if you go to www.unb.ca/chsr you'll come to a screen with a pac
man like creature, click on it and you'll enter the site. Once you've entered the site click the link on the right side that says "listen to CHSR Shout Cast" and you'll be able to listen to it.
The only problem is that there's about a minute and a half delay but it's not too bad.
It will only be half an hour, not an hour unfortunately but still
enough time. The program is called the Lunchbox and starts at 12:30
and goes until 1pm.
You can blog is all you want. I'll also make sure to get you a CD copy of the interview and we'll make it into Mp3 so you can put it up on your blog.
You should also mention that you can listen on the radio at 97.9 FM as well as online.
Also, I invited Kelly Lamrock to come on and give his side. You'll be interested to know that he agreed to it until they found out it was about you.
They said they would call back and then told us that any issue about security matters needs to be forwarded to Tanker Malley.
We've called him and they said he would call back. I doubt he will
agree to it (atleast for Friday, possibly at another time) but it
would be interesting. Would you bo ok with doing the interview with
Tanker if he does come? If not, we can make alternate arrangements.
Friday, June 23, 2006
CHARLES WILL BE INTERVIEWED LIVE AT NOON!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
9 comments:
http://www.unb.ca/chsr/home.html
Good interview but I still believe we're not getting the whole story here. We've heard Charles side but the legislature has been quite vague. I suspect they have reasons for the ban, probably even legitimate ones. Banning a member of the public is serious and the reasons for banning Charles should be made public. Harassment could mean anything. C'mon folks, let the people know what was driving this and don't be so vague. The reasons may very well be legit but it is tough to tell.
Thanks to anyone who listened, this was my first interview so I was somewhat nervous which was probably noticeable.
I to would like to hear from someone from the legislature. I'm going to keep pushing to get someone from the committee who had Charles banned to come on the air. Their silence could be said to be very telling of a coverup. If the banning isn't legit, the last thing they're going to want is to speak on it and be found to be in the wrong.
The interview will be available in mp3 format sometime this week.
Spinks, I think you are right. Both sides should be heard.
I'm more than willing to have both sides heard. it's just a matter of the other side talking which they don't seem to want to do.
It says something right there when the government remains silent and conducts secret courts with secret evidence. At least it shows people how these 'other people' operate and what exactly their government is like.
For Charles part we already follow this blog so know what 'harassment' consists of. It means MLA's are afraid to go around the building for fear of being yelled at and having their picture taken. Charles posts fairly regularly what a pain in the ass he is.
The 'warnings' we've heard about do not exist, if this was government, then there would be a paper trail. In other words, there would have been a written warning to Charles that such and such a behaviour is not acceptable. Of course we know what the behaviour is-it means a politician actually becomes accountable to the electorate, and that can't be allowed to happen.
So long as decisions can be made in private and the most MLA's see voters is during a campaign where everything can be controlled, then its not a problem.
I suspect the arrest in Saint John was the incident in which government hides behind, they can say "look, he was arrested, therefore he must be violent". Of course we know what bullshit that was, but it provides a good out for the government.
Chris Erb, you are doing a great job. Keep it up. It was not about you not trying and it is about the other side and why they are not talking.
Charles thankyou for being the person you are; we need people who care to ask the questions, insist they exlain themselves. No matter the topic it is still about the average person with struggles. Sorry if some people what to pretend the issues don't matter and we should disappear so a certain group or class of people have all the say.
What Charles is trying to do should be praised. What Premier has done to all of us should be investigated? The orimulsion fiasco, auto insurance deals, LNG bill passed for Billionaires and now what is he doing with our Energy and who will he put their to mess our power rates? There needs to be someone there who can't be bought odd. He constantly talks out of both sides of his mouth. He has never had our best interest since he was elected twice. People don't follow what is going on.
Thanks Charles for this Blog and these comments that you deserve it is not so. The government is wrong and they will never admit it but so they will have to come up with their story.
I'm with Chris on this one. The details have been vague. Banning a person from the legislature is serious business that according to one media report has happened a few other times (I can't remember them but for argument's sake a few probably have over the years). However, I think some more detail is required if not to the general public than at least to the guy they banned. As another poster wrote, there is no question that Charles is a pain in the *** to government and I've never agreed when he's targeted employees who just happen to be in the Government and I don't agree with him calling Trevor Holder a bigot and lots of others may disagree with his opinions. I don't often agree with him but I'll always defend his right to have his opinion. Like I've said, maybe the ban is warranted, maybe it isn't, but given the information so far it's pretty hard to tell and I'm betting there's a compromise which could be reached from both sides.
Post a Comment