Jump to content
Political Discussion Forums

Recommended Posts

With Trudeau squashing Northern Gateway and the fate of Keystone in the hands of the next US President (or so it seems), the latest focus has been on Energy East which will see a revitalization of the pipeline that will carry oil from Alberta and Saskatchewan to the refineries in NB thus creating more domestic oil products.

However, in the news as of late Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre and local Montreal area mayors have come out against the pipeline due to environmental concerns.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/montreal-mayor-denis-coderre-energy-east-opposition-1.3413117

This was met with huge criticism from Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall who stirred the pot by bringing up the equalization money that Quebec receives:

I trust Montreal area mayors will politely return their share of $10B in equalization supported by west #EnergyEast

http://globalnews.ca/news/2469532/wall-criticizes-montreal-area-mayors-for-opposing-energy-east-pipeline/

Also Mayor Naheed Nenshi has come out and blasted Coderre for this too:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/business/nenshi-slams-montreal-mayor-for-opposition-to-energy-east-pipeline-1.2746505

On a bright note it looks like Ontario Premier Wynne is getting on board with the pipeline and giving her blessing:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/montreal-area-mayors-energy-east-criticisms-short-sighted-notley-says/article28339330/

Obviously there is the discussion of whether the pipeline is needed or not, but what I find intriguing is the dynamic between Quebec and the ROC. Its almost like this situation is allowing everyone to air their dirty laundry.

Definitely a tough call for Trudeau now....will this situation cause unity among the Provinces or will it the cause of a riff?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 410
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Trudeau has surely painted himself into another I PROMISE corner.(as in the refugee and ISIS promises, which make no sense) He promised to consult everybody on everyhting including pipelines. By doing so, he has encouraged partisan pond scum like Coderre to believe that every village in Canada has a veto project over every project.

He promised to reform the NEB, which seems to work OK.

He promised that every project must have social licence, which amounts to a veto.

I have a sense of mounting dread. I fear we have elected a Dangerous Fool.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Definitely a tough call for Trudeau now..

all his own doing, too.

The opposition in Quebec until now was from the PQ. Coderre and his crew are all mainstream Liberals, Trudeaus heartland in the province.

I really, really doubt that Trudeau has the spine to act in the interest of the country, and there is no doubt that Energy East is to the benefit of Canada overall. he will fold under pressure from Quebec. Actually what he will do is send this off for more study, which will take a decade or two. That is just the same as folding.

And yes, this may well be the cause of some real, and serious, strife between provinces. I give Trudeau Senior credit for being nobodys puppet. He had no problem making decisions/taking action that Quebec did not care for. I have no reason at all to think the same of his son.

Edited by overthere
Link to post
Share on other sites
I really, really doubt that Trudeau has the spine to act in the interest of the country, and there is no doubt that Energy East is to the benefit of Canada overall. he will fold under pressure from Quebec. Actually what he will do is send this off for more study, which will take a decade or two. That is just the same as folding.

And yes, this may well be the cause of some real, and serious, strife between provinces. I give Trudeau Senior credit for being nobodys puppet. He had no problem making decisions/taking action that Quebec did not care for. I have no reason at all to think the same of his son.

Oh, yeah. Because if there is one thing that 9 years of Harper's magnificent success on the building of pipeline consensus shows, it's that the Prime Minister should be a spokesperson for industry and should harass and bully people who have the temerity to object when someone tries to pump toxic sludge through their backyards. Worked great for Harper right? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

tries to pump toxic sludge through their backyards. Worked great for Harper right? :

So oil is now toxic sludge? I wonder if anyone told Wynne that before she approved of this pipeline? It would have been easy for Trudeau to cast off this pipeline had his Liberal cohort not done this...but she did. She must be anti-environmental hey???

Link to post
Share on other sites

So oil is now toxic sludge? I wonder if anyone told Wynne that before she approved of this pipeline? It would have been easy for Trudeau to cast off this pipeline had his Liberal cohort not done this...but she did. She must be anti-environmental hey???

