoothly, with Mulroney quipping the odd joke, until someone mentions wireless and Maxime Bernier, so far that someone being just Pablo Rodriguez.

[ 13 December 2007: Message edited by: Maritimesea ]


From: Nova Scotia | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 13 December 2007 09:02 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Has Mulroney gotten red-faced yet?
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 13 December 2007 09:24 AM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't expect so until he might turn on the pundits. I think Comartin was on to something-- the truth-- or perhaps more investigations-- will come as a result of the tax records.

That's all they ever got on Al Capone, remember.


From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
farnival
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6452

posted 13 December 2007 10:14 AM      Profile for farnival     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
cbc

quote:
...Meeting Schreiber 'biggest mistake'

Mulroney said he now regrets his relationship with Schreiber, but at the time of the meetings, he only knew Schreiber as a successful businessman and chairman of Thyssen, a company with thousands of employees.

"My second-biggest mistake in life, for which I have no one to blame but myself, is having accepted payments in cash from Karlheinz Schreiber, for a mandate he gave me after I left office," Mulroney said.

"My biggest mistake in life was ever agreeing to be introduced to Karlheinz Schreiber in the first place."...


so, mulroney appears to be saying over and over that he only met schrieber just before these meetings he had with him regarding Thyssen. so what about the business of schrieber and his flunkies back during the leadership convention flying out delegates to defeat Clark? he never met him back then?

the man is either a liar or has alsheimers.


From: where private gain trumps public interest, and apparently that's just dandy. | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Robo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4168

posted 13 December 2007 10:18 AM      Profile for Robo     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
My mistake, Scott. I thought Robin Sears, when he was on "Politics", was identified as an NDP strategist. I'll accept 40 lashes with a wet noodle.

Well, I recall Robin Sears joining the Liberal Party to support Bob Rae's leadership campaign. And yesterday he appeared on TV as a high-paid "roadie", scouting out the layout of the room in which Mulroney is to testify so as to get the best presentation.

Robin Sears once was an NDP official. Networks do not ask parties to choose who the Party wants to represent them -- I know that Janice MacKinnon and Joy MacPhail appear because their respective shows have invited them to act as "NDP types", not as a result of a federal, provincial of other NDP official body "nominating" them to be there to represent the party.

Robin Sears, for years now, has gone off in his own direction, through whatever party suited him or has paid his salary. To his credit, I have not heard him claim to be an NDP representative for a long while. That doesn't stop others (like BB) from relying on history to define the present.


From: East York | Registered: Jun 2003  |  IP: Logged
aka Mycroft
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6640

posted 13 December 2007 10:38 AM      Profile for aka Mycroft     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Robin Sears' firm was hired to speak for Mulroney a few weeks ago after his longtime spokesperson quit.

[ 13 December 2007: Message edited by: aka Mycroft ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Aug 2004  |  IP: Logged
Tommy_Paine
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 214

posted 13 December 2007 12:48 PM      Profile for Tommy_Paine     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Any truth to the rumor that I am just now starting that Mulroney refers to Sears as "Smithers"?
From: The Alley, Behind Montgomery's Tavern | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 13 December 2007 01:20 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 

From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Noops
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8227

posted 13 December 2007 03:48 PM      Profile for Noops     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Tommy_Paine:
... You know, ever since Mulroney came into the political scene, I got a bad vibe from him-- and it's because he's a perfect liar. And by that I mean you can't get a feel for when he is telling the truth and when he isn't. I think because he has that talent where he can believe his own lies.

I'm so glad you mentioned it because for a long time I thought I was the only one in Canada who felt this way.

[ 13 December 2007: Message edited by: Noops ]


From: Guelph | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Noops
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8227

posted 13 December 2007 03:50 PM      Profile for Noops     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
... I really can't stand Muldoon's voice at all - the man also comes off as condescending and paternalistic at times (always?).

Ahh... another kindred spirit. I could never bear to listen to his voice for all those years too.
What you said and the vibe of insincerity.


From: Guelph | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Nightflyer
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14821

posted 13 December 2007 05:53 PM      Profile for Nightflyer        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Generally speaking, I don't think most politicians are truly honest all the time and regardless of their political party.

Some folks take their politics serious.I have to admit I've never voted in every election but have most of the time.I haven't always voted for the same party either.

Having said that, Mulroney admitted today he goofed.He admitted he was wrong.He admitted his judgement was wrong.

Now I'm no big Mulroney fan but the press has always hated him and vice versa.You would also have to say many Cdns. never liked him.

During the Chretien years, there was nothing but scandal and mismangement of money.It seemed to happen every week.Obviously, it got reported in the press but it always kind of blew over after a while.Except for adscam, nobody ever went to jail or had an inquiry.Even then it was "two little guys".

So what's everyone's point? What does the current govt. have to do with Mulroney and Schreiber's tit for tat soap opera? Why is the the mainly "....." media having a field day when Chretien's govt. was far worse?

Another public inquiry?? Isn't this what Canada is made of? Lawyers making bundles when we have police forces to investigate lay charges/or not.


From: Near Ottawa | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
Unbiased
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14116

posted 14 December 2007 12:08 AM      Profile for Unbiased     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nightflyer:

Having said that, Mulroney admitted today he goofed.He admitted he was wrong.He admitted his judgement was wrong.


