Wednesday, February 18, 2009

War of words

The fighting in the letters to the editor section is underway. Kathy Corrigan weighs in today on the proposed Willingdon prison. Corrigan highlights the negative aspects of the government plan to put the facility near several schools. To Corrigan's credit, this issue seems to be rallying the community against government decision makers

This issue may cause John Nuraney some trouble in his re-election bid but alone, it is only a small bump on the road to returning the Liberals to government in May.

29 Comments:

Anonymous Anonymous said...

Pothole. Not bump.

If John hits that pothole too fast, he'll ruin the right front wheel and go off the road.

There's going to be quite a backlash against the placement of this facility. It's needed, but not in the middle of a dense area.

The Big Bend area near Marine Way would be better suited.

2/18/2009 8:02 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am sorry, but John Nuraney is NOT going to win this argument. If John decides to start polling his constituents, I say he will find less than 1% of the people who would "support" his unquestionable backing of the government's decision. This is not a partisan issue and trying to politicize this issue will only grant Kathy Corrigan the legitimacy she seeks. I question John Nuraney's response and with him voting for a budget deficit, his days may be numbered. I never thought Kathy Corrigan would have a chance of getting elected until this week and John is becoming more vulnerable by the days.

2/18/2009 10:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am sorry, but John Nuraney is NOT going to win this argument.

He won't.


If John decides to start polling his constituents, I say he will find less than 1% of the people who would "support" his unquestionable backing of the government's decision.

The BC Liberals are most likely polling now, so nothing new there.

John would back the government's decision, just as Harry Bloy and Richard Lee will too. Nothing new there.



This is not a partisan issue and trying to politicize this issue will only grant Kathy Corrigan the legitimacy she seeks.

She's getting it anyway. John is deteroiating in his.



I question John Nuraney's response and with him voting for a budget deficit, his days may be numbered.

Harry and Richard voted for it too.
They also support the convenient change in legislation to make deficit based budgets legal and not contrary to the legislation they both originally supported and voted for.



I never thought Kathy Corrigan would have a chance of getting elected until this week and John is becoming more vulnerable by the days.

News for you bud. That more vulnerable began the week after John was elected in 2005.

It's been a downhill slide like a
bobsled at Whistler ever since.

2/18/2009 10:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Burnaby is the historic home to one of the most notorious prisons in the province. Oakalla was a mere 10 blocks from what is now the heart of Metrotown.

And what is going on at the old Women's Prison site in the Big Bend, anyhow????

Prisons = schools for criminals.

2/19/2009 10:40 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Burnaby WAS home to one of the most notorious prisons in the province. It was closed and demolished in the late 1980s.


Prisons = do the crime, do the time.

2/19/2009 10:42 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

prisons = the justice system has already failed.

2/19/2009 6:09 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

BC Liberals = the justice system has failed.

2/19/2009 6:46 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

What about this

BCNDP = soft on crimes.

I am sorry, obviously this issue is politicized.

John Nuraney's hesitation to stand with his constituents will be his undoing. No offense, but our first lady and her husband are obviously better at playing politics than John, since we all know John will never vote against the government who practically built a school for him last year, but no more goodies this year.

But it is only February and voters are not stupid and we can all see the political capitals Kathy can gain out of this, representing "her constituents" and everything.

John Nuraney should know long ago that who he is up against. John Nuraney's has made his unquestionable support for the facility known, the question is if he can pull the spotlight back to the main issue, because if he cannot, he will soon be outplayed.

2/19/2009 7:06 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

BCNDP = soft on crimes.

BC LIBERALS = does little on crimes.

I am sorry, obviously this issue is politicized.

All issues are politicized.

John Nuraney's hesitation to stand with his constituents will be his undoing.

Nothing new there. But also factor in that Harry hasn't come out being opposition to the new Remand Centre and neither has Richard.


No offense, but our first lady and her husband are obviously better at playing politics than John, since we all know John will never vote against the government who practically built a school for him last year, but no more goodies this year.

First, there is no "Fist Lady" in the context of Canadian politics. That's a U.S. label.

John and Harry and Richard would never vote against the government.

But Caledino, and the other NDPers never voted against the Fastcats when they were an NDP project either.


But it is only February and voters are not stupid and we can all see the political capitals Kathy can gain out of this, representing "her constituents" and everything.

They don't become her 'constituents' until she becomes elected, Sunshine. Right now they are her 'supporters'.

And not all of John's constituents will vote for him.


