Assaulted by
Nonsense,
Part DUH!

Campbell Cabinet Material?

The parliamentary system of government that we inherited from the mother country requires a Loyal Opposition. The opposition wasn't meant to just try to obstruct the government, but to hold the government accountable to the people the legislative body is supposed to represent. In the case of the Campbell criminal regime seventy to eighty percent of the people eligible to vote DID NOT VOTE FOR THE Capo in Chief, Gordon Campbell or his party. Over half of the voters are so either lazy or disenchanted with the process that they didn't vote at all and of those that did, over half voted for ABC, or anybody but Campbell. I've heard estimates that as few as less than 10,000 votes re-directed in the appropriate ridings would have meant that Carole James would currently be premier of the province. At any rate, the results of last May's abortion of an election was hardly a ringing endorsement of the corporate-fascist dictatorship that we find ourselves suffering under.

After a week of media "concern trolling" over the special prosecutor flim-flam in the Kash and Karry Heed situation, Apologist in Chief for the Campbell regime Vaughn Palmer has weighed in to calm everyone down with Despite one spectacular failure, the special prosecutor system doesn't need a major overhaul. According to freelance PABBER Vaughn the special prosecutor system in BC has been wonderful except for this minor and unimportant glitch, which itself is irrelevant. I beg to differ.

This is the same system (and ironically the same "oh so" Special Prosecutor that decided that even though Ken Dobell and his many hats were in contravention of the lobbying regulations didn't merit any action in the so-called "public" interest. Is "public" another psuedonym for Gordon Campbell?

Then there was the infamous Bountiful musical special prosecutors case that has former AG StoneWally Oppal defending himself in civil court - which irony of ironies involved, among others, the same Terrence "go to guy" Robertson.

Then there is the whole issue of having the former law partner of the then AG Geoff Plante named special prosecutor in a case that at the very least is going to involve half of the cabinet at the time of the alleged crimes appearing as witnesses, although many feel they should be appearing a defendants.

The little list above is only what we know in a province that tends to ignore and/or actually hide even more news than it spins, if it isn't favorable to their idol Gordo the Greedy Campbell.

So some of the drivel Vaughn has shoveled up today is as follows.

The B.C. legislation for appointing special prosecutors independently operated without serious challenge through six premiers and two decades before a single failure this week called the system into question.

I've already dealt with how wrong this is just above.

Dozens of special prosecutors have been appointed over the years. Many were on the approved list under both the NDP and the B.C. Liberals. Some had to withdraw from handling specific cases, owing to possible conflicts. But there have been no major controversies involving either the branch or its choices for special prosecutors.

How could there be controversy when we are served by a media (sic) that thinks the only important issue is what color mittens the white haired prevaricator and adulterer in chief is wearing today?

Did Robertson perceive any conflict in taking the case at the outset of his appointment on Jan. 12? He did not.

Only later, after he decided who should be charged (Heed associates) and who should not be charged (Heed himself), did he change his mind about the significance of a $1,000 donation by his law firm to the very campaign he was investigating.

"I am not in a position, due to the conflict, to continue," he wrote in a letter to Gillen Tuesday of this week.

It is difficult to count the number of LIES in the statement above. For starters, Mr. Robertson himself has admitted that he knew about the donation to Heed's campaign going in. Second, he was assigned to look into the HEED CAMPAIGN SPECIFICALLY, not do some general overview of various campaigns in various ridings. How can a man intelligent enough to pass a bar exam (assuming he took it himself) take a few months to realize such an obvious real or apparent conflict - sorry I'm not buying, though being spring and all I could use some fertilizer, if you know what I mean.

Leonard Krog is a Dog,
                No Offense to canis familiaris!

The most disappointing part of the whole affair this morning is the reaction of the Loyal (to WHO?) Opposition to all this skullduggery. Our man in charge of holding the Justice Branch and Attorney General accountable has once again failed all the people of BC, except for Gordon Campbell and his clique of bandits.

Was it a problem that the special prosecutor in the BC Rail case made a donation to the Liberals? No, said MLA Leonard Krog, who is himself a lawyer and the NDP critic for the ministry of the attorney-general.

