|LOOTER PARTY||HOME||MANNING CONFERENCE INFORMATION||QUEEN, GG, PM EMAILS||CORRUPT AREAS||CHRC||RELEASES||CONTACT EMAIL|
Actions that are taking votes, support and contributions:
1. Rigged government contracts. Besides the Sponsorship Scandal, with the Liberal Party there were many news stories about other rigged contracts including advertising, engineering, legal, consulting, computer, lands, registry, Justice Department, RCMP and Canada Post, and other unknown contracts worth hundreds of millions of dollars. This is corruption and funnelling government money to pals and buys support and votes from the beneficiaries.
2. Rigged government jobs. Again many news stories including jobs in the civil service (many with salaries of hundreds of thousands a year, plus benefits) and Canada Post (with a $2 Million expense account and no receipts), and judgeships for Liberal Party pals and political hacks.
3. Parachuting political aides into civil service jobs. This is giving government jobs to political party hacks and flunkeys. This is inexcusable, the civil service is not to be used and looted by political party cronies.
The article Political aides first to get jobs, Convenient way for Martin to offload Chretien staff: Opposition, CanWest News Service, April 12, 2004, mentions ninety political aides being given senior public service jobs in 2003-04. Also, the article "Liberals in Violation of Conflict Rules", National Post, April 16, 2004, page A8, mentions there were more than 3,600 positions on boards and commissions held by Liberal faithful.
4. Using government jobs to buy votes and support from ethnic and feminist special interest groups with race and gender preferences. Many games here, including lowered and separate standards and outright preferences. My information is this is across the government and the RCMP and military. Also see information in the CHRC webpage link on the home page. This brings up election rigging and bribery, giving and promising government jobs for votes and contributions.
This is also Trudeaus gender and race quotas. These quotas are to apply across the government as his Real Change document heading GOVERNMENT APPOINTMENTS THAT LOOK LIKE CANADA points out.
By the way, the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) has to also be smartened up, they are either incompetent or trying to push their preferential agenda (i.e. steal jobs from people). Any one who does some research finds out that hiring is to based on merit, the best regardless of race or gender (unless a bona-fide occupational requirement (i.e. military, locker rooms, etc.)) and no reverse discrimination, no quotas, no preferences and no balancing. The Commissions own documents make these points. I have copies of some documents.
They say hiring should be on merit and then ignore it. I used to think they did not understand merit, but since I have had reverse discrimination complaints blocked and ignored by the CHRC, including complaints against them for CHR Act Section 12 (Inciting) violations and a denial of service (blocking reverse discrimination complaints), I am convinced they are just trying to promote their agenda. And if they are going to displace and bar people from jobs they should compensate them.
And, those who push preferences should be prosecuted, there are criminal code provisions to stop such actions (Sections 121, 122 and 125).
5. Funnelling government money to liberal advocacy groups, like the family hating feminists.
6. Look into politicians family businesses being given large amounts of government money (like the reported $70 Million to Paul Martins family business). And the reported Slush Fund, the article "Probing Chretien's secret slush fund", by Greg Weston, Edmonton Sun, March 25, 2004, said Jean Chretien personally controlled a secret slush fund from which he doled out about $500 Million dollars. Who knows how much went to friends and to buy votes and funnel money to the Liberal Party. Public monies are to be openly reported. There have also been reports of other slush funds. There are also questions with government money with government Foundations being hidden.
7. Stacking the courts with activist judges to surreptitiously push an agenda. Honourable people appoint honest judges. Sleazy politicians conspire to use activist judges to make up law. This is rigging a court case and exceeding their legal authority. Judges work for the people, not a political party and not for the liberal advocacy groups.
8. Using the civil service and courts to protect the political corruption and to promote corrupt actions. Judges and civil servants are supposed to be the checks on politicians. It is the modus operandi of corrupt politicians to put their friends on the courts and in the civil service, friends who will protect their corruption. And corrupt politicians try to use the courts to hide behind while they steal, and to legitimize their corruption. Judges, etc. that have blocked corruption complaints and who have rigged cases should be removed. This is just getting rid of political operatives.
REMINDER OF WHAT WAS DONE, EXCERPTS FROM ARTICLES
From the Gomery Report:
A complex web of financial transactions among Public Works and Government Services Canada, Crown Corporations and communication agencies, involving kickbacks and illegal contributions to a political party in the context of the Sponsorship Program.
The article February 11, 2004, "Web of deceit", Stephanie Rubec, Sun Ottawa Bureau, Edmonton Sun, Fraser said the Liberal government also bucked the rules and selected Liberal-friendly firms when dishing out $793 million in advertising contracts since 1998. The audit found that all other ad agencies were frozen out of federal contracts from all departments. And in some cases, Public Works reneged on contracts already awarded by departments, redirecting them to a favourite firm.
The article "Federal grants went to Grit backers: ad exec", by Stephanie Rubec, Ottawa Bureau, in the Edmonton Sun, May 14, 2002, said "The head of an Ottawa ad agency says he was told by federal officials that only generous party donors get lucrative federal advertising and sponsorship contracts. Robert Hocking, former owner of Acme Advertising, told Sun Media that public servants made clear that large government contracts go to agencies that donate generously to the party in power. ... Hocking said since Jean Chretien's Liberals took power in 1993, he's been fighting mounting pressure to donate to the Grits and create ads for their election campaign for free."