John Nuraney should know long ago that who he is up against. John Nuraney's has made his unquestionable support for the facility known, the question is if he can pull the spotlight back to the main issue, because if he cannot, he will soon be outplayed.

If there's talk like this continually coming out, it wouldn't be surprising if he is defeated.

2/19/2009 7:53 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I wonder what the NDP's position is on this at the Carol James level. Where would she locate the prison.

If the Libs had any brains they would try to flush this out. I for one would like to see it in the middle of nowhere in the interior but I am sure Carol James would be against that.

2/21/2009 12:04 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

If the Liberals had any brains, they would have converted the former Women's facility in the Big Bend to handle the Remand Centre.

The BC Liberals goofed this up big time.

It doesn't make sense to place a Lwr Mainland Remand Centre in the Interior. Port Coquitlam has one.

2/21/2009 5:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My understanding is that in the House the Libs have been calling on dear Carol to state her position on the remand centre and she has essentially been avoiding answering the question - doesn't seem too convincing to me.

On another note, if Burnaby Council and the Mayor are so opposed to there ever being a new facility on the Willingdon Detention Centre site, by which I mean a facility of similar use as Willingdon (ie - some kind of prison), why weren't they proactive enough to rezone this property to a different zoning. It strikes me that one of the chief reasons the Province has been able to make use of this site is because it was already zoned for this purpose. If this is so incompatible with the surrounding areas, people should be taking issue with the City for their failure protect their interests.

2/25/2009 11:19 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

They close the Burnaby courthouse, and then open a new Burnaby jail. ... There's a not-so subtle message in there, children!

2/26/2009 11:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

My understanding is that in the House the Libs have been calling on dear Carol to state her position on the remand centre and she has essentially been avoiding answering the question - doesn't seem too convincing to me.

That doesn't matter. What the statement is essentially "What is your position on the location of this remand centre?" She doesn't need to give one. It's not her
riding, it is John Nurnaney's. The BC Liberals messed this up, as they could have located it to the former Women's facility, and obviously they haven't. Burnaby would not be opposed to it being placed there as the Women's facility is in the Big Bend area and is accessible for paddywagons from Marine Way.

On another note, if Burnaby Council and the Mayor are so opposed to there ever being a new facility on the Willingdon Detention Centre site, by which I mean a facility of similar use as Willingdon (ie - some kind of prison), why weren't they proactive enough to rezone this property to a different zoning.

Probably because then as is now, it is a waste of City time and resources since the provincial government has the power to over-ride any civic zoning. The Willingdon Detention Facility isn't former, it is still there.

The only thing Burnaby Council can do is rezone to make a statement, and that is just playing games with taxpayer money.

Face reality. The BC Liberals messed up. They didn't pay attention to the details.

and having Greg Moore say his piece doesn't help since Moore is a former BC Liberal candidate and was a Regional Organizer for that party, not for anywhere in the Lwr. Mainland, but for the Kootenay region of all places. The guy obvously needed a job, and got one.

It strikes me that one of the chief reasons the Province has been able to make use of this site is because it was already zoned for this purpose.

It is zoned as Institutional as is the area surrounding the former Women's Detention Centre in the Big Bend. and as is BCIT, Discovery Parks, SFU, etc.


If this is so incompatible with the surrounding areas, people should be taking issue with the City for their failure protect their interests.

Wrong, it should be for the people to tell the BC Liberals to stuff it and move the damb thing to where it should be in the Big Bend area. There's already a remand level facility there not being used, and it would cost less to upgrade that than to build a new facility.

Plus the fact as someone mentioned the BC Liberals were smart to close the Burnaby Provincial Courts and then decide later to set a new jail.

Pure geniuses the BC Liberals are.

2/26/2009 7:37 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

http://www.straight.com/article-203115/ndps-james-warms-port-mann-crossing

2/27/2009 11:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

No, au contraire my friend - clearly it is you who are the genius. Let us give credit where credit is due.

Firstly as for the FORMER youth detention facility, this is how it has been described by others, not just me, and with good reason.

(Lena Sin, The Province
Published: Friday, February 15, 2008
"B.C.'s seriously mentally ill and addicted chronic offenders will be treated at a new, secure centre in Burnaby starting this summer.

The FORMER (emphasis added) Willingdon Youth Detention Centre will be retrofitted with 100 beds by the end of the year, said Health Minister George Abbott.")