Unfortunately this is nothing new for our crusader for Justice Krog the Dog from Nanaimo. Last July when we were approaching the fifth anniversary date (July 14, 2009) of the still secret BC Rail Deal Heist, many of us wrote to Mr. Krog to remind him of all the perks that would slip from the public trust on that date, and of course we didn't even get the courtesy of a reply telling us that he had deleted it UNREAD. Only on the day itself, when the dirty deed was done did he issue a lily livered, weak kneed form letter to SOME of the folks who had asked for him to step up, I guess to give the appearance that he was deserving of the big bucks and gold plated pension he gets from us.

Go peruse the archives for July last year at BC Mary's blog The Legislature Raids for lots more on this quisling action by our justice critic if you want to gain some perspective on his current sell-out. A couple weeks after our great loss of what were public lands, after some time to ruminate on the situation Mary published a great piece titled BC Rail: a job for a warrior.

Recently, people in British Columbia stood up, ready to face the threat of the BCR-CN deal's 5th anniversary triggering more benefits to CN to be taken from what was once our BCRail. Citizens were seeking simple justice. We thought that the Opposition Justice Critic would understand that, and invited him to be our guide and advisor.

We asked our OJC to demand that government "Show us the deal", and wondered if "an injunction, or other means" could stop the deal until the implications are clear. Rumours say that there is an option for re-possession of the BC Railway "for cause" and that cause does exist. That priceless BCR lands would slide into CN hands as a gift on the 5th anniversary. That certain BCRail lines would be abandoned leaving communities stranded. And more.

These are not minor concerns.

So what happened? Does British Columbia have this heroic warrior-figure who leaps into action, defending the people against injustice? No.

Did citizens spontaneously rise up to write and telephone him? Yes, they did. I wrote 3 times, myself.

Did the Opposition Justice Critic take notice? Maybe. I was told that this blog is read "with respect" in Opposition quarters. But who knows?

Did the OJC offer his advice? his legal opinion? helpful information? his personal guidance? No, he did not. It was as if his face was turned away from us.

Was there any response at all? From the OJC, no. From his assistants, yes.

His assistants prepared an identical form letter which was emailed to most (not all) of us, on July 13, 2009. Sly. By then, it was too late to head off the windfall benefits to CN triggered by the 5th anniversary of the deal. The Opposition's explanation, over the OJC's printed signature, was as follows:

* An injunction is too expensive. (Ignore the fact that Maude Barlow, for The Council of Canadians, is seeking an injunction this week to protect a water source. And B.C.'s Opposition Justice Critic can't even discuss the topic of lands, railway lines, communities, and the public good?)

* We would have no "standing" before the court for an injunction. (We, the previous owners of BCRail, would have no "standing"??)

* No mention was made of "by other means" which we believed a lawyer would know about. It was an embarrassing list of excuses for doing nothing, sent to us the day before it was possible to do anything.

Which maybe wouldn't be as bad, if our Opposition Justice Critic hadn't held a Vancouver press conference the next day ... the next day being the 5th anniversary which the citizens themselves had called "BCRail Day".

His press conference gave a public impression that he believed what we believed: that further outrageous benefits would roll out of the secret BCR-CN agreement and into the pockets of CN, without the people knowing.

But was he agreeing that the deal should be stopped? No. So why did he set up a press conference for July 14, 2009?

The purpose of that press conference was, I believe, to make it easy for Big Media in Vancouver to quote him as being "aware" of the 5th anniversary and its ramifications, to pretend that he was leading this rally ... and to reassure the Campbell Government that he certainly wasn't about to rock the boat. He was saying, in my view, "Gordo's Gang will lose the next election and I want to be premier. So trust me. This is my promise: if I'm premier of BC, nothing will change." Message received.

Go read the whole piece and better yet, go back to her posts leading up to the day of Krog's betrayal. It's bad enough that we have Gordo and his gangsters stealing everything in sight, but when those who are supposed to be on OUR side, appear to be accomplices, we are getting to the point where discourse and votes seem useless and other tools, like pitchforks at the least seem to be required.