The Other Side of the Mountain

And a mountain it is. Thousands upon thousands of pages of communications. Deals going South. Government employees charged with accepting bribes (but strangely, people offering the bribes not being charged [and that too is a crime under the Criminal Code of Canada]). A premier who tells us one thing and then does the exact opposite. That same premier saying that his government is not interfering in the biggest court case in the history of this province, when sworn affidavits apparently show us otherwise. Lackeys and former lackeys still defending the man when the evidence coming out shows otherwise. And a former (possibly still) insider who in my opinion thinks he is above the law. And appears not to care what he does because he has a different spin for everything. Apparently thinking he is covered in teflon.

And court dockets that don't always show the people what is going on that day in court. As well, court dates being changed without notice.

I was recently very disturbed over developements in the BC Rail Corruption Trial Hearings so I wrote an e-mail to some people and received a reply. This reply was so informative that I wrote back and asked for permission to publish it either in part or in full. That permission has been denied and nothing will be posted on that matter here. The reasons given for the denial is that there is a difference of opinion with the participants. Nuff said.

So instead I will post a very informative link that will give many people a view on Broadcasting in the Courts in British Columbia. BC Mary is not only passionate about the BC Rail trial, as are many of us, she also is pretty passionate about broadcasting this very important trial that has affected all of us in this province. You see like many of us who are interested we can't always be at the courthouse. This trial (#23299) is about the (in my opinion) give-away of our Publicly owned Railway. BCR. I say give-away because there doesn't seem to be a money trail here. A billion dollars and we see no cash changing hands. Mary will soon be writing on that angle as well.

The link refers to a BC Supreme Court opinion on broadcasting a different trial and applies only to that trial. It may have set a precedent, I'm not sure. I's a good read and you will be surprised at the participants.


Anonymous said...

"... so I wrote an e-mail to some people and received a reply. This reply was so informative that I wrote back and asked for permission to publish it either in part or in full. That permission has been denied and nothing will be posted on that matter here. The reasons given for the denial is that there is a difference of opinion with the participants."

What does that mean?? Why can't you publish a communication between yourself and someone else??
Difference of opinion seems like a bunch of weasel words or someone trying to cover their ass.

I thought that the purpose of this blog and others was to inform and expose the facts about this case, unlike what the MSM is doing!

It seems you would rather shamefully make allegations and mislead your readers with puff pieces that are based on fiction rather than fact.

Gary E said...

What this means anon 10:02 is that I made a mistake in my original e-mail to a new source. I did not reveal up front that I might use their response in my blog. Thus it was off the record. When I realized what I had been given and noticed my error I asked for that permission. It was denied for the reason given. I am now working on another angle, but was compelled to write this situation in my blog, in particular for others to see who know what the situation is in this case.

"Difference of opinion" may seem like weasel words to you and possibly others but that is the reason given and I accept it.

And you are correct in thinking that this blog and others are here to inform and expose the facts about this case. But as I have been told you can't do that in some cases and risk losing not only that source but may others.

This "puff piece" didn't have to be posted. It was done as a courtesy to others who read every blog here on The BC Rail Corruption Case, and may have a good clue to what is going on.

As it says in my masthead I am new to this and I'm going to make mistakes. In this case I did just that. But as BC Mary has told me, accept it and move on.

BC Mary said...

Frankly, Gary, I don't think you made an error at all.

Sure, we'd all like to hear exactly who you -- in your angelic innocence -- wrote to.

Man alive, I must admit I was drop-jawed with amazement when you told me who you had asked.

But I was even MORE surprised by the warm, friendly, informative reply you were given.

When you then, quite properly, requested permission to publish that reply, it created a whole different situation. Your correspondent needed authorization to give the go-ahead on publication and that didn't happen. All understandable.

So in my view, nobody made a mistake. You can't give what isn't yours to give.


kootcoot said...