Do some research on dilbit. Toxic sludge is actually kind of a charitable term.

And while you're at it, go and see what happened when a relatively minor spill occurred in the Kalamazoo River. Enbridge has spent over a billion dollars dredging the river and surrounding ponds.

Edited by ReeferMadness
Link to post
Share on other sites

This was met with huge criticism from Saskatchewan Premier Brad Wall who stirred the pot by bringing up the equalization money that Quebec receives:

oh my! One would think a Provincial Premier would actually know the fundamentals and understand just how equalization works.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do some research on dilbit. Toxic sludge is actually kind of a charitable term.

And while you're at it, go and see what happened when a relatively minor spill occurred in the Kalamazoo River. Enbridge has spent over a billion dollars dredging the river and surrounding ponds.

You should go to lac Megantic and see what a train load of oil did there, I mean you're arguing for train and truck transport over pipelines right? Well of course we know that isn't true, you're arguing for, like you do on every thread like this, is the impossibility of an oil free economy, an eco marxist utopia, and with opinions like that...Anyway, to say the you're arguing against a pipeline from a dishonest position would be putting it mildly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Do some research on dilbit. Toxic sludge is actually kind of a charitable term.

.

No...a toxic sludge is a waste product, something that is not useful. Correct me if I'm wrong but you use the products in that substance you are calling 'toxic sludge".

Of course you glossed over the major point...if this stuff is toxic sludge then that must make the Liberal Premier from Ontario an anti-environment type since she approves this going through their back yard. How do you think Trudeau is going to deal with his provincial cohort now approving this toxic sludge.

Link to post
Share on other sites

You should go to lac Megantic and see what a train load of oil did there, I mean you're arguing for train and truck transport over pipelines right? .

Do I detect a certain bitter tone? Why is it so many people are so determined to preserve Alberta's status as diggers of sludge and inheritors of the world's largest toxic hole in the ground? Alberta was there before the oil was discovered and will be there after the sludge is gone. Or worthless.

Well of course we know that isn't true, you're arguing for, like you do on every thread like this, is the impossibility of an oil free economy, an eco marxist utopia,

Did you just call me an eco marxist? You flatterer you. What are you trying to get from me? :P Actually, Marx doesn't really do it for me. All those workers throwing off chains - it seems so medieval and tiresome.

Anyway, to say the you're arguing against a pipeline from a dishonest position would be putting it mildly.

Tsk. Dishonest. Now them's fightin' words.

That's OK. I've been called enough things enough times to know which ones have merit, which ones I need to think about some more and which are just the empty words of people who don't get it.

Dishonest is the pretense that we can keep on endlessly expanding in a finite world. It's the delusion that we can keep on poisoning the biosphere because we'll always have the technology to fix it by time it comes back to us. It's the biggest of the big lies: that Russian experiment started in 1919 had some real association with socialism and that unregulated capitalism cannot only coexist with but is somehow synonymous with democracy and freedom. Dishonest is the belief that we understand enough to mess with the physical world of climate and biospheres but somehow the human-invented world of economic activity is too complicated for governments to get involved in and so we need to let markets regulate themselves.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No...a toxic sludge is a waste product, something that is not useful. Correct me if I'm wrong but you use the products in that substance you are calling 'toxic sludge".

So, I can tell you didn't do the research - that's very disappointing. Not only that but you seem to lack an understanding of the words "toxic" and "sludge". Toxic means poisonous, which dilbit certainly is. Sludge means mud-like. (In fairness, dilbit isn't mud-like because it has all of those carcinogenic, mutagenic solvents added to it to make it flow. The bitumen is mud-like. So sue me). So, how do you come to the conclusion that toxic sludge is a useless waste product? If you have a need for a carcinogenic, mutagenic, biotoxic substance that is almost impossible to clean up once it's dropped in water, then dilbit is probably a perfect fit. Would you like some in your backyard?