Just b/c a building still exists, doesn't make it constitute what it once was. If I closed down your local Timmy's, took away the signs, the people, the tables and chairs, and your yummy Boston Cremes, and turned it into a Mickey-D's, would you still call it a Timmy's? I guess your such a genius that you would. Some lesser humans would call it a 'former' Timmy's, but I guess they're just stupid...

On that note, you're actually quite amusing - since you clearly refer to the women's prison as "former" in your very own comments. Duh... there's "still a building" there as well. But that's different, because, um, uh...

Can you spell

c-o-n-s-i-s-t-e-n-c-y...?

Do you have any idea how much analysis goes into the site and building selection when it comes to things like remand centres? If you do, can you please state your credentials in order to validate your an expert who qualified to make the suggestion of locating it at the FORMER women's prison.

Do you honestly think the Libs, as cost-conscious as they are (sometimes to a fault), would deliberately choose this location if it didn't make eminent economic and logistical sense. What's there over-riding (a word you like to use) motive then?

I grant you that they evidently need to explain themselves better, but let's not pretend to know anything about site selection expertise for which we are not remotely qualified (unless indeed you are, in which case please verify to us mere mortals).

With regard to the ability to "over-ride" zoning, please explain further and cite the applicable statute or other law.

I do agree with you that Carol James doesn't "need" to do anything. She probably doesn't even "need" to show up at the House if she doesn't feel like it. She can hide in the Parliamentary can while the house is in session, if that's what she wants. Since when is leadership about what you "need" to do? What about doing what you "should" do, if you've got any guts and can actually show some leadership? Her silence on this speaks volumes. All I said was that it's 'not very convincing' when a leader doesn't speak out on an issue getting this kind of attention. I didn't say she needs to do anything. Whether or not the leader needs to is totally immaterial - it's simple chicken_ _ _ _ stuff.

She doesn't want to wade into the argument because she knows that if argued on the actual substance of locational decision-making (i.e. where the remand centre should be located, taking account of all legitimate criteria, apart from b.s. political concerns) she'll lose the argument. Why else wouldn't she get mileage out of something like this.


Look at Vaughn Palmer's column today and enlighten yourself a little. This is pure politics. The remand decision has been out there since August 08, and today's righteous indignation and outrage has been deferred, and timed for the election.

It's the City's job to zone land appropriately. Some would go so far as to even say it's their duty. If this location truly is a problem, and the citizens are at risk, then the City has been derelict in its duty. The Province is no different from you or I - it has a right to build whatever is permitted within the zone, subject to applicable bylaws.

And by the way, since you're so concerned about wasting cost and resources, calculate for me the additional marginal cost that would be incurred to spot rezone this site. Let me help you - it would be nominal if anything. The City already has the resources in place; those costs are sunk. Are you trying to tell me with a straight face that somethjing that is supposedly this crucial is not worth the City's time and resources...suddenly it doesn't sound that important anymore.

And to rezone would not just be a "statement" - it significantly ups-the-ante and shows the City doing its job, whatever is in its power to do, which in it view serves the interests of its citizens.

And again, please cite the Provincial "over-ride" of Civic zoning, since you put it out there as an authority.

Interestingly by the way, this morning I heard the City was indeed initiating a rezoning process in an effort to stop this. I have yet to confirm this is correct information, but if true, Mayor and Council sure are stupid money-wasters, according to you at least.

Also as such an authority, please let us know your qualification to make the comment that the FORMER (your words) women's prison is already a "remand level facility" (what does that mean) and that it would "cost less to upgrade than to build a new facility". And explain this using life cycle costing please, if you know what that is, as well as accounting for the ongoing operating cost to the system.

Can you also give me the poll results indicating that the majority of the 'people' want to 'move the damb thing', as you put it.

In fairness, I grant you that if the Libs didn't see this political posturing coming, they were pretty naiive. But let's face it, that's all this 'delayed reaction' really is. You're right, if this one ends up biting the Libs where it it hurts, they sure weren't geniuses. And you're in a good position to judge that.

But sometimes what's right has to take precedence over what's expedient.

Going back to the heart of the matter though, this location has been used for prison type purposes for years. Are people honestly worried about escapees? If you had just escaped from custody, would you remain in the same 'hood to hang around, or would you get the heck out of there...?

There's an article in the last day or two stating that the crime stats surrounding the similar Poco facility haven't changed materially since it was constructed. I haven't analyzed these but it bears mention.