Did he admit to what he actually did is the question I think. When I went home to Mom and admitted to her that I had found the candies I was eating at the side of the road I didn't admit to shoplifting them.
quote:
Originally posted by Nightflyer:

Now I'm no big Mulroney fan but the press has always hated him and vice versa.You would also have to say many Cdns. never liked him.


I dunno, somehow I remember a favourable press when he was in power. Stevie Cameron came along and made a dent in his armour if that is what you mean but he has always been way too teflon for me.

From: Vancouver | Registered: May 2007  |  IP: Logged
Buddy Kat
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13234

posted 14 December 2007 08:06 AM      Profile for Buddy Kat   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Nightflyer:

So what's everyone's point? What does the current govt. have to do with Mulroney and Schreiber's tit for tat soap opera? Why is the the mainly "....." media having a field day when Chretien's govt. was far worse?

Another public inquiry?? Isn't this what Canada is made of? Lawyers making bundles when we have police forces to investigate lay charges/or not.


I think the media feels a bit guilty promoting the adscam affair too much and having it manipulated by the neocons to a point where the neocons actually formed a government with a minority of support. A real case of be careful what you wish for.

The ethics committee meets anyways..and finally there is something they can chomp at and people are saying ..this costs too much? Hell there finally doing something and earning there money.

Remember mulroney walked away with 2.5 million of your dollars....2 and a half "million dollar lotteries" worth of money over this. That's what they are supposed to be investigating. I think they have a problem tho and that's ...do they want to wash mulroney up financially and turn his family into a group of homeless people? That's where the harper neocons come in and I would be surprised if there is a real inquiry.A real inquiry may lead a trail too the present government and there is just one direction they will head in the polls and...it isn't up.

Do they want to take a chance that even 50% of what shrieber says is true? I don't think so. They will just have to be saddled with the mulrony ..I am not a crook act...and the shrieber is a liar act. They tested the waters and it's too cold for mr neocon to jump into regardless of what Canadians may think.


These neocons stick together like "muzzled flys around shit"...just look at all the testimony so far..it's just one big happy family of crooks living of your dime. The only group that isn't tainted by this mess is the NDP...and if it costs millions to educate Canadians on that fact , so be it. As it is Canadians look pretty stupid, tolerating this fraudulent system that bastardizes our democracy..so a pile of neocons can rape it and walk away with sacks of money.

Regarding police forces and investigating...they will only investigate to certain point...even they know getting close to crooked neocons means trouble. A further inquiry will most definitely make them look corrupt and treacherous. They will have no qualms destroying you or your family but when it comes to neocons...lookout they are petrified of them. Imagine the top 100 people of the rcmp reduced to working at hotdog stands....I rest my case.

So it worth it to clean this mess up?


From: Saskatchewan | Registered: Sep 2006  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 14 December 2007 08:22 AM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The line that should go into the history books is Pat Martin saying "I'm not calling you a liar, Mr. Mulroney, but I wouldn't want anybody here to think I believe you."

It sounded authentic, as though it was a line Pat Martin used to use as a Carpenters Union man at the bargaining table or at an arbitration.

Which is perfect, because before 1984 Brian Mulroney was a management-side labour lawyer, and would have been across the table from dozens of Pat Martins.


From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 14 December 2007 08:23 AM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Seeing Mulroney again on TV reminded me just how much an awful liar he seems to me. He still makes my skin crawl. Blecch.
From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
toddsschneider
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6280

posted 15 December 2007 12:02 AM      Profile for toddsschneider     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"CBC reviewing claim reporter fed questions to Liberal MP"

http://tinyurl.com/2yzexa

quote:
... The probe follows a formal complaint by the Conservative party ...

In a letter to the CBC ombudsman on Friday, the director of the Conservative party cited Liberal questions to Mulroney about whether he had lobbied the current government concerning the spectrum auction for cellular and wireless devices ...

The [Liberal] party also pointed out that Rodriguez had previously asked similar questions in the Commons about Mulroney and the wireless spectrum issue ...

The story raged across the conservative blogosphere all day Friday, where the incident was viewed as an example of Liberal bias by the CBC.

Conservative party spokesman Ryan Sparrow called the matter "a very serious allegation, and if proven true (it) begs the question: why is a public broadcaster getting involved in partisan politics?"

But [a spokesman] said the CBC does "not accept that this is evidence of bias against any particular political party, but rather was something that occurred in the context of trying to determine the specific circumstances of an ongoing political story ..."


And you Babblers are worried that the Ceeb shows a Conservative bias ...

[ 15 December 2007: Message edited by: toddsschneider ]


From: Montreal, Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Peppered Pothead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14772

posted 15 December 2007 04:42 AM      Profile for Peppered Pothead        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Neo-Liberals are right-wing.
From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
Indebt
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 13639

posted 15 December 2007 10:56 AM      Profile for Indebt     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Does anti-obesity pasta really exist? Or was it used as a metaphor by M. & S. to mean something else.
From: Canada | Registered: Dec 2006  |  IP: Logged
sgm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5468

posted 15 December 2007 06:43 PM      Profile for sgm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Those who know him--er, never mind:
quote:
Asked how Canadians felt about the testimony, [Erik Nielsen] said: "I think there was a phrase that attached to Brian years ago where he was known as Lyin' Brian, and for my own part, I believe that they're both in the same boat - Schreiber and Mulroney."

Asked if he bought Mr. Mulroney's testimony, Mr. Nielsen said "no" before chuckling and adding. "I know Brian."


Ouch.


From: I have welcomed the dawn from the fields of Saskatchewan | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 15 December 2007 06:46 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Wilf Day:
... dozens of Pat Martins.