Of course you glossed over the major point...if this stuff is toxic sludge then that must make the Liberal Premier from Ontario an anti-environment type since she approves this going through their back yard.

You think you have me on this? I know little about Premier Wynne and I care about as much. She's a politician so I expect she goes along with a whole bunch of stuff she doesn't like to get whatever she does want. It sounds like this is very important to you so I'll let you answer your own question.

How do you think Trudeau is going to deal with his provincial cohort now approving this toxic sludge.

I couldn't even begin to guess and as luck would have it I don't have to. Trudeau has sided with Notley and Wynne on this. It's not really surprising. Like Wynne, Trudeau is a politician. Whether he really believes what he's saying or whether he is being careful to not alienate Alberta is impossible to know. Maybe he really believes his own bullshit about being able to protect the environment while still being the world's leader in purveying toxic sludge.

But one thing is certain. Unlike Harper, Trudeau is showing he can make common cause with his provincial counterparts.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the Mayor Of Montreal has a real concern and maybe Justin should throw it back into the laps of the oil companies saying yes, maybe pipeline are safer than trains but its NOT safe until the pipelines are made not TO BREAK and spill and cause an environmental mess for years. I thought they were going to go through SW Ontario , but I see they go through N. Ontario. So either make a spill-proof pipe or re-direct the pipeline away from cities and carry a couple of billion for cleanup.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So, I can tell you didn't do the research - that's very disappointing.

Why would I do research a scientific topic when I clearly posted this in Provincial politics. With that said, I don't need to research the items as I deal with sludge every day. Do you consider sewage to be toxic? Most municipalities do however Montreal felt it was ok to dump billions of litres of raw sewage right into the St.Lawrence. Victoria dumps all their raw sewage right into the ocean. The reality is that an item can be determined relatively toxic based on its intended use.

Vitamins can be toxic....http://medical-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com/Vitamin+Toxicity

Gasoline is toxic....but you use that every day.....don't you.

Municipal sludge is toxic but when treated properly and applied under the right conditions will go right on farmers fields.

Hell...even water is toxic at high levels.

The fact of the matter is that everything is determined in a risk/benefit analysis and the reality is that until we stop using oil we need to have ways to move the oil and pipelines are the safest way of moving this product. In fact, one of the main reasons for the catastrophe in Kalamazoo is that they never dealt with it before and didn't respond accordingly.

You think you have me on this? I know little about Premier Wynne and I care about as much.

Then why the hell are you commenting in a post made in PROVINCIAL POLITICS with the OP citing how this will impact interprovincial relations? Do you just come here to deflect? Aside from offering the latest news on Trudeau now agreeing to the project, you offer nothing on how this will impact relations. This post has nothing to do with the science or practicalities of pipelines, nor does it have anything to do with your biggest fear (HDS), rather it is about the rift it is causing between jurisdictions. Consequently how it will affect Trudeaus base in Quebec that clearly doesn't want this go forward.

Of course....like you said you don't care so please leave the conversation for the people who do.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course....like you said you don't care so please leave the conversation for the people who do.

pulling partial/select statements doesn't speak well of the supposed conversation you project. Do you recognize local authorities have responsibilities to their direct constituents? That there's an onus on participating oil companies to work to allay the raised concerns of those local authorities? Surely you're not suggesting oil companies have carte blanche - surely.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh, yeah. Because if there is one thing that 9 years of Harper's magnificent success on the building of pipeline consensus shows, it's that the Prime Minister should be a spokesperson for industry and should harass and bully people who have the temerity to object when someone tries to pump toxic sludge through their backyards. Worked great for Harper right? :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Not surprisingly, you have missed the point entirely.

There can be no consensus on pipeline construction. It is impossible. Completely impossible. But the building of this economic infrastructure means much more to the economic health of this country than everybody holding hands in fellowship and harmony. It is one of the things, and a crucial element, of paying for the social contract of which you are so very fervently fond. I get that you don't understand that. But does Trudeau? Is his deep need to be loved by all greater than his ability to objectively assess the situation and base decisions on facts rather than sunny ways?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Like Wynne, Trudeau is a politician.