Don't people talk about facts any more? That's how this matter should be debated. I'm not entirely convinced on this issue either, but I certainly don't want my intelligence insulted by politicians or activists in disguise, suggesting they supposedly represent the majority. People aren't that dumb anymore.

Those are my two cents - thanks for listening.

2/27/2009 11:24 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Further to the above, additional articles refer to the "old Willingdon Youth Detention Centre". Also, can anyone find this article:

"Rezone prison land?

Burnaby city hall will try to rezone the site of the proposed provincial remand centre to exclude prisons as a permitted use. (Feb 18 2009)"

2/27/2009 11:34 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Here it is: (they also fail to cite where the power to "overrule" comes from) can someone please provide the law?

Feb 18 -

"Burnaby city hall will try to rezone the site of the proposed provincial remand centre to exclude prisons as a permitted use.

Council asked staff to look into the city’s options and to start the rezoning process for the property at the southwest corner of Willingdon Avenue and Canada Way. Coun. Sav Dhaliwal said the community might like to see something different on the property.

The province has the power to overrule council’s decision. "

2/27/2009 11:37 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Don't people talk about facts any more? That's how this matter should be debated. I'm not entirely convinced on this issue either, but I certainly don't want my intelligence insulted by politicians or activists in disguise, suggesting they supposedly represent the majority. People aren't that dumb anymore."

Facts, why, you dont mean you are gonna do what the gov did, shoving facts down our throat. Some handful, such as Nuraney's staff or the prison management company, hold views like yours, most however are opposed to that central location. I have never voted with the mayor's party and the mayor is right, the province should have built the prison downtown where the courts are.

If BCLIB decides to override, they can proceed to write John Nuraney off for the next decade, or probably indefinitely. Trying to play this game by standing next to Gordon Campbell against Kathy Corrigan is digging John's own grave, I say play along with the mayor and trust to shut Kathy off as another NDP activist.

2/27/2009 1:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Shoving facts down our throat" ?!?

Funny thing is that I, and most reasonable folks, (evidently unlike some others on this blog), actually like facts - I seek them out and swallow them raw and whole.

Others instead prefer all kinds of artificial seasonings and strange preservatives - I guess you're just an "MSG" kind of guy/gal...

Like that comment about a "Prison Management Company" - say what? Do tell, who is the Prison Management Company?

And only a handful of Nuraney's staff, eh? Who's sounding arrogant now - presuming to speak on behalf of the entire City populus?

First it's "build it out in Big Bend", now its "build it downtown".

I guess as long as it's nowhere near you, it's ok. Who cares about other people that live downtown, right. I guess they must love prisons, according to you.

Who cares about sophisticated site selection criteria and operations life cycle accounting, for a project of this magnitude, and how it will consume our tax dollars. I guess you're not on that list.

But I suppose you're right - yes, good idea, why not put it downtown - I'm sure the land is very inexpensive over there and the Province owns many hectares of developable property adjacent to the courthouse, as it does in the Willingdon complex.

This is the kind of nonsense I'm talking about. Utter rubbish from people who don't care about facts.

Nevertheless, there are many of you out there, so you might just be right about poor John Nuraney.

Nobody said politics was about truth.

By the way, our beloved courthouse also housed criminals, and apparently the greatest danger of escape is in transporting them to and from their court dates.

Why are some of you prison-haters shedding tears for the courthouse then? There are schools and homes right nearby the old courthouse as well.

Not to mention City Hall, where some would say the criminals would blend right in...

Back to your first point - "facts be damned" - I don't think most people consider the pursuit of accurate information to be shoving something down their throats...

2/27/2009 2:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am not certain how much commission you or John Nuraney gets from the Prison Management per head, but I can tell you this, John on his own will continue to be out-polled by his constituents on this issue.

Let us not forget that even himself has now decided to support a new location, not that it matters or anything.

I would certainly change my attitude of taking the bus or dropping off the kids when I realize the criminals who may possess weapons are sleeping within 200 steps from the bus stop. Where is the best place to locate the prison, certainly there are better places other than the existing one and I certainly welcome BCLIB to give this riding to Kathy Corrigan for free if they decide to proceed over the wishes of the constituents since Gordon already wrote Burnaby off anyways.

John Nuraney make his plea fast though, if he cant change his emperor's mind, he is toast.

2/27/2009 2:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I am not certain how much commission you or John Nuraney gets from the Prison Management per head, but I can tell you this, John on his own will continue to be out-polled by his constituents on this issue.

Let us not forget that even himself has now decided to support a new location, not that it matters or anything.