Great, now I'm gonna have nightmares.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Peppered Pothead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14772

posted 15 December 2007 11:57 PM      Profile for Peppered Pothead        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by toddsschneider:

And you Babblers are worried that the Ceeb shows a Conservative bias ...


No, we are justifiably angry at the CBC's recent drift towards implementing and facilitating a *right-wing* bias, as the entire political paradigm has shifted towards the right over the last 5-10 years.

The current Neo-Liberals are in fact, a right-wing party. They get the faithful boosting of the CBC. And the only alternative view offered by the CBC to the Neo-Liberal view, is the Neo-Conservative one.


http://www.politicalcompass.org/canada2005

http://www.politicalcompass.org/usprimaries2008


Neo-Liberals ARE right of center, and Neo-Conservatives are FARTHER right of center. The fact that these 2 ideologies get the vast majority of coverage, if not exclusive coverage, is evidence of the CBC implementing a *right-wing* bias, and an anti-NDP bias.


From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
ReeferMadness
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2743

posted 17 December 2007 07:28 PM      Profile for ReeferMadness     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I don't normally care for Andrew Coyne's writing but he did a masterful job picking apart Mulroney's BS.

Link here.

quote:
I think we should hear more. Who did he talk to on these foreign journeys? According to Mulroney, he talked to Boris Yeltsin, and to Francois Mitterrand. Does he have any other names -- someone living, perhaps? He says he talked to government officials in China and the United States? Are there any records of these meetings?

quote:
And no expense records: he can offer no receipts or records to account for how the money was spent, though he says it was used strictly for business expenses incurred in the course of representing Schreiber’s interests abroad, and though he says he paid for these with a credit card (paying off the credit card bill in turn with wads of cash). And this brings us to the tale of the taxes.

quote:
Does he take us for fools? No cheques, no invoices, no receipts, no contracts, no bank statements, no withdrawal slips, no credit card bills, no expense records, nothing: not a single scrap of paper exists, it appears, anywhere in the world to support Mulroney’s version.

From: Way out there | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
toddsschneider
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6280

posted 18 December 2007 09:07 AM      Profile for toddsschneider     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"Most don't want public inquiry into Mulroney-Schreiber affair, poll suggests"

http://tinyurl.com/3b5v9q

quote:
A new poll suggests most Canadians don't want a public inquiry into Brian Mulroney's business dealings with Karlheinz Schreiber.

The resistance comes despite deep misgivings about the former prime minister's story and the propriety of his relationship with the German-Canadian arms lobbyist. The Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey suggests only 21 per cent of Canadians think Mulroney was telling the truth when he testified last week about $225,000 in cash he received from Schreiber.

Moreover, two-thirds of those surveyed felt the relationship between the two was inappropriate.

Nevertheless, only 32 per cent wanted to see a public inquiry delve into the minute details of the affair; 52 per cent said they would rather avoid that spectacle.

The telephone survey of just over 1,000 Canadians was conducted Dec. 13-17 and has a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points, 19 times in 20.



From: Montreal, Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
farnival
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6452

posted 18 December 2007 10:16 AM      Profile for farnival     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
every single one of those polled that said they don't want an inquiry should read Andrew Coyne's article from the link above. it really lays it all bare.

Mulroney is a dissembler at best and a liar at the least.

quote:
...Then there’s the little matter of the cash. According to Mulroney, it was Schreiber who insisted that he be paid in cash, in payments totalling, he says, $225,000, not the $300,000 Schreiber has maintained. Schreiber’s explanation for this extraordinary request, he says, was simple that he was an international businessman, and this was how he did business. O-kay. That does not explain why Mulroney -- former prime minister of Canada, former president of the Iron Ore Co. of Canada, experienced lawyer -- accepted the request. All that we heard, over and over, was: I made a mistake. It was an error. I’m sorry.

This at least has the virtue of being something we have heard before. A month ago, Mulroney’s faithful former spokesman, Luc Lavoie, road-tested the international businessman-colossal mistake explanation. But Luc added another element: Mulroney needed money. Desperately. This was a rare point of agreement between Mulroney and Schreiber, who said the same thing in his testimony. Indeed, Mulroney once confided in Kaplan to much the same effect. “I can tell you,” he said in a June 4, 1998 interview, “when I first started out, I needed … money quite badly.”

But this was a hard sell -- not only did he have most of his expenses paid as prime minister, on top of his six-figure salary, on top of his pension, but the party also kicked in $4000 a month to boot -- and in any event, if he was so broke on leaving office, it was hardly likely to be more than a temporary affliction. He was a former prime minister, with business connections the world over; soon, he would be joining oin the blue-chip Montreal law firm of Ogilvy Renault. Why could he not have hit up a friend, Peter Munk for example, to tide him over until the directorships and legal fees started to flow? Or a bank? Or Ogilvy Renault? Why go to Schreiber? And why in such circumstances. Perhaps that is why Luc is no longer his spokesman.


Mulroney is so full of his own hubris it's incredible. what is also incredible is the public not crying out for a criminal investigation of the connections Coyne describes, dating back to Mulroney's start in politics. The man is clearly no stranger to sleaze and unethical behaviour.

The sad part is can it be proved? likely not and Mulroney will once again slip through, crowing from the rooftops that he is innocent of any wrongdoing or impropriety. The reason you don't keep records of your business dealings and conduct financial transactions in cash and safety deposit boxes is because you are up to no good. period.

