Why do New Brunswickers cross that thin line?
Everyone of us has issues in life. Some deals with it and moves on but others will keep the fight as long as they can.
I always told people if I ever cross that line?
I’m a dead man because I have all kinds of very high powerful people who are just waiting for me.
In New Brunswick, we live in an atmosphere like 50 years ago.
Just think about it? I’ll use me as an example. < Surprise? >
Around five years ago, I was told by the Irving papers that my letters will no longer be printed.
I got 500 letters printed and all this came to a sudden halt!!!!
Of course, we still had CFBC Talk of the Town.
I always had a good relationship with the host so therefore it was a great way to spread my concerns on the airways.
Of course, I also had Voice of the Province.
I would confront the politicians with my issues live on the air.
This all came to an abrupt end when Rogers Television came out with a policy that only a unique few will be allowed to call their talk show.
So out the window are The Irving Papers and the Rogers talk show.
All we had was CFBC Talk of the Town.
Sadly, the Irvings made sure that the talk show was cancel.
So? All these avenues are gone forever.
I got lucky because I phone the show when I was arrested by the Saint John Police Force and told the listeners my story which was proven right after the verdict of the Judge.
Here we are today!!!
A showdown with the New Brunswick Police Commission who will not deal with my issue.
We have cops who falsely arrested me and lied on the stand so I could land in jail.
Of course, there’s the issue when Duty Counsel told me that I had no right to a lawyer.
I had to represent myself in court.
I got two letters from New Brunswick Legal Aid denying my claim.
If Harold Doherty < Iron Horse > would have not step forward?
I would be in jail today.
So? My question is this? What are New Brunswickers supposed to do when the bureaucrats totally ignore your issues?
I always tell people that thank God that I’m half Scottish because if I was a pure Acadian? I would have took a heart attack a long time ago but one thing is certain?
If I leave this world? It will be by a heart attack!
The Scottish gene is a terrible one to have and I wouldn’t wish this on anyone.
Once we turned? WE TURN!!!! We don’t go back and that’s the way it is.
I even asked my Priest if he can do an exorcism on me?...lol....You know get that Scottish blood away from my body?..lol
Once you have a mixture of Scottish blood and ADHD together? Well? That’s quite a breed!!!!!
A person wants to tell the whole world of their concern but there’s no way to spread your views.
Yes, some people will get so angry that they will cross that line be arrested and jailed!
Myself? I pray every day that God gives me the courage not to cross that thin line.
Just imagine if I wasn’t blogger?
I’m not allowed to write letters to the editor. < Could have one in the Irving’s paper this week? > No talk shows. No nothing!!!!
How is a person supposed to tell the world of their concerns without committing a crime?
Yes, I am very happy that blogging is around because it sure helps this activist from crossing that thin line but others are not that lucky!!!!
9 comments:
What? Ha ha ha ha ha, you make me laugh. You are way over the line, you are so far beyond the line that it would take you years of walking back to reach that line again.
You make these allegations against the Irvings, Rogers Television, NB Legislature, NB Human Rights Commission and now the NB Police Commission without any proof what so ever. Now you say that you have proof but you will not share it with your readers so it's hard to believe you. Show us the proof and not statements like "Stay Tuned", "Truly Stay Tuned", "This will become a messy event" etc...
And of course there is your inappropriate picture taking behavior, your rude comments towards women calling one a "Barbie Doll", your rude comments towards people that come from Quebec, in this blog to say that you don't want Scottish blood in you so you don't like Scottish people now? Everyday you make rude comments on your blog site, etc...
From sitting here at my computer, I think its a little case of "the kettle calling the pot black". Before making a claim that NBers have crossed the fine line you should look in the mirror and ask that same question to yourself
Since Charles doesn't define the line he's talking about then its hard to say whether he's crossed it or not.
Like the above poster maintains, perhaps using negative language is crossing the line. If 'being rude' is crossing the line then we can add most people who blog, the above included, me included, and half the people who post here.
So what makes 'us' cross that line? Frustration? Perhaps the same thing as Charles. When you meet up with a massive government that doesn't give two *&^%$ about you, then it tends to make you rude. You can see it also in the letters to the editor.
Not all New Brunswickers are like that, but lots of us are. A good proportion simply ignore politics altogether. They know the government doesn't care, some sit in their homes and focus on family and ignore the political arena as much as possible and hope it doesn't negatively affect them too much. Others simply leave New Brunswick, and many leave Canada.
But 50 years ago there was no Irving controlling all the media, so its actually worse in that regard.