I would certainly change my attitude of taking the bus or dropping off the kids when I realize the criminals who may possess weapons are sleeping within 200 steps from the bus stop. Where is the best place to locate the prison, certainly there are better places other than the existing one and I certainly welcome BCLIB to give this riding to Kathy Corrigan for free if they decide to proceed over the wishes of the constituents since Gordon already wrote Burnaby off anyways.

John Nuraney better make his plea fast though, if he cant change his emperor's mind, he is toast.

2/27/2009 2:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Well said !

When you lack the knowledge or intelligence to discuss fact and engage in legitimate debate - what do you do? The following is your approach:

1) Attack personally: accusing me (and MLA Nuraney) of receiving commission payments... (if this was meant to be a joke, it's not funny)

2) Continue to perpetuate myths and untruths (who the heck is the Prison 'Management Company' - and where can we buy their stock since crime seems to be a growth business these days). I figured unions ran prisons (in addition to the prisons in which some of them hold their membership)

3) Refuse to take a stand and provide an alternative solution: before it was Big Bend, then Downtown, and now it's "Certainly there are better places than the existing one" (...I just don't know what they are - but so long as they're not in my backyard, I don't care)

4) Fear Monger: criminals with weapons just 200 steps from your favorite bus stop or school? At least prisons are places that are routinely checked for weapons, and where criminals are monitored. How many people within a 200 step radius of your home do you know? There might be grow-ups and gang members in your own neighbourhood and you wouldn't even know about it.

Nearly every time a raid on a meth lab or grow op is announced, or a shooting happens in a residential neighbourhood, the residents say they had no clue what was going on right under their nose...

2/27/2009 3:42 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

On that note, you're actually quite amusing - since you clearly refer to the women's prison as "former" in your very own comments. Duh... there's "still a building" there as well. But that's different, because, um, uh...

Can you spell

c-o-n-s-i-s-t-e-n-c-y...?

Well genius, "former" was in the context of usage, not the physical plant which still exists.

Try to learn to read a bit more and try to graduate from Grade 3 English if you can.

2/27/2009 5:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

To the guy that had that long winded tirade ending in "that's my two cents, thanks for listening"

Geezus does he have alot to learn.

First there was no "prison" per se at any time at that location. There was a Detention Centre, but it was never a prison. it can be best stated as a low level secured facility, since it only housed high school age brats who figured they would test to see how tough they are by bothering the citizens with their dumbass antics. The only prison that existed was Oakalla. It closed in the late 1980's John Nuraney's residence rests on the former farmland surrounding the administration and medical building that was there.

Second, the government can through expropiation of property place an institution where it wishes, thus overriding civic zoning. Even Corrigan himself admits the rezoning effort won't result in his desired outcome. It's all politics on his part.

Thirdly, there is alot of politics in this, but it is largely due to the fact that a few politicos in Victoria didn't do their homework. Was there community input sessions? Was this ever brought forward to the public beforehand, if so when?

As far as accounting goes, there isn't much in institutions that can be compared to establishing a commerical building. Government facilities are there to provide service to the public, not profit.

Foruth John didn't see the implications of this and has now within the past few days decided he wants it moved. Why didn't he advocate it being at the former Women's facility in the Big Bend at the beginning. The building complex(despite some idiot in here stating that somehow I believe the the building doesn't exist) is still there, unused and wouldn't need much upgrading.

If comments like the "two center" and others are the quality of people who are in the BC Liberals hoping to get John re-elected, he is in big trouble.

And for two center - don't try to go after a political appointment. Your research is abysmal to say the least.

Quite a few people here have a lot to learn about politics, and the NDP if they complete their goal of being strong once again, they are almost there, will certainly provide the environment for learning.

The arrogance of the BC Liberal supporters in here is certainly reflective of that party and government.

2/27/2009 8:49 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I still smell toast!

3/03/2009 12:11 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Why not?

The taxpayers are getting burnt by John's antics.

3/03/2009 5:33 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

After being away on vacation, Here's my reply to the NDP hack with the below comments:


To the guy that had that long winded tirade ending in "that's my two cents, thanks for listening"

Geezus does he have alot to learn.

-If the "knowledge" is coming from you, I doubt there's much to learn beyond your politically skewed views...

First there was no "prison" per se at any time at that location. There was a Detention Centre, but it was never a prison. it can be best stated as a low level secured facility, since it only housed high school age brats who figured they would test to see how tough they are by bothering the citizens with their dumbass antics. The only prison that existed was Oakalla. It closed in the late 1980's John Nuraney's residence rests on the former farmland surrounding the administration and medical building that was there.