If anything good comes of this, it will be his fellow conservatives continuing to write articles like this and give interviews like Erik Nielson, and Lyin' Brian will never work again, and all his 'friends" will just stop answering his calls. that would be some measure of justice for how he fucked up this country.


From: where private gain trumps public interest, and apparently that's just dandy. | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
fixer1
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14790

posted 18 December 2007 01:29 PM      Profile for fixer1        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It does not matter what any investigation finds out about Mulroney. He is gone, and while I would like to see him gone with a big black mark on his departure, it will not ever come about. Schrieber has made all of Canada look so stupid that we need to be told that YES this is cash involved in international business. Of course Mulroney did not plan to ever claim the money he got from Schrieber. Are we really that dumb? He only claimed it when he was starting to be blackmailed by Schrieber. That shoudl be a given, and people should just go ahead on that surmised position.

Mulroney thought he could out fox Schrieber, but Schrieber was not going to let go without his tarnishing Mulroney for his deception. That is all this is. Yes technically when Mulroney paid the tax on the money he was given an amnesty on being charged for it. If we want to go farther into this then we will have to do so for Chretien and that will not fly with the liberals. Just watch what Schrieber has to say in that regard. It will not be pretty.

The hard and soft of this is that Mulroney was and is a liar and a tax cheat. Just like many of the people in Canada. Only his lies and cheating are being made very public. The ethics committee is a waste of time, and the iquirey will be even more so, but it should make for an expensive period to all this, and Schrieber will be off to spend his days in a German jail cell.


From: Ottawa | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 18 December 2007 03:39 PM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
The hard and soft of this is that Mulroney was and is a liar and a tax cheat. Just like many of the people in Canada.
You speak only for yourself - and you slander the Canadian public in doing so.

Go ahead, continue to make excuses for criminals. Pretend that this is business as usual - perhaps for you it is. We should expect nothing more from neo-conservative trolls.

[ 18 December 2007: Message edited by: Lard Tunderin' Jeezus ]


From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 18 December 2007 03:41 PM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
double post

[ 18 December 2007: Message edited by: Lard Tunderin' Jeezus ]


From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
ReeferMadness
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2743

posted 18 December 2007 05:44 PM      Profile for ReeferMadness     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Reasons why we need the public inquiry:
1. Send a clear message to present and future politicians who want to cut deals with upstanding individuals like Schreiber. To those who say Mulroney's reputation has already been dragged through the mud, read Andrew Coyne's article. "I made a mistake" doesn't cut it.

2. Show Canadians the sleazy things that go on in politics. This isn't just about Airbus, it goes back to 1983 when Schreiber is alleged to have bought the Conservative Party leadership on behalf of Mulroney. If Canadians have their noses rubbed in this excrement often enough, there will be sufficient desire for change.

3. Demonstrate to the world that we are not a country where corruption will be tolerated.

4. Unearth the list of names who've benefited from the largess of Schreiber. Again, think future deterrence.

5. Who's to know? Maybe the truth will even come out. I think we'll all recognize it if we see it.


From: Way out there | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Peppered Pothead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14772

posted 18 December 2007 09:41 PM      Profile for Peppered Pothead        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
LTJ Wrote :

"You speak only for yourself - and you slander the Canadian public in doing so.
Go ahead, continue to make excuses for criminals. Pretend that this is business as usual - perhaps for you it is. We should expect nothing more from neo-conservative trolls."

What the hell are right-wingers doing on a SUPPOSEDLY left-wing forum anyways ?

Maybe the moderators are simply too busy banning leftists who verbally attack right-wingers for being the scum that they are.

Yet another reason why the North American left is so lame, ineffective and sabotaged.

[ 18 December 2007: Message edited by: Peppered Pothead ]


From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
fixer1
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14790

posted 19 December 2007 01:44 PM      Profile for fixer1        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Wow this forum like any other is supposed to be for views from all sides of the political spectrum. It is not just for the left. Are you that slow in your thinking that you need to be reminded, that this is not all about you? That just goes to show you how small and non relevent you are. Call me a troll, because I speak up for a side that needs its positions to be shown, very grown up people, do not fear opposing views.

I will respectfully have my say and I do not hide where my views lie. That is more in keeping of the rules and right of this forum then the verbal name calling many have done. Could that be why you think left thinking people get banned? Do you really think you have the right to make this forum exclusively NDP only? How quaint that would be.

I post my views and yes I read the response and then I decide in my own mind, just how much weight to give each poster. But you do not see me publicly saying that I think they are self absorbed idiots, or that some have valid arguments. I just ignore the ones who I decide are useless to anything productive.

I welcome anyone to express their opinions to my posts in a respectable way, and I will respond in kind. That again is what this is all supposed to be like, or do you not understand that

[ 19 December 2007: Message edited by: fixer1 ]


From: Ottawa | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 19 December 2007 02:10 PM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
And now,we conclude another episode where the self-appointed troll-stalkers are continually frustrated that the moderators,much like the rest of the community,refuse to give credence to the stalkers' biases.
From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 19 December 2007 03:05 PM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
When I want to know what Fixer1 thinks, I can just read the editorial in the Sun for myself, thanks.
From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 19 December 2007 03:18 PM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by fixer1:
Wow this forum like any other is supposed to be for views from all sides of the political spectrum. It is not just for the left.