That is unproven, that he is a politician. Or perhaps he is a politician in the pejorative sense, and is unproven as a leader of a country.

He has put himself in a very tough position. He either tends to the economic needs of his country, or panders to some of his electorate. Either way, he reaps a whirlwind.

I think that he will do all he can to defer a decision, likely by shredding the NEB and suspending their decision.

It is the cowards way out, and I reckon he will take it.

He could push the pipelines forward, take his lumps from various quarters, and charm them back into his camp over the next few years but..... does he have both the wit and the spine?

Link to post
Share on other sites

That is unproven, that he is a politician.

again, you continue your practice of purposely taking out the member name of statements you quote... why do so? It affords no opportunity for anyone to know who you're replying to... it affords no opportunity to allow anyone to look back at the linked quote and check context. Again, this is your standard practice in quoting - why?

Link to post
Share on other sites

pulling partial/select statements doesn't speak well of the supposed conversation you project. Do you recognize local authorities have responsibilities to their direct constituents? That there's an onus on participating oil companies to work to allay the raised concerns of those local authorities? Surely you're not suggesting oil companies have carte blanche - surely.

Where have I stated ANYTHING about oil companies??? Where? I have stated that Brad Wall wants this to go forward and stirred the pot talking about equalization payments. I have stated Nenshi, Notley and Wynne support this but nowhere have I stated oil companies. The OP is about political relations among inter provincial entities.... Do I need to hold your hand on this?

Now do you have something to offer or will it just be your standard deflections at this point?

Link to post
Share on other sites

again, you continue your practice of purposely taking out the member name of statements you quote... why do so? It affords no opportunity for anyone to know who you're replying to... it affords no opportunity to allow anyone to look back at the linked quote and check context. Again, this is your standard practice in quoting - why?

For brevity, and because this site does not link the entire post.

If I don't quote you Waldo, it is because your post is not worth repeating or commenting upon.

If my style is offensive , there is a report mechanism.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP is about political relations among inter provincial entities.... Do I need to hold your hand on this?

Now do you have something to offer or will it just be your standard deflections at this point?

obviously... political relations are based on political positions. If you believe you can discuss relations based on positions taken/held without qualifying those positions... just what do you presume to discuss? I appreciate you're taken aback by having pointed... and apparently, most inconvenient questions directed to you!

.

Link to post
Share on other sites

For brevity, and because this site does not link the entire post..

of course there's linkage to an entire post... that's what you're eliminating when you purposely take a member's name out of the quotation. You can accomplish your claimed "brevity" by leaving your "brief quote" as is... and simply leaving the members name within the quote. And again, by doing so, it affords an opportunity to realize directly who you're responding to and it allows anyone an ability to simply click the arrow within the quote to check the complete post for context. You do know about that arrow in the upper right-hand corner of a properly (name included) quoted post, right? :lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

obviously... political relations are based on political positions. If you believe you can discuss relations based on positions taken/held without qualifying those positions... just what do you presume to discuss? I appreciate you're taken aback by having pointed... and apparently, most inconvenient questions directed to you!

.

Hey...if you want to make said claims then go for it. Don't state that I made such claims and purport them in your standard deflection ways. That would be dishonest waldo....you're not dishonest...are you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