Charles didn't call anybody names, so its not the pot-kettle case at all. The 'line' could be doing something illegal, although I agree that Charles often says that he will cross that line by going onto the legislature grounds. If he means protests, then he's already organized one.
So we don't know what the line is. I also agree somewhat with the above post, although I suspect typing in "Ha ha ha ha" could be said to be 'crossing a line' as well:)
Charles is often rude, but this is a blog, and take a look at most blogs. David Campbell has a nice, well behaved blog where he daily recounts all the problems in the economic life of the province, and the result of that is that people pay no attention to him.
People may think Charles is rude, but they do keep coming here. And that gives Charles power that he would never have. If he wasn't rude and beligerent, he would have given up long ago, and personally I think the province would be far worse off. Certainly the residential tenants would be, and so would the poor who now at least have a voice.
I think Charles could moderate himself better as well. I agree with the poster above and hopefully Charles will pay attention. He may not be formally educated, but the mark of intelligence is being able to look at information objectively. If Charles COULD moderate his behaviour a bit, then personally I think he'd be far more effective. Keep in mind though that he has done that quite a bit, which is far more than can be said about Irving's press, and nobody complains a bit about that.
Charles didn't call anybody names
I guess you don't read this blog. He certainly does call people names, all the time. Slander, insults, etc. - he does them all.
That depends where. Charles only uses the word bigot occasionally, such as the leader of the union that supported his ban, and Brent Taylor, who was in COR and Charles even posted a page from a book where it was easily proven.
A bigot isn't nearly as insulting as it seems, its just that most people have pretty soft skin for insults, usually quite rightly. We know what he thinks of Dan Brussiere's, but the only name he calls him is 'quebecer', so that's not really an insult. Neither is 'bureaucrat'. People must have pretty sheltered lives to take those as insults.
Context is everything. An insult need not be a curse word to be insulting. Repeatedly expressing hatred for anyone who works for government or Irving or comes from Quebec certainly translates into insults when he routinely calls complete strangers "a true bureaucrat" or a "good Irving employee" - he isn't complimenting them, he's stereotypically insulting them. Think about what he does... really stop and think.
Imagine someone walking downtown, perhaps shopping at some local businesses, minding their own business that afternoon and then Charles takes their picture and posts it online with an insulting headline accusing the person of being a "true bureaucrat" (he uses that word as an insult - we all know that) when that person was simply shopping. What normal person does that? If you think that is acceptable behaviour and doesn't equate to namecalling, what about if someone went down to the homeless shelter, took a photo of a person there, posted it online with a caption of "Look at that drug addict welfare bum"? That's not acceptable behaviour either and people would be quick to condemn that person.
We know Charles means them as insults, that's exactly the point. What you are saying is that not only should people not be called names (though its a free country) but they should not even talk negatively about people.
Don't lump Irving in there because Charles often says plenty of nice things about Irving employees, and actually in the past has said nice things about bureaucrats-but that is not mentioned.
Keep in mind who Charles audience is, mainly the poor. These are people who have been given the short end of the stick by Irvings and bureaucrats for years. Is he pandering to them? Absolutely. Does Irving pander to the middle class? Absolutely. So whats good for one, is good for the other.
Next Charles will have a post of a "wonderful human being" and people will start complaining that he is insulting people by calling them wonderful human beings!
If the worst insult you get is being called a 'good irving employee' or a 'true bureaucrat' then consider yourself lucky. Just look at what Charles has to listen to on a daily basis.
Once again, the old adage is best, if you don't like it....
The last line about "if you don't like it" could apply to Charles as well. If he doesn't like it being banned, stay away from the gov't & the leg. If he doesn't like getting arrested, stay away from the police. If he doesn't like Irving papers, stay away from them.
Obviously, the old adage is not always best. Some of the criticisms are valid, some are simply ad hominen attacks. And that goes both ways. It would be pretty boring if the only comments were "good charlie" and "poor charlie." And it would be pretty useless if nobody would back him up. Discussion is better than no communication at all.
The Legislature belongs to us the people. No one should be banned. Somebody could be asked to leave the building or grounds with justification. If Charles was banned by an authority such as given by court order then that could be challenged. As it is now it seems Charles is banned by the seargent at arms. If that person were to leave their post and go somewhere else for work and a new employee were seargent at arms would Charles still be banned?
As usual with all things Charles, "As it is now it seems" Really means little as no one actually knows anything...That includes Charles himself depnding on his mood. But stay tuned! This is a serious matter! More later!
Post a Comment