Are you that slow in your thinking that you need to be reminded, that this is not all about you?
That just goes to show you how small and non relevent you are. Call me a troll, because I speak up for a side that needs its positions to be shown,I will respectfully have my say and I do not hide where my views lie. That is more in keeping of the rules and right of this forum then the verbal name calling many have done. Could that be why you think left thinking people get banned? Do you really think you have the right to make this forum exclusively NDP only? How quaint that would be.

I post my views and yes I read the response and then I decide in my own mind, just how much weight to give each poster. But you do not see me publicly saying that I think they are self absorbed idiots, or that some have valid arguments. I just ignore the ones who I decide are useless to anything productive.

I welcome anyone to express their opinions to my posts in a respectable way, and I will respond in kind. That again is what this is all supposed to be like, or do you not understand that

[ 19 December 2007: Message edited by: fixer1 ]


Ok I was going to make a long rebuttal, but can't be bothered just notified moderators instead.


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 19 December 2007 04:40 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by fixer1:
Wow this forum like any other is supposed to be for views from all sides of the political spectrum. It is not just for the left. Are you that slow in your thinking that you need to be reminded, that this is not all about you? That just goes to show you how small and non relevent you are. Call me a troll, because I speak up for a side that needs its positions to be shown, very grown up people, do not fear opposing views.

Hi, moderator here. No, this forum is not "like any other". It's not for views "from all sides of the political spectrum". And yes, actually, it WAS created for people from "the left". It appears that you're the one who has been slow - at least, slow to read the policy you agreed to when you signed up for this web site.

You seem to have been doing nothing but antagonizing people since you've arrived. That coupled with your complete ignorance of the mandate of this forum = find another forum better suited to you.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Peppered Pothead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14772

posted 20 December 2007 07:25 AM      Profile for Peppered Pothead        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lard Tunderin' Jeezus:
When I want to know what Fixer1 thinks, I can just read the editorial in the Sun for myself, thanks.

I'd like to confess, Jeezus.

I am addicted to mainstream media.... have been for years.

With my remote, I whimsically flip from CNN to FOX 100X and then read the local right-wing rag, and then go on to flipping from CBS, to MSNBC, to ABC, and back to CNN.

I wonder what the physical & mental withdrawal symptoms would be if I quit cold turkey, as others have kindly suggested...


From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603

posted 20 December 2007 07:37 AM      Profile for Noise     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I like Fixer's viewpoints on here... It's like having one of us post 'they will tell you', except a 'they' is actually trying to tell you.

It's distancing and attacking to make Mulroney seem like 'not a conservative'. "He's not representative of us, he's a unique one of a kind example, honest!" . Same tactic employed recently on the feminist forum in the Teen killed by father another misogynist act II thread that was trying to pass off an act of the Patriarchy on 'Islam' or a 'mentally disturbed father with control issues', or more generally in the 'This wasn't one of us, it was a monster!' tactic used to distance our society from school shootings and similar inceidents.

Ultimately it's the same goal, trying to pass responsibility from the group you identify with to the individual he is.


You hold a very idealistic notion of the Conservatives Fixer1, reality is no where near the same as your fantasy party you're trying to represent.


From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
jester
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11798

posted 20 December 2007 07:39 AM      Profile for jester        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Peppered Pothead:

I'd like to confess, Jeezus.

I am addicted to mainstream media.... have been for years.

With my remote, I whimsically flip from CNN to FOX 100X and then read the local right-wing rag, and then go on to flipping from CBS, to MSNBC, to ABC, and back to CNN.

I wonder what the physical & mental withdrawal symptoms would be if I quit cold turkey, as others have kindly suggested...


Try Middle Eastern and Asian media - very thoughtful in depth analysis without the one-size-fits-all designer sound bites of the western MSM.


From: Against stupidity, the Gods themselves contend in vain | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Peppered Pothead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14772

posted 20 December 2007 07:41 AM      Profile for Peppered Pothead        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Thanks. I'll check it out. Along, of course, with Rabble, and other alternative/progressive Canadian based sites.
From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
Noise
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12603

posted 20 December 2007 07:51 AM      Profile for Noise     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Peppered... I do the same thing over CNN and a couple other news sites and will continue to. I'm really not interested in the viewpoint they are presenting, more interested in the viewpoint that the majority of American news-watchers are receiving.
From: Protest is Patriotism | Registered: May 2006  |  IP: Logged
toddsschneider
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6280

posted 20 December 2007 01:49 PM      Profile for toddsschneider     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"Affaire Mulroney-Schreiber: Coup dur pour Schreiber"

http://tinyurl.com/2p9f6k

quote:
Un tribunal ontarien met fin la poursuite de l'homme d'affaires germano-canadien Karlheinz Schreiber contre Brian Mulroney affirmant que ce dossier ne relève pas de sa juridiction ...

L'argument de M. Schreiber était qu'au moment où il a scellé une entente avec M. Mulroney à la résidence d'été du premier ministre, au lac Harrington, au Québec, la résidence officielle de M. Mulroney était le 24, Promenade Sussex, en Ontario. Et c'est pour cette raison que M. Schreiber s'était adressé à un tribunal ontarien ...

Les avocats de M. Mulroney ont fait valoir avec succès que leur client habite au Québec et que les faits allégués dans la poursuite n'avaient aucun lien avec l'Ontario ...



From: Montreal, Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Peppered Pothead
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14772

posted 21 December 2007 02:48 AM      Profile for Peppered Pothead        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Noise:
Peppered... I do the same thing over CNN and a couple other news sites and will continue to. I'm really not interested in the viewpoint they are presenting, more interested in the viewpoint that the majority of American news-watchers are receiving.