  • Similar Content

    • By The Philosopher
      Hi,
      I would like to heard people about what they are thinking about the french fact in Canada
      What do you think about the idea of a Bilingual Canada ?
      Do you think that Pierre Elliott Trudeau was right about that ?
      PS: In this topic I'm asking everybody to be respectful while sharing opinions 
      Thank you
    • By 7th_attempt
      The LAW, the thing that forces people to do things- is only as fair as the extent of external scrutiny (duh) but something obviously messed up will at least gain enough coverage to generate a response right? Well sure, but not before a whole host of people get screwed over. In cases like first world capitalism, no amount of coverage and outrage from a legally (and morally) wronged party, can evade the concrete consequences derived from violations cited on intentionally vague parameters covered by that very same law. The past 2 years, due to limited options, I've been working for a company (can't say) that is indeed founded out of Canada.. however the (U.S.) founders had simply maintained 'permanent' residency for a number of years, allowing them to claim Canadian citizenship and therefore establish Canadian founded business status for their new brand. This matters because the whole reason for this endeavor was so the 'new' company could circumvent the (somewhat) recent additions to anti-add and anti-spam laws to prevent U.S. based marketing tactics from overpowering local Canadian business. Well it turns out not even that can stop a determined U.S. businessman from (lawfully) stealing if they see enough potential to merit investing in a system that can achieve such a theft. If you're reading this, then please, for the sake of yourself and the sake of your loved ones read and pass along this REAL (and in my opinion, utterly distasteful) admittance to allowing vague laws to enable sales representatives for businesses to quite literally steal from others (the classic sign the contract, that just so happens to be indecipherable and says the complete opposite of what the plastic-smile sales representative just told you). Please note that this link outlines law that applies to U.S. AND Canadian based customers.
       
      THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART- https://www.consumer.ftc.gov/articles/0195-some-home-security-systems-may-be-scams  
       
      P.S. I know many reading this are going to say why are you wasting my time with this I already know better than to let a sales rep con me..   3 reasons:
      1. 80-90% of (wronged) customers will say the sales representative showed up at an interesting or 'destined' moment, providing (at the moment) so much more than just a killer deal on a sweet new sign-on product/service. They were helpers, friends, attractive, flattering, and almost seemed to understand their lifestyle and hobbies... please refer to https://www.theverge.com/2018/3/28/17172548/gdpr-compliance-requirements-privacy-notice which pretty much states your personal or any useful info- if it's ANYWHERE on the internet, it's free game for businesses to use. *this includes the ability to run credit tests without your consent/knowledge once enough info is obtained and automated programs that constantly trawl the internet for anything linked to a potential customer/area they've taken an interest in.
      2. Contracts do not end with the death of the signing customer and many are a minimum of 3 years- some up to 8 for official services. Yes, the law can protect a company collecting on a contract (aka fees, monthly bills, collection bids, etc) to the next of kin, for a contract signed by the parent or spouse even if no one was  ever notified about such a condition, as long as the contract was signed: the next of kin MUST pay the due in full. Meaning everything you're reading could affect you much more profoundly than you know even if you choose to never personally touch a contract, if they got your family by extension under extreme circumstances you must become involved (so better to prevent rather than struggle; simply by making sure as many people as possible are aware of this).
      3. This is the information age, data in general is constantly being filtered and analysed by increasingly advanced AI, capable of spitting out easy to use, yet disturbingly effective actions and procedures to use on specific common personality types. If you don't believe me, please check out the attached picture(s). The first one is a 'chart' provided in some way to sales representatives, and it's how they get their 'in' with a paying customer. I guarantee you'll see yourself and agree that it at least somewhat illustrates the possibility of use against you. The second picture is simply a QR code meant to link any QR code scanner phone app to bring one directly to the FTC website, if possible- everyone should read the linked page from that code..
      I spent valuable hours of my life (I'm 25 no joke, I work my ass off and this is my day off) to make this. It's because I've spent no less than the last 4 years listening to people cry to me (I do phone support) about how they were essentially lied to and then robbed. And it all came from a contract, a morally corrupt 'sales representative', and a complete lack of regulations in favor of protecting citizens simply because capitalism. Simply knowing they're out to finger your wallet should be more than enough to kneecap them halfway through their entirely false pitch and get them out of your hair and keep them out.
      Cheers. 