-Incredible insight, Sherlock! You are truly a gift to this board ! Anyway, agreed; my use of the term "prison" was intended to be loose at best; a remand facility is not truly a "prison" in the Oakalla sense you describe either.

Second, the government can through expropiation of property place an institution where it wishes, thus overriding civic zoning. Even Corrigan himself admits the rezoning effort won't result in his desired outcome. It's all politics on his part.

-All I asked for is a reference to the legal authority, statute, etc. for this. Is that too much to ask from those who appear so knowledgeable about it. Evidently you don't know the authority either so we'll continue to share our ignorance. If someone can refer both Sherlock and I to the authority, please do.


Thirdly, there is alot of politics in this, but it is largely due to the fact that a few politicos in Victoria didn't do their homework. Was there community input sessions? Was this ever brought forward to the public beforehand, if so when?

-I agree with Sherlock on this point. I suppose the come back is, did the City do enough to demonstrate it's concern before now, such that some of these consultative steps might otherwise have been taken, for the benefit of Burnaby's residents. In any event, I concur with Sherlock's point that it was extremely poor strategy by the Libs. In contrast, I would point out the smart political timing & strategy on the part of Sherlock's friends of the left. But make no mistake that this is politics.


As far as accounting goes, there isn't much in institutions that can be compared to establishing a commerical building. Government facilities are there to provide service to the public, not profit.

-Really? Accounting's not important in public buildings or projects, compared to private endeavours? Anyone else here who's glad Sherlock isn't running anything to do with our tax dollars (hopefully). He's contending that once you remove the profit motive you can remove the accountability...

-Sherlock, I'm afraid you've just demoted yourself to "Watson"...

Foruth John didn't see the implications of this and has now within the past few days decided he wants it moved. Why didn't he advocate it being at the former Women's facility in the Big Bend at the beginning. The building complex(despite some idiot in here stating that somehow I believe the the building doesn't exist) is still there, unused and wouldn't need much upgrading.

-I agree with Watson in terms of the Nuraney inconsistencies. Read Watson's earlier posting (his own long-winded tirade which required an equally lengthy and breath-consuming retort) and you will find he is himself an expert in inconsistency. Apparently, he also happens an expert in prison facilities, folks. Slap up some fresh paint and new curtains and re-use the old women's prison? After a site selection process that chose Willingdon from over 50 other sites? Remember, this is coming from the guy that thinks accounting is unecessary in these circumstances... Hmm...

If comments like the "two center" and others are the quality of people who are in the BC Liberals hoping to get John re-elected, he is in big trouble.

-Who said I was a BC Liberal? I just don't like political hacks pretending to be talking facts when it's just propaganda is all. I don't like it any more from the Libs than from the NDP or anyone else... You're a perfect example of those who like to treat the average Joe like an ignoramus in order to get his vote.

And for two center - don't try to go after a political appointment. Your research is abysmal to say the least.

-Uh, who said I want a politial appointment? And I don't recall claiming to have done any huge amount of research.

Quite a few people here have a lot to learn about politics, and the NDP if they complete their goal of being strong once again, they are almost there, will certainly provide the environment for learning.

-It's starting to sound like you're the political zealot on this board. You must be just salivating at the prospect of this goal being achieved! Maybe it's you who are awaiting an appointment.

-I'm not sure the majority of the Province will agree with your NDP agenda, but I grant you that it will be a close race for sure.

The arrogance of the BC Liberal supporters in here is certainly reflective of that party and government.

-May I humbly suggest to you, that it is political hacks, ignorant of facts and either too lazy or too dumb to provide them to the board, who are arrogant.

-Don't treat us all like fools Watson. It is you who are arrogant. Average people, with the benefit of all the facts and information at their disposal, are capable of forming their own valid opinions and positions. We don't need the "Watsons" of the world to hit the smokescreen button of politics and propaganda posing as truth...


-Rather elementary, my dear Watson...

3/16/2009 1:44 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

the two-cent guy makes a good point. i never hear any facts regarding the remand centre. i only hear stuff like men will escape and risk the safety of the elementary school children- that's so unrealistic and offensively underestimates my intelligence.

the citizens deserve to hear from experts and an opportunity to get independent objective information on the location of the prison and the politicians, of all stripes, should stay home.

3/23/2009 11:27 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home