The article July 30, 2004, Ouellet involved in abuses, audits find, by Cambell Clark, Globe and Mail which said Ottawa - Suspended Canada Post president André Ouellet pushed marketing and other contracts toward firms friendly to the Liberal government, skirted hiring practices to get jobs for favourites and ran up expenses that averaged $250,000 a year, two audits released yesterday found. ... The audit found several instances where untendered contracts were issued and Mr. Ouellet told the auditors that the "shareholder," the Liberal government, ordered who would be the winner. ... In addition, a number of people referred by Mr. Ouellet were employed as "special hires" without going through Canada Post's normally rigorous hiring process. ... In most cases where ad firms were hired to handle the sponsorships - Liberal-friendly firms Lafleur Marketing \Communications and Groupe Everest - the invoices did not contain details on commissions paid. For advertising campaigns from 1994 to 2003, Canada Post issued untendered contracts ranging from $12-million to $25-million a year to Montreal ad firm BCP, which has Liberal ties. "The President [Mr. Ouellet] indicated during an interview that the granting of the contract to BCP was directed by the shareholder," the audit notes. ... In 2000, Canada Post decided to have a competition for that work - but two of the three evaluators told the auditors they were directed from "inside" Canada Post to "ensure that specific firms were successful."
The Liberals and their pals have been lining their pockets with huge amounts of money, hundreds and hundreds of millions of dollars.
The Federal Court has said hiring is to be based on merit, this is in the Commission's own documentation (A.G. of Canada v. Greaves). The article PS Commission uncovers 'worst' staffing abuses ever, Kathryn May, the Ottawa Citizen, Tuesday, September 30, 2003, discussing the Auditor-General of Canada audit of the Privacy Commission and the Public Service Commission says "All government hiring, promotions and recruitment are supposed to be based on "merit," which means the best qualified person gets the job."
With government contracts, I have a document from the Department of Justice, PWGSC (Public Works) Legal Services, December 15, 1997, that says "ensure equal access to procurement for all Canadian suppliers". Not rigged contracts, should be tenders.
THE REAL STORY WITH RACE & GENDER PREFERENCES
That there are politicians that will use some guy's job to get votes and support is inexcusable.
Anyone that can think like a sleazy politician realizes that race and gender preferences are really just politicians using government jobs to be a hero to feminist and ethnic special interest groups for votes and contributions. There are Bribery, election rigging and criminal code sections to stop such.
These people should be displaced and their assets taken to compensate their victims (loss of opportunity).
The CHRC webpage also shows what is really going on now.
The title of the following article says it all, some politician promising government jobs for votes.
An article Copps woos minorities, promises more federal jobs, Canadian Press, May 31, 2003, said VANCOUVER -- Liberal leadership hopeful Sheila Copps is promising to double the number of visible minorities in federal service if she is elected prime minister. ... In the text of a speech to be delivered last night to a meeting of ethnic groups in Vancouver, Ms. Copps urges people in the audience who like the sound of that to join the Liberal Party and vote for her.
http://www.globeandmail.com/servlet/ArticleNews/TPStory/LAC/20030531/UCOPPQQ//?query=Copps (no longer at link)
Shiela Copps also wrote an article,
Politics of gender always risky business, December 13, 2006, that said: Dion's surprise victory was due, in part, to his promise to boost the participation of women in Liberal party backrooms and front rooms. That commitment brought crucial support of the only woman in the race, Martha Hall Findlay. And, More than a decade ago, then Opposition leader Jean Chretien announced one in four Liberal candidates would be women. Chretien's decision was partly the result of a written analysis I had provided on how to deal with the potential for two women leaders in the other major parties. To counter their impact, he adopted a quota and secured the power of nomination appointment to support equality.
http://torontosun.com/News/Columnists/Copps_Sheila/2006/12/13/2770448-sun.html (no longer at this link)
This is using quotas for political support.
Also Chretien, in his book JEAN CHRETIEN My Years as Prime Minister, on pages 249 - 250, talks of preferences for women and minorities and pressuring staff for preferences.
Just like with Harper and women on boards, this comes from the U.S. feminist groups and is just some women (not all) trying to get special treatment for themselves and displace men and replace them with women, and discriminate against men. Politicians that want to give away some guy's job should give up their job so we can see how they like what they profess being done to them. Too complicated a thought for these politicians. Also, I do not want politicians who are in-the-pocket of the butt in line people, or are too dumb to see through what special interest groups are really trying to do (special treatment for themselves), or any pansies that special interest groups manipulate. Let's displace them. Or politicians trying to be a hero to women because they are dorks and want female attention, or worse yet think they might get a vote from those trying to get special treatment for themselves. This also sends the message that any moron can displace men and discriminate against men.
These politicians should read section 119 of the criminal code.
I also point out that many of these people do not think of consequences, they just get some idea in their head and charge ahead. If someone is too dumb to think of the consequences of their actions that is their problem.
Work hard and have some two-bit politician use your job as a political pawn and to be a hero to those trying to get special treatment and steal for themselves. Sucker.
To go to the Looter Party home page click here.