    • By Special Delivery
      I was told my previous post about the 15 years of drug smuggling into Canada by friends of Oliver North and Jeb Bush was deleted because of the graphic photo of the executed Barry Seal, which by the way autloaded when I inserted the you tube link (in other words, you tube inserted the photo - not me)

      Here's the summary of my previous post... It is alleged that our former PM was given $3 million (either an outright bribe or a campaign contribution) by Canadian Mike Huxtable on behalf of Jeb Bush and Oliver North's smuggling team which flew over $1B of cocaine (wholesale value) into Canada over a 15 year period, and even after getting caught by honest mounties in Sakatchewan in 1997, (both Huxtable and a corrupt retired FBI agent named Terry Nelson were arrested), continued after a 6 month recess. The source is a veteran DEA agent and two witnesses who tried to blow the whistle (Erling Ingvaldsen and a former U.S. Treasury agent named Bruce Gorcyca were booted out of the country - with the help of a corrupt Brampton lawyer, who himself was arrested for child abuse and the subject of a 200 page Law Society complaint http://bruceslawsocietycomplaint.wordpress.com.

      Five insiders actually wrote books about Bush's involvement in Canada with four proxies of FBI Terry Nelson (now retired), Canadian Mike Huxtable (a personal friend of Stephen Harpers), a Florida Lawyer named Stephen J. Finta, and a former RCMP Colonel named Pierre Jeanette from Montreal. Gorcyca also wrote a book and then sought sanctuary in Canada after federal agents seized his book manuscripts at gunpoint, and five witnesses named in the manuscripts were murdered (George Morales, Al Chalem, Canadian John Pierre Gonyou, Johnny Molina, and Stephen Finta) See: http://www.worldlawdirect.com/forum/law-news/91146-uncle-sam-seized-book-manuscripts-protect-jeb-bush.html

      For those quick to shout "conspiracy theory" or suggest I wear a tinfoil hat, you may want to do a little background homework first since NONE of these authors were ever sued for libel or slander by Bush or anyone ellse they accused:

      Daniel Hopsicker: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0970659105 wrote BARRY & THE BOYS and all the sources found in this article: http://www.worldlawdirect.com/forum/human-rights/91228-will-pm-trudeau-right-wrong-harpers-fake-extradition-bruce-gorcyca.html

      Also read this book by a former U.S. Navy Commander Al Martin: THE CONSPIRATORS, http://www.amazon.com/The-Conspirators-Secrets-Iran-Contra-Insider/dp/097100420X and another by a highly decorated USA Army General named Russ Bowen who used to work with Bush father during his CIA Director days. http://www.amazon.com/Immaculate-Deception-Crime-Family-Exposed/dp/092235680 IMMACULATE DECEPTION - INSIDE THE BUSH CRIME FAMILY

      There is is also even better reading material in the exhibit sections of that Law Society complaint above espcially the 11 page sworn report of Canadian Private Investigator Ed Reiken. It also details a $43 million investment fraud scheme that Harper is alleged to have covered-up as well as per http://rabble.ca/babble/election-2015/43-million-secret-reasons-not-to-vote-steven-harper-yet-another-cover

      And this was takend from another forum:

      "Take a look this http://www.copi.com/articles/Montana/980326dh.html Anyone with a brain between their ears will know that this is not some "conspiracy theory". The dots are now easy to connect but it seems nobody has the courage to investigate Harper who is alleged to have taken either a $3 million bribe, or a $3 million campaign contribution...

      "The veteran DEA agent just looked at me in silence for almost a minute with a fully frustrated look on his face, then finally admitted "We know that $3 million went from Jeb to Harper through Nelson's group in 2010. Finta delivered the cash to Huxtable who had a late night meeting with Harper. We requested a court order for wiretaps but were turned down. The DoJ keeps getting in our way and if we push this issue, we will all get transferred to Nogales!" This was not the first time I heard about interference from the top. When I met with XXXXXX and XXXX I got pretty much the same feedback. But at least XXXX was determined to nail Finta. Once Finta was bagged and facing a 30 year sentence XXXX was sure the "fat fuck lawyer" would roll over on everyone. I agreed with him and also suggested they go after Fischetti and the accountants. He asked me if I had the names of the accountants and I gave him one. He jotted it down in his notebook.