Well, I thought it over and...

I'm going to keep on watching those right-wing wackos for insight about their pathological insanity and inhumane brutality (via their blatant embrace of greed, persecution & war).

It's good to know how (why/when/whom/where) they systematically pave the road to a Neo-Fascist state, in their unique, ruthlessly manipulative increments.

But I'll also use alternative news sources for *genuine*, humanitarian enlightenment.


From: Victoria, B.C. | Registered: Nov 2007  |  IP: Logged
SALSs
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14846

posted 22 December 2007 11:46 AM      Profile for SALSs        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Who was Rick Salutin referring to in this weeks column,"All I want for xmas is my enquiry", ie:Franz Josef Strauss.

I had not paid much attention to this issue till what Salutin had to say. Now that it has caught my attention I am intrigued where this can go.

Any info or links about this person or the story (alleged) about illegal financing of Mr M's run for the leadership?


From: vancouver | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 22 December 2007 11:55 AM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:

We know that, acting on the instructions of his Bavarian masters, whose leader was Franz Joseph Strauss, Minister President of Bavaria and the dominant voice in the Christian Social Union, the fervently right-wing partner in German politics of the more moderate Christian Democratic Union, Schreiber helped finance the overthrow of Joe Clark as leader of the Progressive Conservative Party.

In 1983, the PCs held a federal convention in Winnipeg and a review of Clark’s leadership was on the agenda. Strauss and his CSU henchmen saw it as their role to support the rise to leadership of conservatives of their ilk in the right-wing parties of the West. In their eyes, Joe Clark was an old-fashioned conservative, a red-tory who was too firmly Canadian for the new era of globalization. As was revealed in 2001, on the CBC program, the Fifth Estate, Mr. Schreiber helped fund the effort to fly delegates to Winnipeg who would vote against the leadership of Joe Clark.


http://tinyurl.com/yulgpw

[ 22 December 2007: Message edited by: josh ]


From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
SALSs
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14846

posted 22 December 2007 01:08 PM      Profile for SALSs        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Tanx Josh. I feel like Ive just pulled my head out of the sand.
From: vancouver | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
Noops
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8227

posted 22 December 2007 07:03 PM      Profile for Noops     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Harper waffles


Oy vey. Harper's turning into Mr. Wishy-washy.

He's now changing the mandate of Johnston on the fly!

[ 23 December 2007: Message edited by: Noops ]


From: Guelph | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 22 December 2007 07:51 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Sidescroll hurts Baby Jesus.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Noops
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8227

posted 23 December 2007 11:20 AM      Profile for Noops     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Boom Boom:
Sidescroll hurts Baby Jesus.

It took me a few minutes but I think I dechiphered the meaning of your post.

When I looked at my last post I noticed that it had a much wider border than the rest above it. But I didn't know why.

Now I think I figured out why. The URL address in my post (that didn't work) was frigging long and proll'y caused the margins to bloat, thereby causing Baby Jesus to hurt.

Which finally brings me to my question. How does one add a freaking long URL to this site without pissing off other members?


From: Guelph | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
M. Spector
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8273

posted 23 December 2007 11:28 AM      Profile for M. Spector   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
You could use tinyurl.com, as josh did about 5 posts above.
From: One millihelen: The amount of beauty required to launch one ship. | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Noops
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8227

posted 23 December 2007 03:33 PM      Profile for Noops     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by M. Spector:
You could use tinyurl.com, as josh did about 5 posts above.

Cool, I just learned something new today!


From: Guelph | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
ReeferMadness
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2743

posted 23 December 2007 11:07 PM      Profile for ReeferMadness     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Oy vey. Harper's turning into Mr. Wishy-washy.

He's now changing the mandate of Johnston on the fly!


Why wouldn't he? Although almost nobody believes Mulroney or Schreiber, very few Canadians want an inquiry. If the public is prepared to give up on this, why wouldn't Harper?

Oy vey indeed.


From: Way out there | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Noops
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8227

posted 24 December 2007 06:09 PM      Profile for Noops     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ReeferMadness:

Why wouldn't he? Although almost nobody believes Mulroney or Schreiber, very few Canadians want an inquiry. If the public is prepared to give up on this, why wouldn't Harper?

Oy vey indeed.



Well for one thing, the public/Opposition/Mulroney didn't demand an Ethics Committee Hearing if I recall correctly. They demanded a public inquiry.
What you learn from an ECH compared to what you learn from a PI is quite different.

If I recall correctly the EC hearing was called at a time when a PI was just wishful thinking of a few. Things began to snowball very quickly however and somehow, someone decided to go ahead with both an ECH and a PI.

[Edited for spelling.]

[ 24 December 2007: Message edited by: Noops ]


From: Guelph | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
ReeferMadness
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2743

posted 24 December 2007 07:26 PM      Profile for ReeferMadness     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Actually, if you read the link, you'll see it's the public inquiry that is now in question.
From: Way out there | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Noops
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8227

posted 25 December 2007 12:13 PM      Profile for Noops     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ReeferMadness:
Actually, if you read the link, you'll see it's the public inquiry that is now in question.

Yes I know it's the PI that's now in question.
I was just answering your previous question:

"...very few Canadians want an inquiry. If the public is prepared to give up on this, why wouldn't Harper?"

Anyways this is the current flavour of the week as far as polls go.
The New Year will bring some new twists and surprises from Schreiber, that's a given.

