Here is an interesting point of view from Charles' blog. I like Anonymous' succinct and direct way of stating the matter:
"Criminologist Michael Boudreau and Law Professor Jula Hughes gives their views on Blogger's case!!!"
2 Comments - Show Original Post
Anonymous said...
- Reasonably good interview but it still falls short of real issues - the City of Fredericton as the employer of the Fredericton City police farce is legally responsible for every Tort involving the police - i.e all legal actions and repercussions so why are these professors not telling us like it is? This is the Mayor's responsibility - he is in charge if this rogue and defective Chief of Police and his rotten officers. And David Alward - the law professors have confirmed you can just decide to do the right thing and have a public inquiry so ... are you going to do it? If you don't that tells us all you are just going to keep hiding the rot and corruption to hide the rotten Crown Prosecution Service, rotten police, rotten City council and rotten Justice Department. Do you have any balls or have they rolled off to the same place as Shawn Grahams? It's time for justice and time for change.
Anonymous said...
It would be great if Anonymous had the balls to put his name behind his words and let us know what information has to support his opinion.
It does look like the Province is working hard to create it's own commotion with the angry Frederictonians. What began as a magnanimous offer from Premier Alward is looking to get all wrapped up in red tape in the capable hands of Attorney General Blais in the hopes of whittling it down to nothing.
It does look like the Province is working hard to create it's own commotion with the angry Frederictonians. What began as a magnanimous offer from Premier Alward is looking to get all wrapped up in red tape in the capable hands of Attorney General Blais in the hopes of whittling it down to nothing.
Here is another silver-tongued orator commenting on Charles' blog:
Post a Comment On: Charles Leblanc's Other Blog
"Reader supports Blogger but......"
7 Comments
Anyone who votes for Woodside is an idiot. Look at his track record. He has spent tax payer money like a drunker sailor and raised our property taxes to pay for it.
Further he is responsible for the City buying the old North Star Sports Bar location and selling it at a substantial loss.
Just last week the city sold York House to ADI for $500,000 after paying $1 million.
This is despicable business practices of the City. Buying property with taxpayer money and then taking a wicked loss selling it to developers.
I hear him justifying it by saying that they will make the money back over time through property tax.
What about all of the years of lost revenue until the city reaches break even?
This is a scandal just like the PAC is a scandal. Developers on the PAC endorsing development at the expense of the environment.
There should be a criminal investigation of the process to see if there has been any shenanigans!
Luck the City conned the Province to buy the Convention Centre. It remains empty as there is a glut of rental office space in the downtown.
Lastly, developers are building condos like there is no tomorrow. There is a growing over-capacity of residential property and this is all going to crash.
A lot of it is being financed by the contractors using bank money. Someone is going to get burned and it will be us when the banks scream for money because mortgages are defaulted on.
BTW Charles is only endorsing Woodside because he made a bunch of YouTubes with him.
Again, it would give Anyone but Woodside's opinion more force if he had the courage to put his name to it.
And more tough talk from Anonymous... Ouch! This is the fear that dare not speak its name:
Post a Comment On: Charles Leblanc's Other Blog
"Fredericton Mayoral Candidate Matthew Hayes is confronted by the Blogger on the final days!!!"
1 Comment - Show Original Post
1 – 1 of 1
Anonymous said...Well said Matthew. This smacks of rushing through a deal that is not in the interests of the public - more about cutting some business buddy a lucrative deal and the public purse covers the pre-ordained losses. So, did the City Council also do a favour to the owners when they bought the building by paying an over-inflated price for this property? How many people might be getting financial perks or backhanders in this deal? Why are such issues in a closed council meeting when it is our money they are playing with? Outrageous - Matthew, if you don't win it's 'cos it was rigged but Brad is obviously rushing this deal through in case he is ousted as mayor.