      Officially he said he was not assigned to the Nelson case, because the "Nelson case" no longer existed officially - thanks to Don Gregg and the DoJ. He further admitted that he was not even supposed to be in Beijing but his former partner XXXXXXXX asked him to "check in on Gorcyca". I am glad that he did. I was still worried about the two shootings at our home in Mississauga and now that I heard Soave was retiring, we would have nobody to call for help. Soave and Besson both knew the score but both said Ottawa was calling the shots when we decided China was the best "temporary solution".

      I told XXXX about my meeting with Ms. Frazier at the Renascence Center in Toronto and I played some recordings for him of my conversations with Maury and XXXX. He grabbed my arm and said "Listen Bruce, you are preaching to the choir. I believed your story after I first spoke with Maury and read the Reiken report. Save those recordings for the people who don't believe you." Despite his assurances and support he still asked me for a copy of them so I gave him the USB - one of seven I made and gave to various friends I had around the world. If anything happened to me or my family, I asked my friends to post everything on line and give copies to two reporters that had been asking me for interviews for more than five years. The only person that I wanted to speak with was not able to communicate with me and I still do not know for sure if my courier package actually reached their hands.

      My emails had been locked or blocked for months as were most all of my skype calls. Just to call my wife and kids I would have to buy a phone card and use the landline at a local business or hotel. They were doing a good job of isolating me in China, but I was determined to keep my family together. Without communications, that is not easy to do."

      Note: Atty. Stephen J. Finta was murdered with an induced heart attack in July of 2012, two weeks before the DEA planned to arrest him. My sources suspect the NSA was spying on the DEA's South Florida task force - by executive order for more than five years. Finta had served as a paid FBI informant and Nelson's front man since 1986. It was Finta who delivered the $16 million in cash to the offices of American Financial Group in 1996."

      Lastly the guys in Montreal at GlobalReasearch.ca seem to know all about Bush as well: http://www.globalresearch.ca/jeb-bush-the-mexican-drug-cartel-and-free-trade/5448747 So in summary, if some way, some how America elects Jeb Bush as President, Canada will be flooded with even more cocaine from the yanks. It got so bad in the late 90s that local citizens even sent a open letter of protest to the FBI director http://www.copi.com/articles/Montana/971215.html Will Trudeau also turn a blind eye to drug flights from America? How ironic their government doesn't want Americans to buy prescription drugs in Canada!


      P.S. Since I am not allowed to post the youtube video about the hit on Barry Seal, I guess you have to Google it for yourself ("Youtube.com, Barry Seal, murder") Btw... this was also taken from that other forum and show the cocaine trail into Canada starting about 1990. To be clear Harper was not part of the smuggling ops, he just ignored them when he was told about them by both the DEA, RCMP, and some inside informants..

      link
    • By Not Yet
      No matter how deep you bury skeletons or how far you you exile the witnesses, the truth has a habit of floating to the surface. PM Harper has never been one for transparency so when he decided to ignore the author of this letter and decided to extradite him instead, he probably figured his secrets were safe. http://whyunclesamhatesbruce.blogspot.com who wrote the letter to Harper 9 fricking years ago and offered to take a polygraph test.


    • By kraychik
      http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/20/alberta-oil-companies-hemorrhage-cash-after-ndp-tax-hike/
      So the "environmentalist" (i.e. "pro-science" Luddites) NDP seizes control in Alberta due to faux conservative prior leadership, and now massive profits have turned into massive losses. Well, at least now Alberta's NDP has an extra billion dollars laying around with which to purchase votes - which is what it's all about.
  • Tell a friend

    Love Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
×
×
  • Create New...