However Gary AND Mary -

The whole kerfluffle about this apparently "privileged" communication between Gary and the mysterious "whomever" was mis-characterized by the first anon, who implied Gary was playing some game to seem important.

And you both may be right that the refusal to allow Gary to publish his so called "warm, friendly, informative reply," a characterization I will obviously have to accept on faith (which means it is B.S. to me - being a man of little to none faith), is understandable. I'll get around to calling B.S. in a second!

However if, as I assume, the other party to this "privileged" communication is ole Seldom Seen Bill Berardino in his capacity as Special Prosecutor REPRESENTING the people of British Columbia, and concerns THE PUBLIC'S supposed right to open transparent justice, especially involving possible THEFT of public assets - THEN IT IS UNACCEPTABLE. Especially since I also assume it is an explanation for yet another incident that appears to be MANIPULATION of the court process to protect some unnamed interests - NOT THE PUBLIC INTEREST!

So I will just assume that old Bill sluffed off some more cover his ass and his master Gordo's ass on Gary E. and proceed accordingly. But then it's not like that is any kind of a change in my perception of this ongoing travesty of an obstructed and manipulated excuse for something, posing as a judicial process.

kootcoot said...

"So in my view, nobody made a mistake. You can't give what isn't yours to give."

Well though I don't know for sure who Gary wrote to, I have my own guesses and if it is who I think it is, THAT person has made a mistake. The mistake being that that person isn't accountable to all the citizens of British Columbia. He is accountable to everyone, not just Gary. Do we each individually have to write to this individual?

Maybe the problem is that any information regarding this government, or our justice system can only be released through "official" channels such as Vaughn Palmer and Keith Baldry. It certainly was peculiar that when the CBC through its ability to actually come up with the RIGHT question forced the government to acknowledge the ongoing investigation of the still sitting Solicitor-General. Of course the government couldn't reward the CBC for their diligence, but had to seek out their buddies (or part time employees) at Global to make sure everything was spun as well as possible. It takes real spinning skills to explain why a person being investigated should be in charge of those investigating him for about one full year.

Gary E said...

Well Koot, it is your right to make assumptions. I make quite a few myself. But I will not confirm or deny whomever I sent the mail to. Even if it was the "Soup Nazi" himself.(your moniker for him)

The first anon in my opinion was trying to bait me to find out who it was. And I don't need to feel or seem important. As I have said elsewhere I don't give a rats ass what anyone thinks. I will give an opinion or publish thoughts or protect a source whether others like it or not. So he needent worry.

As far as the information being released "through official channels" such as Palmer or Baldry: that system makes it propaganda. And we know what that did in the thirties. Although sometimes the dissemination of news from this government (in my opinion) seems very close to the same thing.

As Mary has said over and over, we need citizen journalists and these blogs. If it were not for this type of communication i alledge that we would not have any news of this or any other major case in this province. And the MSM in my opinion is slowly waking up because of these Blogs.

I want to thank BC Mary here for her kind comment above and for her and Robin Mathews help in figuring out what I could do in this case.

And Koot i'm with you on "the public's right to open and transparent justice" You can't imagine how upset I was over this. The bride thought I was going to check out early.

Gary E said...

This subject has ended. No further comments are accepted on it. If you want ot spin my words or bait me, try another subject.

BC Mary said...

Ha! Good on ya, Gary.

But hey, don't stop writing. I've been winding up your visitors' count by dropping in to look for your latest thoughts.

For example, did you notice a comment over at my place about CN selling off rail-cars? I followed the links he provided but couldn't make much sense of CN's nation-wide offering to sell locomotives, etc etc. Maybe you could figure it out.


Gary E said...

I have been doing a lot of searching Mary, with both CN and CP. I am still trying to confirm a rumour that CN disposed of (wrecked) about 1500 cars from our BC Railway. Even though these units had barely $5000 worth of repairs to be done. I haven't seen the comment on your sight yet but will do that today.