Maybe we should start our own poll?
Will there be a public inquiry?


From: Guelph | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Noops
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8227

posted 25 December 2007 12:58 PM      Profile for Noops     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Why did Mulroney keep his spokesperson and closest confidant, Mr. Luc Lavoie in the dark about the amount of cash he received?

Almost 15 years after the fact, Mulroney had plenty of opportunity to tell Mr. Lavoie that the envelopes contained $75,000 instead of $100,000. Why did Mr. Lavoie tell the Globe and Mail that Mulroney received $100,000 cash in an envelope at the Chateau Mirabel?

Mr. Lavoie

Mr. Lavoie said Mr. Schreiber met Mr. Mulroney at the Chateau Mirabel to pitch a job to the former prime minister as a consultant on projects with an “international dimension” – including a military vehicle plant in Montreal and a pasta business.

Mr. Lavoie said the meeting occurred about a week before the federal election, while Mr. Mulroney was still an MP for Baie Comeau, Que. Mr. Schreiber claims in a sworn affidavit the meeting happened “on or about August 27, 1993.”

In a published report, Mr. Lavoie also suggested Mr. Mulroney was surprised when Mr. Schreiber pulled out an envelope stuffed with cash.

“Then he said ‘I would give you $100,000 a year' and then he pulled out an envelope with $100,000 and Mr. Mulroney said ‘what is that.' He said ‘well, I want to pay you in cash.' So Mr. Mulroney asked a few questions. ‘Why would you do this in cash' and all that,” Mr. Lavoie told the Ottawa Citizen. “Mr. Mulroney admits today that he made a colossal mistake.”

Mr. Lavoie confirmed his statement, but would not elaborate for globeandmail.com. “I'm not going to feed the monster ... I've said enough,” he said.


From: Guelph | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Liberalwhowantsthetruth
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 14854

posted 26 December 2007 08:48 AM      Profile for Liberalwhowantsthetruth     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
As a run of the mill member of joeQ public, I am amazed at how few dots have been connected in the Karlheinz affair.
First of all, in answer to the question why it has taken EIGHT years to extradite KarlHeinz, the question that should be asked is why did it take a change of government to get the extradition order acted upon? The answer to that question is that Karlheinz was being protected by Chretien and Bermuda man(remember that fool, more on him later). The next question is why were they protecting him? The answer to that question is pretty obvious. Ouellet, Lalonde et al, come on down! Dion should'ave listened to da little guy...

Where do you people think the cash in envelopes that was distributed to Quebec candidates came from? Not all of it came from the 40 million missing sponsorship cash or from Paul Champagne.

Lets not forget that at two minutes to midnite prior to legislation making it illegal, 55555 INC. made the single largest cash (there's that cash again) donation to a political party. The 55555 INC. Toronto mail box shares the same address as a Toronto law firm that brags to have sent more lawyers to the bench that any other Canadian law firm. For a company with no assets, no product and no history, 3 million dollars is chicken feed to avoid extradition when you have a multimillion dollar slush fund to dip into.

This story gets juicy and juicier. Sargeant Shultz (zi zknow znuthing znuthing ) was in far deeper with the grits than he ever was with Brian or the old PC party. That makes sense. Grits are greedier. Power attracts slimeballs. They would have never settled for the embarrassing amounts Brian settled for. Think about it. What was Cretin doing at Lang Michner that he could amass a multi million dollar fortune in time to jump back into politics after just a few short years? Just who was the "mystery" investor in the Shawinigan golf course? I don't care who Chretien's daughter married, that's not the answer.

2 million will seem like a real bargain to the grits to get the "airbus" story to go away. Left up to that asshole bermuda man, he couldn't leave well enough alone. He did half the job in soiling the grit brand with the Gomery inquiry and a bigger asshole Dion will finish the job with the Johnson Inquiry. Stephen Harper must 'ave thought he died and went to Heaven when Dion asked for an inquiry. Rather than waiting 15 minutes for Dion to change his mind, PMSH agreed immediately. Should'a listen'd to da little guy.....

This smell has always been in the grit backrooms. Follow the dollar. The grit family feud has always been about the almighty buck. That's all they know. And it promises to stink up the grit party for a long time to come. It would take an investigative team of 10 years to write this story: either that or 100 million spent on a federal inquiry into liberal party corruption 2 years. Think we could reduce the grits to two seats? Just ask'in. This is just the tip of the iceburg.....

Personally, I think Dion is walking directly into a CPC trap.

I hope an election is called in February.


From: Toronto, Ontario | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
Lard Tunderin' Jeezus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1275

posted 26 December 2007 09:58 AM      Profile for Lard Tunderin' Jeezus   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Lots of innuendo.

No substance at all. Zip, zilch, zero.

Is there anything substantial you might care to add?


From: ... | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
toddsschneider
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6280

posted 19 February 2008 12:11 PM      Profile for toddsschneider     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"Democracy Watch Files Court Challenge of Federal Ethics Commissioner’s Decision ..."

http://tinyurl.com/39ygcz

quote:
Today, Democracy Watch released details about the application it has filed in Federal Court challenging the precedent-setting ruling issued on January 7, 2008 by the federal Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson which concluded that, even when the Prime Minister’s and Cabinet ministers’ own actions and the actions of one of their close associates are in question, it is fine for them: to choose whether a judicial inquiry will take place; to set the scope of the inquiry; to choose the inquiry commissioner(s) who will judge them, and; to control a legal proceeding against another person who has made allegations about them. (To see the Ethics Commissioner's ruling, click here (PDF format) -- To see Democracy Watch's court application, click here (PDF format)).

