Tom Mann and David Brown are going on a witch-hunt against the poor and other Unions in this province should stay away from these two individuals.
The main goal is to set the poor 30 years in the past.
Friday, August 04, 2006
WHY DID DAVID BROWN FROM THE NEW BRUNSWICK EMPLOYEES UNION LIED TO ME??? THAT'S RIGHT!!!!! HE'S A LAWYER!!!! TOM MANN SHOULD ALSO BECOME A LAWYER!!!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
17 comments:
You want to explain that? Whats the point of headlines if there's no story?
Yeah really. What's the story here? Oh, and FYI: Tom Mann is a lawyer.
Ohhhhh???? Tom Mann is lwayer??? Well this answers a lot of my questions about the bigot....
Merci Beaucoup!!!!
Answers a lot of what questions? Why are you smearing this guy across your blog? Seriously, give it a rest.
Tom Mann is a good man and person. Shame on you for trying to say anything else.
Some would say Your a Bigot against the Irvings and their fine Newspapers.
Shame Shame on you
The smearing will continue till the end of time. I'm not the one who wrote those stories in the Irving Papers.
Brent Taylor, Tom Mann and David Brown will continue to be blog!!!
Actually its more like Brent Taylor, Tom Mann, David Brown, the Irving's, Bernard Lord, all the MLA'S, Stephen Harper, All Quebecois, people in suits that might be bureaucrats, the police, The papers..(see Irving's above) and from what I have read in here possibly people with green roofs are all out to get Charles. We should all be so popular! But what the heck, there's worse things than being paranoid don't you think Charles? You could be blaming aliens for your problems...and I am not talking about the ones from Quebec!
Oh my God. The roof of my house is green. Am I in trouble?
Actually, be honest. Charles has NEVER said anything about 'all the MLA's". In fact many of the MLA's have supported Charles.
However, the rest of the list seems quite apt, let's run through it:
the Irvings
the papers (same thing)
Stephen Harper
Bernard Lord
Brent Taylor
Tom Mann
the police
Quebec security
As well as SOME bureaucrats.
And if you think Charles is being paranoid, you haven't read much of this blog or know too much about what goes on in New Brunswick.
Charles has accounted pretty fully for why that list above exists, and the facts speak for themselves.
Be afraid of aliens if you want, in this province there are far bigger threats, and congratulations to Charles for getting at least some of those skeletons out of the closets. If more of the New Brunswick government and bureaucracy can be brought out for what it is, them perhaps NB can stop being the armpit of canada that most New Brunswickers are leaving.
Too bad there weren't more people like Charles, and fewer of the pissants.
Its probably a smart move on your part to remain anonymous.Allowing people to know just how much of the asinine ramblings in here are really yours would probably be embarrassing. Charles might well be paranoid, and more interested in seeing his own name in print than reporting news but at least he is brave enough to not be just another annoying anonymous. You on the other hand don't even rate a pissant. How about being Honest yourself. I'd put my knowledge of this province up against your pathetic little rants any day. It is painfully obvious you no little of anything. You might sound entertaining to your friends as you stand on your proverbial soap box preaching your nonsense but in the real would your a nobody. Maybe anonymous does suit you after all.
Are you talking to moi????
The facts are all there, I notice nobody is disputing them. Perhaps the above poster thinks putting three initials is somehow less anonymous, if so, then that's a strange world you live in. When we see a first and last name and where you live then at least you won't be a hypocrite.
But notice there is no attempt to dispute the facts. Charles has stated quite clearly why he attacks the people on the list, in most cases they attacked him first. I guess New Brunswickers don't like it when people defend themselves.
We've seen Charles arrested in a room full of protestors when he was just taking pictures, we've seen him expelled from the legislature with no evidence presented. And we saw all those individuals listed come out in support of it. Charles is fighting back with the only method he has-the truth and this blog.
It's hardly paranoia when people really are out to get you, and its no suprise that they are. In virtually every society those who oppose government and speak out publicly against them are repressed and oppressed.
So again, people can try be extremist and paint Charles as if 'he's blaming everybody' for his troubles. But the facts speak for themselves and are very well documented in these pages.
Finally, keep in mind that virtually none of those problems are unique to Charles. The poor face them all the time. You can always tell by people's posts just where they fit in on the economic food chain.
The facts are all there, I notice nobody is disputing them. Perhaps the above poster thinks putting three initials is somehow less anonymous, if so, then that's a strange world you live in. When we see a first and last name and where you live then at least you won't be a hypocrite.
But notice there is no attempt to dispute the facts. Charles has stated quite clearly why he attacks the people on the list, in most cases they attacked him first. I guess New Brunswickers don't like it when people defend themselves.
We've seen Charles arrested in a room full of protestors when he was just taking pictures, we've seen him expelled from the legislature with no evidence presented. And we saw all those individuals listed come out in support of it. Charles is fighting back with the only method he has-the truth and this blog.
It's hardly paranoia when people really are out to get you, and its no suprise that they are. In virtually every society those who oppose government and speak out publicly against them are repressed and oppressed.
So again, people can try be extremist and paint Charles as if 'he's blaming everybody' for his troubles. But the facts speak for themselves and are very well documented in these pages.
Finally, keep in mind that virtually none of those problems are unique to Charles. The poor face them all the time. You can always tell by people's posts just where they fit in on the economic food chain.
Listen, did anyone here that little whining sound? I wonder if the old saying "when an anonymous whines on a blog nobody cares" is true? You know sometimes these sayings do have a basis in fact.
So, my whinny little friend, look at this sets of postings and tell me what you see? Now at the time I wrote this there were 13 postings listed. Of those Charles was responsible for 3, DPS for 2 and 8 for anonymous. Did you pen all those 8 my anonymous 8:14 friend. Did you pen half of them? Or just that last one? You have the nerve to call anyone that has the decency to at least want to distinguish themselves from the other posters on a page a hypocrite when you can't even bring yourself to do that one little thing? It's obvious the meaning of the word "hypocrite" is lost on you.
Now on the subject of "facts", it is again apparent you just do not grasp the meaning of the word, or more likely choose not to. On any of the topics you have raised neither you nor I know the facts, at least based on what you read in Charles's blog. Now if you were with him when he was arrested or if you were present when the alleged incidents at the legislature happened then you might have a claim to know the "facts" and that's only a "might". In fact if YOU took the time to read this blog objectively you would see there is a difference between fact and opinion. Charles is very big on the opinion part (as is his right as the blogger of note) but the facts are more often than not a little harder to find.
The FACT is Charles will have his day in court on the arrest in St. John. That is where the evidence will be presented. The FACT is you have been told the reason for the banning at the legislature. Whether you agree or not really has little to do with the FACTS. Your entitled to your opinion just as I am but don't be so crass as to think people don't know the difference between the two. To be perfectly honest I really don't think you can't grasp the meaning of these and other words you like to toss around in here. I think in FACT you intentionally ignore there meaning because it suits your agenda. Facts just get in your way. But then maybe we shouldn't take your opinions to serious anyway, after all you are just another anonymous voice in the crowd.
Charles, I thought it would be a nice touch to address that last posting as anonymous. If only for the benefit of anonymous 8:14. But unlike 8:14 I do acknowledge it is in FACT mine
I let you people debate the issues and once in a while? I will join in but my job is to blog away!!!!
This entire blog is 90% OPINION & LIES and 10% FACT.
Post a Comment