Even Prime Minister Stephen Harper has acknowledged, and stated publicly, that he and all members of his government are in a conflict of interest concerning the Brian Mulroney-Karlheinz Schreiber situation, given that Mr. Mulroney acted until very recently as an adviser to the Prime Minister, Mr. Schreiber named the Prime Minister in a court affidavit, and the government is seeking the extradition of Mr. Schreiber to Germany. Despite recognizing his own conflict of interest, Mr. Harper continues to take part in discussions (including during several 2007 year-end interviews with the media (Transcript of relevant part of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s interview with CBC-TV -- Transcript of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s interview with CTV) and make decisions about the situation.

Ethics Commissioner Dawson made the ruling in response to a complaint filed by Democracy Watch on November 26, 2007 that raised serious questions about the actions of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and Justice Minister Rob Nicholson with regard to the Brian Mulroney-Karlheinz Schreiber situation being in violation of the measures in the Conflict of Interest Act (the Act) (To see Democracy Watch's complaint letter, click here). She concluded that neither they nor any other Cabinet minister or Cabinet staff has a conflict of interest, and therefore they did not have to, and in the future do not have to, recuse themselves from making decisions concerning how the government deals with the situation ...



From: Montreal, Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
remind
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6289

posted 28 March 2008 06:23 AM      Profile for remind     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Interesting development.

quote:
Open Letter from Hon. Robert Thibault to Dr. David Johnston

...I am writing you this open letter in anticipation of your final recommendations for the mandate of public inquiry into the financial dealings between Karlheinz Schreiber and Brian Mulroney which the Prime Minister has asked you to complete by April 4, 2008.

I encourage you to review carefully the additional information that has come to light since your initial report in January and would suggest there are a number of areas within the public interest beyond those questions identified in your report that demand further scrutiny. Revelations that have come out through the Ethics Committee process and the media would suggest that even some issues that have been looked at by the RCMP are not entirely the “well-tilled ground” that your initial report suggested.

Here are a few issues that I believe need to be specifically included in the mandate of the inquiry:


http://www.liberal.ca/story_13759_e.aspx


From: "watching the tide roll away" | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
toddsschneider
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6280

posted 10 May 2008 07:09 AM      Profile for toddsschneider     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
"ETHICS RULING: MP barred from asking questions on Mulroney saga: Libel suit against Thibault cited as reason"

http://tinyurl.com/4hbdut


quote:
OTTAWA -- A Liberal MP has been barred from asking questions on the Mulroney-Schreiber affair in Parliament, raising fears that a libel chill is set to extend into the House and committee rooms on the Hill.

Up until this week, Liberal MP Robert Thibault had been one of the opposition party's main questioners on the cash dealings between former prime minister Brian Mulroney and businessman Karlheinz Schreiber.

However, Ethics Commissioner Mary Dawson has barred Mr. Thibault from raising the issue further in Parliament because Mr. Mulroney has launched a $2-million lawsuit against Mr. Thibault for allegedly libellous statements on CTV Newsnet on the matter ...



From: Montreal, Canada | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 28 May 2008 06:47 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Gomery chides Harper

quote:
The man who headed the inquiry into the Liberal sponsorship scandal is questioning how serious Prime Minister Stephen Harper is about an inquiry into the Mulroney-Schreiber affair.

“It's clear this is not a high priority for him, because he's not treating it as a high priority,” retired judge John Gomery told The Canadian Press in an interview Wednesday. ...

Judge Gomery called it “unprecedented” for Mr. Harper to ask an outside party to decide on the scope of the proposed inquiry. ...

It was a different story, said Judge Gomery, when former Liberal prime minister Paul Martin gave him a broad mandate to delve into the sponsorship affair that erupted under predecessor Jean Chrétien.



From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 12 June 2008 11:52 AM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Manitoba judge to head Mulroney-Schreiber inquiry

excerpt:

OTTAWA -- Prime Minister Stephen Harper has named Associate Chief Justice Jeffrey Oliphant of Manitoba's Court of Queen's Bench to lead a public inquiry into the Mulroney-Schreiber affair.


Today's announcement comes seven months after Harper first promised to launch an investigation into former prime minister Brian Mulroney's controversial financial dealings with arms lobbyist Karlheinz Schreiber.


From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged
Wilf Day
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3276

posted 12 June 2008 12:05 PM      Profile for Wilf Day     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Kady O'Malley:
quote:
Oliphant was appointed a Justice of the Court of Queen’s Bench of Manitoba, and later, Associate Chief Justice, by then-Prime Minister Brian Mulroney.

That won’t be a problem, though, right? I mean, I’m sure the PM didn’t even know that he was appointed by one of the people he’ll be investigating — it doesn’t say a word about it in the press release, after all.



From: Port Hope, Ontario | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Boom Boom
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 7791

posted 12 June 2008 01:54 PM      Profile for Boom Boom     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The point was made by someone on Politics tonight that all the Justices were appointed by either a Progressive/Conservative or a Liberal Prime Minister, so there will be times when it looks fishy. The problem apparently is not with this appointment, but rather the terms of reference for the Inquiry - Paul Szabo, the Chair, said today the terms of reference are unacceptably narrow and his committee is going to discuss how to deal with this.
From: Make the rich pay! | Registered: Dec 2004  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca