The next building to its left, still standing, with the two small dormers facing the street, is #95-97 Colborne St. (lastly Ideal Pizza on the right (west) side) which was built in 1878.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
The next building to its left, still standing, with the two small dormers facing the street, is #95-97 Colborne St. (lastly Ideal Pizza on the right (west) side) which was built in 1878.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
"Ombudsman to deliver LHIN report next month.
After a 16-month investigation, Ontario's ombudsman will deliver his report on the decision making process of our LHIN August 10th.
Andre Marin launched the review of the Hamilton Niagara Haldimand Brant Local Health Integration Network on March 24, 2009.
It started after Marin received dozens of complaints about LHIN actions--from residents, community groups, health care providers and MPPs.
Many were [sic] about the Niagara Health System's Hospital Improvement Plan.
That is the plan that converted E-Rs in Fort Erie and Port Colborne to Urgent Care Centres.
Marin's look at the LHIN was supposed to focus on alleged problems with the process, like complaints there was not enough consultation and the decisions made.
We still do not know when the Chief Coroner's Office will start it's inquest into the death of Reilly Anzovino.
She is the Fort Erie teen whose death her family says might have been prevented if ERs in Port Colborne or Fort Erie had been open.
18 year old Anzovino died December 27, 2009, after a crash at Highway 3 and Nigh Road."
Once Marin's report is released, we'll see how our local media avoids focusing on obtaining any in-depth response from the likes of health-care-monopolist Liberals such as MPP's Jim Bradley or Kim Craitor. And far be it for anyone to question George Smitherman's role in the Liberal fiasco known as the "LHIN" - why, GeorgieBoy's got nothin' to do with any of this; he's running for mayor of Toronto, trying to get Pink Dave's old job, doncha know; and anyway, what's Smitherman got to do with the LHIN's??!
It's not like George Smitherman - McGuinty's disastrous Liberal health minister - had ANYTHING TO DO WITH CREATING THEM !!!!
Ha ha ha ha hee hee ha haaaaahaaaaahaaahaa... bwahahahahaHAHAHA!!
Monday, July 26, 2010
At the far right, where the vacant space now is, was where 87-89 Colborne St. had stood (lastly My Thai restaurant); it was built in 1915 and was demolished late last week.
above: July 26, 2010, looking up at the demolition site from Water St., 91-93 Colborne St. is the dark brick building, still standing, to the right. Just to its left is some remnants of the multi-level rear of 87-89 Colborne St. (the former My Thai building). The bottom level of that building was where some of the green-painted block wall can be seen at the bottom right. For an earlier view of this same area, see here.
Sunday, July 25, 2010
It was a non-story, as truly about nothing as one could get.
No one could give a rat's ass about the ads, which (hahahaha) so-infuriated Furious George!
But wait: showboat Smitherman, all full of piss and vinegar - as well as good ole Liberal manufactured smug faux-outrage - then decided to drive down the QEW from Toronto to Niagara Falls to bitch about his hurt feelings, and to post a letter on the Niagara Parks Commission's office door!!
What an utter FLICKING waste of time this pompous Liberal clown is.
Guess Ole Smitherman never heard of the phone... or, um, even a fax... or yeah, um... email...
Did Liberal MPP Jim Kyodiot Bradley bother to demand to know why Smitherman didn't use the tax-payer subsidized GO train or bus to get to Niagara Falls?
How about Liberal MPP Kim Craitor - did Craitor bother to demand details from Slitherman regarding how much damage to the environment Smitherman's little car trip trip to the Falls caused?!
Did anyone ask hypocrite Mr. Green Energy Act Fiasco George - the human Lung-O-Meter - Smitherman about any of this?!
hee hee hee. Wouldn't want to make Georgie look bad, when he's so desperate for attention, would we?!
YES - it has happened: our prayers have been answered, and the great reporters and editors of the esteemed St.Catharines Standard are finally persisting and demanding detailed answers from their local Liberal strongman, Jim Bradley.
The St.Catharines Standard is finally holding Jim Bradley to a higher standard, and not to the lower sub-Standard that was the usual 'Handle-Jim-With-Kid-Gloves' approach, the status-quo procedure when dealing with Bradley around here for decades...
Finally, now, the St.Catharines Standard is gettin' tough with Liberal MPP Jim Bradley... (ohh HA HA ha ha ha ha ha... but it's not what you think...)
Get this, in all seriousness: the St.Catharines Standard - regarding the whole eco-fee disaster, where secretive Jim Bradley wasn't heard from whatsoever - allowed Bradley TO PHONE IN HIS COMMENTS in a July 21, 2010 story by Don Fraser, "Hudak expects return of eco-fees"!!
Can you BELIEVE IT?!
Is this the best that the Standard's reporters can do - GIVE READERS A PHONE-MESSAGE FROM HIS ROYAL HINDNESS BRADLEY?!
What a lame excuse for a report - NOT EVEN A REAL INTERVIEW, with real questions!!
All we get from the Jim Bradley Asslick Fan Club is a boilerplate phone message from King Bradley, that could have just as easily been issued by a robot!
..."In a phone message Tuesday, St. Catharines MPP Jim Bradley said the eco-fees aren't actually a provincial government tax.
It's rather a charge from businesses and industry under the umbrella of Stewardship Ontario.
"The minister of the environment is dissatisfied by the way it has been implemented," Bradley added.
"And we're removing all the fees announced July 1 and saying let's go back to the drawing board ... and determine (how) to pay for a way to divert wastes."
Bradley said money for the diversion will either come from general taxes, or through specific fees assumed by business or industry.
In an interview, Hudak responded to Bradley's comments.
"There is only one taxpayer," Hudak said. "And this is yet again another attack on the pocketbooks of Ontario families that will not be helping the environment.""
Is the St.Catharines Standard on Jim Bradley's Liberal payroll?! Wow...
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
above: same view, July 13, 2010
below: Jun.30, 2010 - looking northwards at the old YMCA; Fourth Ave. is to the right
above: same view, the former YMCA is at the bottom left; now the Gale Arena four-pad rink is seen under construction on the former Cyanamid lands - see also here.
below: Apr. 1972 - working on the swimming pool at the Fourth Ave. YMCA, photo from the Niagara Falls Library; in the left distance is part of the Cyanamid factory.
below: the Niagara Falls, Ont. YMCA's 'first' building was this one, which was on River Rd., at a point just slightly north of the Whirlpool Bridge. Not sure exactly where it stood on River Rd., compared to today - where the Customs depot is, or possibly a bit further north, towards where the Hampton hotel is. Also the orientation of the building is not quite clear.
This photo below is from the Niagara Falls Ont. library digital archives, but this photo's date is not given with the accompanying library notes. This building, according to the library info, was built in 1898 and was demolished in 1936, and had been part of the "railroad dep't" (which can be seen on the banner at the top of the left gable).
Strangley, I have seen this same photo [in a 2009 "Celebrating 150 years, YMCA of Niagara, 1859-2009" newsletter] dated as being from 1894 - yet the library's info stated that the building was built in 1898...(!)... so, there's some discrepancy there.
This YMCA building was built in conjunction with the Grand Trunk Railroad (which later became CN) and the Town so that railway workers had a place to rest and cleanup during layovers (and be removed form the temptations of vice!) It had a library, a gymnasium was on the second floor, and in the basement, a bowling alley and shuffleboard.
The YMCA's web site says that the Y came to Niagara Falls, Ont. first in 1889 - so I wonder then, where the actual "first" location was, seeing as this building didn't open until 1898.
Maybe the library is referencing this 1898 building as the "first" insofar as it was purpose-built, instead of perhaps, converted from some other use in a previous location?? I wonder, then, where the YMCA had been located in Niagara Falls, Ont. between 1889 to 1898?
The YMCA's 150th anniversary newsletter noted that the Fort Erie YMCA was established in 1905 (it was also a 'Railway Y') and that the Welland YMCA was established in 1907 at the Model School on Dorothy St. at Hellems Ave. The St.Catharines YMCA was founded in 1859, in rented premises at 25 Hainer St., with druggist James Mills acting as the first president.
I wonder also whether the timing of the demolition in 1936 had anything to do with the old Whirlpool Rapids Incline (which must have been practically right across the street, slightly north, from the YMCA, on the cliff-side of River Rd.) being rebuilt into a new elevator-operated facility, also in 1936? (see also here)
above: the now-vacant Customs compound lot facing onto River Rd., was approximately where the old YMCA had once stood, on a slight rise just about where the present buildings are.
Looking at the previous older photo of the Y, it is not clear to me which way this building was oriented.
Did the wide-front of the building which we see in the old photo face east? (ie, the wide-side would have been parallel to River Rd.)
If so, then Bridge St. would be slightly to the left (south) out of frame; the train station would be in the left distance, behind the trees, and the roundhouse would be behind the building, where the smoke from a steam locomotive is seen at the right. The smoke seen at the left of the photo would be from a locomotive most likely stopped at the station on Bridge St. The site of today's Hampton hotel would be to the right.
Looking closely at the fuzzy photo at the end of this post, it does look as if the YMCA had been situated with its wide-side being perpendicular to River Rd., which means, in this case, that the wide-side view we see in the old photo could be either the north or the south face of the building.
If the wide-side view in the old photo was facing north, then the elements seen around the building would change: Bridge St. would now be behind the building, as would the mainline tracks; the train station would be kind of behind the building, to the right; the smoke at the left would be from a train just coming off the bridge; the smoke at the right from a train leaving the station; the roundhouse would be to the right of the photo (ie, to the west of the building)!
[And who knows what the sign reads, which is seen at the right distance, behind the Y building? It looks like 'P (or D) E N T' ... and then 'E R S'. Was this an ad on a warehouse roof, or name of some factory located there? President Suspenders?!? In smaller letters (under the large ' T ' ) can also be seen the phrase "sold everywhere".]
The last possibility is that the wide-side of the old YMCA building photo was facing south (parallel to and facing the tracks) This would mean that the large stairs seen at the right would have faced east onto River Rd., and, that the advertising seen in the right rear would have been on some kind of building slightly further to the north along River Rd. (somewhere near where the Hampton now is).
With this third possible scenario, the smoke at the left can still be explained as coming from an engine, but in this case the engine would have to be near the roundhouse. The smoke at the far-right, though, is harder to explain - this could not be from any train, since in this scenario, there is no possibility that any railroad track could have been there, which would be along River Rd. (...though, keep in mind, streetcar tracks did run down River Rd., but, the cars were electrically powered); so the smoke seen at the right may be from some kind of factory chimney, possibly.
So, which way did that old Y face?! I think that #3 describes the location.
If you compare the next-below photo to the previous close-up photo, you will see the same features in both photos :
the dimple-peaked large gable at the left; the smaller gable in the middle; small-dormer windows in the top floor at the right; the long porch seen along the right; and the path which is seen leaving the porch at an angle into the field.
What clinched the #3 choice for me, was not just that the elements of the gables line up the proper way in both photos, but, that the well-worn pathway from the porch is seen leading off into the field at the same proper angle as well, in both photos. So, it makes sense then, when you look at the below aerial photo, that the well-trodden path is clearly seen running in a direct angle from the Y's large front porch to the bridge underpass. This would have naturally been the quickest way to walk, to get to/from the other side of the tracks.
As can be seen by comparing to my earlier post, in the period from July 10 to July 21, six more buildings have been demolished:
- 73-75 Colborne St. - centre-part of the 1870-built Bellhouse block; lastly Zorba's restaurant
- 77 Colborne St. - east-end of the Bellhouse block; was Flood Jewellers in the 1960's and 70's
- 79 Colborne St. - Pattison building, built 1874; lastly a blessing centre
- 81 Colborne St. - built around 1871 known as the Howell block, lastly Harvey E. Flood Jewellers
- 85 Colborne St. - Whitney building, built ca.1880; was Adams Furniture in the mid-1970's
below: Jul.10, 2010 - a little further to the east from the above photo, still looking at the south side of Colborne St.; the Art Stanbridge Walkway (covered in plywood to protect its glass canopy, and temporarily closed to pedestrians) is in the left-centre distance. Immediately to the east of the walkway another building (at 115-117 Colborne St.) is seen at the early stages of its demolition: the west-side of its upper brick wall and part of its roof have been torn down. This Georgian style building was built by James Moore ca.1850.
above: same view, Jul.21, 2010: #115-117 Colborne is now gone. It once housed the New Service Lunch and Tea Room in the 1930's.
Also, next to its east, 119 Colborne St. is now gone; and 121 Colborne St. is gone, and 123 Colborne St. is gone (see them here prior to demolition).
121 Colborne St. was where the Bell Telephone Co. had an office from the 1890's to about 1907. The exposed wall now visible is that of 125 Colborne St. The row of two-storey buildings from 119 to 129 Colborne St. were erected between 1865 and 1870 by John Laughrey.
So on this section of Colborne St. (the part east of the walkway), between July 10 and July 21, four buildings were demolished (with #115-117 being counted as one unit)
below: as seen Jul.10, 2010, looking from Water St. up at the rear of the buildings facing along Colborne St.
The large building at the right (with the green-painted lower level) is the building at 87-89 Colborne St. (lastly My-Thai restaurant). Part of the Zorba's restaurant building is at the far left.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
-The price of the batteries was $11.99.
-Added to that was an "eco fee" of 37 cents.
-The subtotal was $12.36.
-Then, the 13% HST was added (which was $1.61) bringing the total cost for this 4-pack of rechargeable AA batteries to $13.97.
Now that Liberal goof John Gerretsen temporarily rescinded his eco-tax/fee, we can get our money back from the retailers (at least, from those retailers who had shown the eco-fee as a separate charge on their receipts).
Having provided the clerk at Canadian Tire's refund desk with the original receipt, the retailer refunded the eco-tax without question.
What they did first, was to refund the entire original bill; so, they gave back the $13.97 .
Then, they wrote up a new bill based on the same original price of the batteries ($11.99), then added the 13% HST ($1.56 this time), with the total cost of the batteries now being $13.55 .
So: the difference in total cost to the consumer, on a simple 4-pack of AA batteries, due to McGuinty's eco-fee, was 42 cents. (ie $13.97 originally with eco-fee vs. $13.55 without eco-fee)
As we've seen, though, the actual "eco-fee" originally charged by Canadian Tire was shown to be 37 cents [a ridiculous 9.2 cents per battery, btw] yet the total price differential between the two bills was 42 cents - which is a difference of 5 cents. So why is there a 5 cent difference??
Well, because this 5 cents is THE EXTRA SNEAK-TAX which McGuinty's Liberal scumbags foisted onto Ontario, under cover of the HST; in other words, McGuinty's "eco-fee" was applied to your bill BEFORE the 13% HST was applied - so, McGuinty's Liberals were planning to not only collect their "eco-fee", but were planning to charge a 13% HST on top of the eco-fee as well!!
Read that again, if you don't yet understand the inherent smarminess and duplicity of Dalton McGuinty's Lying Liberal regime.
This is the sneaky deception that Dalton McGuinty and his stalwart Liberal scumbags, such as MPP Jim Bradley, were hoping to pull off: charging a 13% HST tax on top of their eco-fee.
So: when Liberal Environment Minister John Gerretsen tries to tell us - as he did in his eco-fee-postponement press-conference on Jul.20, 2010 - that his Liberal government 'did not get one penny' from the eco-tax, and that 'it all went to the Stewardship council', then Liberal John Gerretsen is lying.
Gerretsen's Liberal government WAS earning HST revenue on every "eco-tax" penny!!!
John Gerretsen LIED at his own press-conference - and not one reporter asked him to clarify his claims.
Is it Gerretsen whom Dewar is portraying?
Isn't McGuinty's enviro-bag-boy John Gerretsen the same greenshevik who was dumping all over Alberta in Copenhagen, just at the end of 2009, along with Jean Charet and Pink David Miller?!
This incompetent Liberal boob should be fired for this eco-fiasco sneak-tax of his - but McGuinty is unable to recognize incompetence, regularly confusing it with Liberal policy.
oh, and did you like Julie Greco's July 19, 2010 column Seniors, asthma sufferers feeling the heat? No mention was made in this column about HOW MANY Ontarians - and specifically how many Niagarans - are dying each year due to smog and heat. Oddly, no mention in this column either, of Liberal MPP Jim Bradley!!
Odd, because, of course, when Golden Boy Jim was in opposition, smog and heat wave deaths were carefully and dutifully mentioned in the green-hysteria-pushing-media at every possible opportunity.
Jim Bradley and his Liberals were always being quoted in stories about how under the evil Conservatives, hundreds of people were being killed due to smog! Yep, Good Ole Jim Bradley blabbed about Nanticoke and about shutting coal plants and about all the things his Liberals would (apparently) do (it was a lie), and the press eagerly reported it.
Now - Nanticoke is still open, Jim Bradley and his McGuinty Liberals have been blatantly lying through their teeth for almost a decade, and people are still dying (aren't they?!) - but you wouldn't know that by reading the Jim-friendly spin in the Standard.
Why should the St.Catharines Standard bother to tell its readers what Jim Bradley has to say about that?!
Nanticoke's still open??
What's Jim Bradley got to do with that!!!?!
Why should the Green Propaganda Team bother to ask Liberal MPP Jim Bradley about his Liberal government's latest fiasco? (Their July 19 column completely avoided any reference to the imploding-Liberal-political-reality all around them [no mention about Jimmy or his Liberal eco-tax]; they were writing about 'Scarpface', at first look it appeared their column might be about 'Crapface' Bradley... maybe next time...)
It's best to leave Good Ole Jimmy out of all this!
Monday, July 19, 2010
McGuinty's Liberal government has become a parody of incompetence. And funny how the St.Catharines Standard couldn't be bothered to interview Jim Bradley to explain what his sneaky Liberal government was up to. Nope, all we got was a cheerleading thumbs up for the eco-tax from the green teamsters and an avoidance of any mention of Jim Bradley.
There was no local press scrutiny, no focus, no interviews, regarding what a secretive Liberal MPP Jim Bradley and his government of incompetents were trying to pull off. There was nothing about Jim's views and comments regarding his sneaky Liberal eco-tax. Hey - if we keep Jim Bradley out of all this, the sheeple will think Jimmy had nothing to do with any of it; they might even be conned into believing that Bradley's not a McGuinty Liberal!!
oh... and John Gerretsen had nothing to do with any of this either - right?!
This clown Gerretsen should simply resign; he should be piled on the scrap heap along with his bungled sneaky Liberal tax increase.
What a FLICKING Liberal mess... but don't blame Liberal MPP Jim Bradley, he's got nothing to do with any of this...
"Re: Put the HST blame where it belongs (July 6).
St. Catharines MPP Jim Bradley is not to blame for bringing in the HST. The person to blame is Premier Dalton McGuinty, the real father of the HST. How does letter writer John Currey know the general public is complaining about the HST? It seems to me the only one complaining is Currey. There is nothing we can do about McGuinty bringing the HST to Ontario. Maybe Currey is angry because he's among those who have to pay more for gasoline at the pumps?
Jim Bradley is innocent.
I have my own business, and have worked with 15% sales tax, then 14% and now 13%, which is where the HST is. My customers have never complained about the HST. The HST is new to Ontario residents and they have to get used to it. Has anyone ever heard of just one person giving their approval to the HST? No, it was the entire Liberal party that voted to bring in this tax. When the next election comes up, please vote for Jim Bradley to continue being our MPP."
This is an excellent example of the delusion known as Bradley Syndrome, where you just can't fathom that your hostage-taker isn't your buddy...
Our Liberal bag of crap from St.Catharines - MPP Jim Bradley - HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE HST?!
Are you insane, Irene?
And we're supposed to swallow this Bradley bull? Jimmy also had nothin' to do with the LHIN's, the health tax, healthcare cuts, ER closures, the eco-tax, eHealth, the OLG scam...
Jim Bradley "is innocent"?!?!
Irene, DID LIBERAL MPP JIM BRADLEY VOTE FOR or AGAINST the HST?!
[what...? how...? ...where do you even begin dealing with this level of misguided spin...?!!]
'We better get used to Jim's HST'?!!!!! 'Yer angry cuz ya hafta pay more fer gas': Where do these Bradley Bootlickers come from? I have no idea what Boyle claims she sells, but the bullshit she's peddling in the St.Catharines Standard is embarrassingly pathetic.
"There is nothing we can do about McGuinty" says this confused writer - who then goes on to shill for Shitbag Liberal Bradley, as if magically Bradley had NOTHING whatsoever in common with his political leader, Dalton McGuinty!!!!!
Irene, Jim is part of McGuinty's Lying Liberals - a vote for Jim is a vote for more McGuinty Liberal lies.
Bradley is PART OF THE LIBERAL LIE!! Try as the Liberals might (and Boyle tries valiantly) they cannot separate Liberal MPP Jim Bradley from Liberal McGuinty's Liberal lies and Liberal incompetence. Jim Bradley is up to his stinking Grit ass in Liberal lies, deceptions and manipulations.
Jim Bradley is a significant part of the problem. St.Catharines residents can only do their part to kick McGuinty's Liberal scumbags out of office by voting local Liberal goon Bradley out.
"Jim Bradley is innocent"... innocent, I tells ya - Jimmy's got nuttin ta do wid ANY OF DIS STUFF!!
ohhh, ha ha ha... ha ha ha ha ha...!!
ha hah ha ha ha ha...
HAH HAAAA!! hee hee hee
Hee hee hee hee
Ha ha ha HA HAH HA ha ha!...
...Hah ha ha ha ha... bwaahahahahahahaha ...
...hee hee ha ha...........!!
Let's see... which cabinet minister had run the Ministry of Transportation, from the time since McGuinty's re-election, to the McGuinty's last cabinet shuffle?
It was St.Catharines Liberal MPP Jim Bradley.
Will the local press, such as the St.Catharines Standard, be asking Golden Boy Jimmy to comment on this latest Liberal fiasco?
What does Jim Bradley know about any of this?
How far back will the police be investigating?
Will the Standard's Jim Bradley Bootlick Club bother to ask Jimmy anything; any questions to shed some light on this??
Oh, yeah... Jim was just a cabinet minister responsible for Ontario's Transportation Ministry for several years - what would Jim know about any of this... right??!!
Thursday, July 15, 2010
"Don't think of the eco fee as another -- possibly illegal -- tax.
Think of it as a green fee.
Don't think of the HST as another tax grab that shifts the tax burden from corporations to individuals.
Think of it as the Liberals saving the economy.
Don't think of the deposit on liquor bottles as a tax. Think of it as saving the environment
Ditto for the 5¢ you now have to pay for plastic bags. Don't think of it as a massive gift from the government to the retail sector. Not only are they off the hook for the cost of plastic bags, they even built a whole new revenue stream selling cloth bags.
Some retailers even add HST to the fee and are now charging 6¢ a bag.
That's the soothing message the government wants to get out.
And we're all nodding and smiling at the cash register and smugly thinking we're doing our bit to save the world, when what we're really doing is paying the stores for the privilege of shopping at them.
Like so many other government tax grabs, the eco fee on 9,000 consumer goods came disguised as an environmental fee. It was done with such stealth, even the opposition parties seem to have been caught unaware.
But, as QMI Agency Queen's Park Bureau Chief Antonella Artuso reported last week, it may well be illegal. Industry insiders and a prominent tax lawyer all point out the tax is being levied not by the government, but by a third party.
What are the stores doing with this money? What happens to the fee you pay on batteries, fire extinguishers and air fresheners?
"We already pay taxes that help support waste disposal and diversion programs," PC Leader Tim Hudak told reporters Tuesday.
"The notion that it comes from an unaccountable, arm's length body of the government that can tax directly consumers, I reject fundamentally," he said.
In an attempt at damage control, Stewardship Ontario sent out e-mails to "stewards" (you and I call them shops) with hints as to how to hide the tax.
They suggest making the fee part of the price of the goods -- and hoping no one notices.
Here's what they said:
"Our Message: The eco fee is not mandatory nor is it a tax -- stewards have the option to pass the fees they pay Stewardship Ontario on to consumers. ... The eco fee may be reflected in the product's sticker price -- in which case the consumer is none the wiser. Or it may be itemized on the cash register receipt and added to the product price at checkout ..."
So it's a hidden fee charged arbitrarily by these unnamed "stewards."
It's not going to the government or Stewardship Ontario (SO) -- so no one is quite clear where that money is going.
Tuesday night, Environment Minister John Gerretsen released a letter he had sent to SO CEO Gemma Zecchini, expressing, "serious concerns with some overcharging of fees and the availability of accurate information, related to the Municipal Hazardous or Special Waste Program."
Gerretsen said SO must take "quick action" to resolve these issues "and restore consumer confidence."
It's not just the eco fee that has people outraged. It's the sneaky way it was implemented. It's a novel tactic. Introduce a sly eco fee the same day you introduce a whopping tax grab -- and hope no one notices.
Boston had its tea party because people resented paying unfair taxes to a person they didn't know.
Who wants to toss the eco fees overboard?"
... do you wonder HOW COULD IT BE POSSIBLE that no-one at the St.Catharines Standard has been able (or even bothered) to interview local Liberal MPP Jim Bradley on this very issue??!
Where is St.Catharines secretive Liberal Jim Bradley, explaining his Liberal eco-tax fiasco? This Liberal greenshevik weasel has damn VANISHED!!
What's that..? ...oh, yeah, right: Jimmy's got nothin to do with any of this!!!
Liberal Dalton McGuinty's part of the right?
Did Tim Hudak pass the G20 law?
Or did Liberal premier Dalton McGuinty secretly pass it?!
Does this make a whit of difference to Ferguson?!
Maybe Ferguson should also pay attention to the nuance of supporting the police, but investigating their command decisions. There is a difference. Did any politician interfere with Blair's command decisions in this fiasco? Is Ferguson insinuating that Harper directed all this, and that the black bloc criminals were police plants?!
And when in the same letter Ferguson laughably goes off on Lorrie Goldstein as " (Monte) Solberg's fellow climate-change denier and authority", it begs the question of what "authority" Climategate deniers such as Ferguson bow to and cite? Al Gore? David Suzuki? Stephane Dion? Jim Bradley? The IPCC? Ban Ki Moon? Who?
Neither John Eco-Tax-Stewardship-Chump Gerretsen, nor Jim Kyodiot Bradley, nor Michael Ignatieff, nor even Environment Canada's chief climatologist David Phillips, have revealed their so-called 'proof' of 'man-made global-warming/climate-change' - have they?
What does the supposedly-hurtful phrase "climate-change denier" even mean when used by someone like Ferguson?!
Its use does speak volumes about the user's state of political awareness: you're a denier... a DENIER, you hear, you neo-con denying denier? ... you damn denying neo-conning denier... bla bla bla whatever...
Ironically, on the same page as Ferguson's letter appeared, another Goldstein column on the global-warming deception also ran: "Climate scandal kills green wave", which certainly Ferguson will immediately dismiss as right wing propaganda(!):
"Most people understand what an independent public inquiry is.
Except climate scientists and politicians.
In a public inquiry, a third party with no interest in the outcome -- typically a judge -- is appointed by government with a mandate to investigate an issue of public concern.
The inquiry has its own legal counsel, investigators and budget.
It has the power to compel witnesses to testify publicly, to cross-examine them, to demand documents and call in outside experts.
By that standard, the three official "inquiries" into "Climategate" -- the last of which recently "exonerated" scientists at the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) of the University of East Anglia (UEA) -- again were farces.
Two were cases of the UEA appointing sympathetic academics to investigate itself.
The third was a one-day hearing before a British parliamentary committee in a country that has been at the forefront of global warming hysteria.
Climategate involved the unsanctioned release of thousands of e-mails and documents by leading climate scientists.
The most infamous came from former CRU director Phil Jones about using a "trick" to "hide the decline" in temperatures, plus discussing with colleagues ways to hide data from freedom of information requests under U.K. law.
The latest "inquiry" found what the two previous ones did -- the science of climate change is sound (surprise!), but researchers were unprofessionally secretive.
While warmists declared "victory" with each predictable report, and are still fighting skeptics over the credibility of various claims in the 2007 report of the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which basically described global warming as an existential threat, much of the public has stopped listening.
International polls show concern over climate change dropping -- even in countries such as Germany, which has heavily invested in renewable energy -- and most significantly in the U.S., the world's No. 2 greenhouse gas emitter.
With China, the world's largest emitter, refusing to accept hard emission targets, global negotiations to draft a successor agreement to the (widely ignored) Kyoto accord, which expires in 2012, are stalled.
There'll be another attempt in Cancun this November after talks all but fell apart in Copenhagen last December, but the effort is losing steam.
One reason is the realization global, centrally- imposed diktats to cut emissions over mandated time frames -- mindful of the former Soviet Union's absurd five-year plans for the production of tin -- don't work.
Another is politicians now have to move from promising to lower emissions, which is easy, to lowering them, which, as the public is discovering, is ruinously expensive, doesn't work and will lead to power shortages.
Optimists might say, as Newsweek did Monday in an essay, "A Green Retreat: Why the environment is no longer a surefire political winner," that climate change is finally being put into perspective as one of many challenges we face, not necessarily the most significant.
Unfortunately, the global political fight never has been about the environment, but about expanding government power domestically and creating, internationally, a socialist, money-sucking scheme to transfer wealth from the first world to the third. That effort is proceeding.
It's how Stephen Harper accurately described Kyoto, before he became prime minister and stopped talking about the issue honestly.
As for the opposition parties, they're so uninformed about the devastating economic consequences of what they're advocating, it's just scary."
But global-warming is real, you denying neo-con denier, denying the changing clim... bla bla bla...
Pearson's article says that Ignatieff "spent more than twenty years living and working in in the United Kingdom and the United States." I recall earlier articles which had different estimates of how much time Iffy had been 'internationalizing' abroad - for instance, the Toronto Star's Rob Ferguson, in the article below, reported that Ignatieff had just moved back to Toronto in Dec.2005, "after almost 30 years abroad".
Maybe some of the donut-chompin' reporters tagging along with Ignatieff's Can You Smell Me Now? cross-Canada tour can get an exact answer from Iffy of how long he's been 'internationalizing' abroad.
Rob Ferguson wrote in "Liberal switches camps; Riding president says he'll back Conservative, Move follows uproar over Ignatieff nomination" (Toronto Star, Jan 21, 2006):
"In a defection designed to damage Liberal candidate Michael Ignatieff, the president of his Liberal riding association in Etobicoke-Lakeshore endorsed Conservative rival John Capobianco yesterday.
The controversial process by which Ignatieff was acclaimed the candidate over local hopefuls - ruled ineligible by the party at a raucous meeting Nov. 30 - was a major factor in the decision, said Ron Chyczij, who sought the nod himself.
"After the nomination fiasco, I've purposely waited on the sidelines to see if Michael Ignatieff can in some way redeem himself as a credible Liberal candidate," Chyczij said in a statement.
"This has not happened."
The move comes as candidates in the riding - held for 12 years by retiring Liberal MP Jean Augustine - begin a final weekend of campaigning before Monday's vote, which is expected to be close.
It's not clear how Chyczij's defection will affect Ignatieff - disgruntled Liberals have been protesting for weeks - but "it's not exactly going to help," said one Liberal who spoke on condition of anonymity.
Ignatieff's camp disputed that view and said Chyczij hasn't been on the sidelines.
"He's been the organizer of some of the protests and conspiring with Capobianco," said Ignatieff's campaign manager, Sachin Aggarwal.
Chyczij, who also quit as riding association president, could not be reached for comment. He has not been involved in the Conservative campaign, Capobianco said.
"I was quite surprised, and pleasantly," Capobianco said in an interview, adding Chyczij's reasoning echoes "concerns we've been hearing at the door" from voters.
Chyczij said he'll vote for the Conservatives because they are "the only major party on record to openly declare that they would end the practice of 'parachuting' candidates."
Toronto-born Ignatieff returned to the city last month to teach at the University of Toronto after almost 30 years abroad. He does not live in the riding.
Chyczij said the "last straw" was controversy about the views of Ignatieff, a former human-rights professor at Harvard University, on the Iraq war, torture and ethnic groups.
Ignatieff, the author of 16 books, supported the U.S.-led Iraq war but has denied that his writings support torture of suspects in the war on terror and slander ethnic groups like Ukrainians.
The riding association is dominated by Ukrainians, who hoped to field one of their own as a candidate.
While he threw his support to Capobianco, Chyczij also said New Democratic Party candidate Liam McHugh-Russell shows promise.
"Both have a clearer vision of what is important to the residents of the riding," Chyczij wrote."
... as we have so sadly seen, this charlatan Ignatieff is still clearly out of touch, not only with what is important to his own riding, but now with what is important to Canadians.
His policies and his methods reek of political manipulation and condescension - his elitist noble sneer is palpable in whatever this guy says - he's just not a believable persona; his rhetoric is tiring and uninspiring, comprising of stale-dated crap leftover from Stephane Bumbledore Dion's asinine Greenshift Tour fiaso from the summer of 2007. Yeah - at least Iggy is recycling Bumbledore's failed old rhetoric, how, um, green...
And Iggy's stupid sulphuric sarcasm is so-unflattering - to himself! Iggy should be smart enough to get that - but, as Kelly McParland wrote in "Not as smart as we thought" - Iggy just isn't.
"With poll numbers in the toilet and rain greeting his every campaign stop, Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff’s cross-Canada tour stalled on Highway 34 just outside of Hawkesbury, Ont., late on Tuesday.
Shortly after giving a speech to several dozen supporters, Ignatieff’s Liberal Express bus broke down on the side of the road. A broken transmission stalled the tour until a car could be brought in to ferry Ignatieff and media representatives to the next event in Cornwall. A second bus has now taken over.
The tour began with a send-off on Parliament Hill with about 100 Liberals cheering on their leader as rain pelted the front steps of Parliament Hill.
Ignatieff then took to the road, making a pit stop at a Tim Hortons to buy doughnuts before moving on to the eastern Ontario towns of St. Albert and Hawkesbury.
Along the way, the message was about bringing jobs back to rural Canada. The Liberals say that if they are to have a shot at winning back power they need to win rural seats again and move out of their base in Montreal, Toronto and Vancouver.
Ignatieff says a Liberal government would turn Canada back into a more caring society, telling supporters that he wants to restore the image of Canada “…as a beacon of hope, a beacon of human rights, a beacon of peace, order and good government, an example of tolerance to the world.”
What a pantload of Ignatieff's ignorant Liberal poppycock.
It's great to see Iggy Poop, Liberal elitist, now trying to manipulate Canadians into believing that Iggy or his Grits give a fig about rural Canada. This calculated ploy is at the cynical heart of Iggy's Liberal Deception 2010 Tour. Iggy's poll numbers are in the toilet because Iggy's policies are crap, smeared with elitist liberalism which Canadians do not care for. Iggy's persona and policies (such as they are) represent his egg-head academic detachment, smug disdain, and elitism.
Ignatieff's Smell my Iggyness Tour 2010 isn't changing this perception - it's only reaffirming it to Canadians and reinforcing the fact that Iggy is a disaster who should've been given a one-way bus ticket by his party back to Harvard, where he could pontificate and sneer and theorize with his liberal buddies at how dumb them farm hicks are, too stupid ta see da big picher... That's the real Iggy. Watching this disgusting charlatan of an urban cowboy pretending he's 'one of the little people' is painful and insulting. He's a FLICKING poser.
Listening to Count Iggula's endless rhetoric and cloying boilerplate speeches is already tiresome - and its only been a couple of days of Ignatieff's Smells Like Mean Spirit Tour !!
It's the same old vacuous Grit-shit, spewed by Icky at at one hicktown whistlestop after another, places which he is certainly glad to see the back of as soon as he gets back on his planet-killing, diesel-fume-spewin', anti-Suzuki bus. (Iggy's buyin' donuts? Yikes - call his Liberal health critic: why isn't Carolyn Body-Bags Bennett whining about how Canadians are all fat and condemning Iggy for being an enabler to the Fat Problem Of Canada? Did any reporter ask Iggy why he didn't get granola bars? Or are we to believe that Count Iggula is just a Good Ole Aw, Shucks Guy, and that getting the boys and gals some donuts shows that it is so?)
Michael Ignatieff doesn't explain the legitimacy of HIS OWN nomination in Etobicoke South.
How did all that subterfuge, back in the fall of 2005, happen, Mike?
How exactly did you fly in from Harvard to become an Etobicoke MP, Mike?
You coyly didn't talk about the Parachute Process then; so, now, as Liberal leader and aspirant to the top political office in Canada, will you talk specifically about how you were nominated into Etobicoke-Lakeshore??
Are any of Iggy's donut-stuffed reporter buddies asking?
Liberal manipulation worked out nicely for Iggy, eh?
After all, isn't Ignatieff's Smell My Putrid Policy Tour supposedly ALL ABOUT (as Iggy himself says) "the politics of manipulation"?
If so, then when will Michael Ignatieff, the carpetbagger from Harvard, tell us in his own words how his own Liberal party manipulated his nomination into the Etobicoke -Lakeshore riding? (...and we don't want a re-hash of the manipulated, white-washed propaganda version of Ignatieff's dirty ascendancy into power which you see - pardon, don't see - on wikipedia!!)
This Liberal piece of hypocritical shit should be held accountable to the same standards he sanctimoniously holds others to.
COME ON, IGGY: let's hear how your own Liberal party manipulated YOU into power.
Tell us about it, you sulphuric-spewin' slimeball.
Wednesday, July 14, 2010
Of course, Iggy was quick to point out that this "is not a metaphor for anything" - yet Ignatieff coyly 'smelling sulphur' in reference to Harper apparently WAS a darn good metaphor...
Count Iggula is so full of crap it's hard to know where to start hosing down his Gritty stench; let's look at day two of Count Crapula's diesel-spewing bus tour (gosh, by the way - have Stephane Bumbledore Dion, or David McGuinty, yet told Canadians how much pollution Iffy's cross-Canada tour will cause?
Why aren't McGuinty and Dion issuing dire warnings about how Michael Ignatieff is killing the planet with his "Smell me, I'm Iggy" 2010 tour? No carbon-offsets to brag about? No snide remarks about the evils of 'tar-sands' diesel?!
How odd that Ignatieff isn't walking or biking across the country, to show us how pure and green his liberalism is!
And none of his reporter buddies along for Iffy's propaganda tour are asking?
Let's look at Count Iggula's explanation for his eco-killing bus tour...
(isn't it eco-killing? Let's ask Suzuki: well?... [insert sound of crickets]
...when Iggy says:
“We’re going to bring politics back to the Canadian people, restore faith in the political process, give Canadians an alternative — a compassionate, progressive, reforming alternative,” Mr. Ignatieff said. “We’re going to do politics differently. We don’t like a government that doesn’t respect the institution behind us. We’re going to practice the politics of persuasion instead of the politics of manipulation.”
What a pantload of manure that is: pure Liberal horseshit, right from the lead horse's mouth.
Iggy Poop wants to 'persuade' us that Harper is the devil!!!!!!!!!!!!! What a moron. There's nothing trustworthy about Iggy whatsoever.
Ignatieff should be the last person pretending that his Liberals are somehow above the "politics of manipulation" - Iffy's ENTIRE TOUR is nothing BUT manipulative; it's an orgy of Icky manipulation!!!!
Why aren't Icky's reporter buddies asking about HOW he got nominated?!
Why hasn't even a single reporter bothered to get Ignatieff to explain to Canadians HOW HE ACTUALLY BECAME THE MP in Etobicoke?!
Ignatieff's OWN damn nomination was NOTHING BUT MANIPULATION.
It was a pure example of Liberal elitist thuggery in how the Liberal Party shoved Michael Ignatieff into the Etobicoke riding - see here; see here; see here.
Back then, in 2005, Iggy, the smarmy SOB, coyly told us he had no comment on the process by which he was parachuted by the Liberals into the Etobicoke riding; yet now this FLICKING hypocritical bag of elitist shit - as leader of the same Liberals - wants to wax poetic about the 'politics of manipulation'!
IGNATIEFF IS THE POSTER CHILD FOR THE POLITICS OF MANIPULATION!!
This IGGYPALOOZA tour, as well as Ignatieff's entire existence in Liberal politics, are the very definition of political manipulation.
Let's see some reporter have the balls to nail Iggy on his political poppycock.
But, don't get your hopes up - no reporter from the St.Catharines Standard has yet bothered to ask for Liberal MPP Jim Bradley's views on the latest climate scam revelation.
This has nothin' to do with Jimmy, y'see... it's not as if Jim Bradley ever promoted doomsday global-warming GreenFearTM !! (heh heh)
Bradley surely would prefer that guys like Ross McKitrick didn't keep coming up with things that questioned the greenshevist climate deceptions of politicians such as Jim, as in McKitrick's column "Defects in key climate data uncovered" (National Post, Oct.1, 2009)
Oddly, we didn't hear much about McKitrick and his "climate-change" revelations in the St.Catharines Standard back then. I mean, really, why question Jim Bradley's graphic hockey-stick enviro-fantasy?!
We still don't see anything in the Standard looking into the World Wildlife Fund's co-opting of the McMullan council with their 'earth day' propaganda... It's best to, you know, not talk about it... after all: RAH RAH RAH Copenhagen, doncha know...!
But now, the St.Catharines Standard's editors could have at least tried to correct Ross McKitrick's name in Brian Lilley's Sun Media story, which was mis-spelled as "McKintrick".
[Maybe the green teamster cheerleaders over at the Jim Bradley Fan Club were going 'Ross mcwho? We dunno anything 'bout him... who is this guy? We, like, all know, like, about Al Gore, eh, and the melting, like, um, glaciers and stuff... and like... umm, oh yeah, the flooding and stuff, and ah, oh yeah... the drowning polar bears and stuff... and like we know about David Suzuki , and about Jim Bradley and Kyoto... but like, we've never heard of this Mcsomething guy...']
Brian Lilley reported in "Climate change science under fire - again" (St.Catharines Standard, July 13, 2010):
"The scientific accuracy of the United Nations' climate change reports are coming under fire again.
In a scandal that dates back to January and was dubbed Amazongate at the time, it has been confirmed that claims of the Amazon burning up due to climate change were sexed-up and pulled from activist literature.
The 2007 UN report on climate change, the one that has helped guide government efforts to spend billions of dollars to combat global warming, claimed that “Up to 40% of the Amazonian forests could react drastically to even a slight reduction in precipitation.”
The real report, drawn from a website and paid for by pressure group the World Wildlife Fund, says something quite different.
While the UN reports are often described as scientific and peer-reviewed, this claim of the Amazon being at high risk originated on a website of a Brazilian advocacy group. The original claim read that “Probably 30 to 40% of the forests of the Brazilian Amazon are sensitive to small reductions in the amount of rainfall."
The World Wildlife Fund says it cannot be held responsible for how the UN climate change group used its data.
So far no one seems to be able to say how a report that claimed parts of the Brazilian rainforest “probably” are “sensitive” was hyped to make things sound more dire.
Professor Ross McKintrick says no one should be surprised that such mistakes end up in these massive reports.
“The IPCC (Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change) doesn’t have the internal rigour that one would expect of it,” said McKintrick [sic] from his office at the University of Guelph. “Nothing is in the process to prevent activist rhetoric from appearing.” McKintrick, who teaches environmental economics and has had his own battles with the accuracy of climate change reports, says the calculations used in the UN reports are often not checked for accuracy and even the much-vaunted peer-review process does not guarantee that the information used is correct.
Amazongate is not the only claim that relies on information from activist groups.
Toronto author Donna Lafamboise recently led a team of citizen auditors through the 2007 climate change report and found heavy use of reports from Greenpeace and the World Wildlife Fund. That report is published at noconsensus.org.
Laframboise says Greenpeace was cited at least eight times and the WWF at least nine times, despite both groups having clearly stated activist goals when it comes to climate change.
“This is shocking in a report that the public has been told relies solely on peer-reviewed research published in scientific journals,” said Laframboise.
The UN has appointed a team of academic experts to give advice on how to avoid these mistakes in the future, but McKintrick says the UN isn’t really serious about changing anything.
He points out that the authors for the next massive climate change report have already been chosen and many were part of the last error-riddled effort.
Work has also already begun on the follow-up to Copenhagen; climate experts will try to hash out a new climate deal in Cancun, Mexico, in November."
Activist climate-change/global-warming literature and rhetoric?! What about the activist rhetoric, the greenshevism, which was FEAR-MONGERED INTO POLICY by statist politicians and Liberal liars such as Dalton McGuinty and Jim Bradley?
Who's looking into that?
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
The greensheviks will be so miffed. This "eco-fee" follows on the heels of another McGuinty-implemented tax increase, the HST.
Guelph Grit hack Liz Sandals rationalized to keep McGuinty's ridiculous HST, while at the same time bashing Hudak, in the Jun.17, 2010 GuelphMercury story "Hudak slams HST again, offers no alternative"
Oh, and the GuelphMercury headline was precious! Have they ever asked for any McGuintyite, even their local hero, 'to offer alternatives'?! Now there's a Liberal Asslick Society teachable moment for you; the St.Catharines Standard should take note of the technique: ominous bias, built right into the headline, slanted just so for your 'proper' political enjoyment!
Oh - and though reporter Layson made damn sure we knew Hudak had 'no supporters on the sidewalk' (WTF?!), oddly, he didn't mention how many supporters 'were standing on the sidewalk' outside of Sandals' office!!
And, oddly, no mention by Layson of what Liz Sandals might have 'failed to mention' (!) ... wow Greg Layson... well done... (and forget about whether any GuelphMercury reporters might have ever 'failed to ask' Liberal Sandals any inconvenient questions!!)
(oh... and yes Greg, unlike with the HST, Hudak DID say that a future PC gov't WOULD scrap McGuinty's deceptively named "eco-fee" tax.)
"Re:Put the HST blame where it belongs (July 6).
Just to be sure that I do not mix up my Jim Bradleys, is letter writer John Currey talking about the Jim Bradley who is an associate of Kim Craitor of Niagara Falls, who commute to Toronto to engage in "meaningful discussion and debate" in the big house at Queens's Park?
The Bradley and Craitor who followed the lead of Dalton McGuinty and provided Ontario with a no-tax-increase election promise yet introduced the health-care premium, doubled the price of most lottery tickets, increased licensing fees, created an eco-tax many people don't realize they pay until they see the bill, put a disposal tax on all electronics and back on tires, passed the HST (the largest tax on the province ever, followed closely by the health-care premium), introduced us to SMART meters and gave us the eHealth scandal with $1.2 billion wasted?
Are they the ones who closed emergency rooms in Port Colborne and Fort Erie because there is not enough money, yet awarded a hospital in Toronto $3 million -- in the riding where there just happened to be a byelection to replace George Smitherman (who I believe was an associate of Bradley and Craitor)?
Is it the same Bradley and Craitor who have taken the richest, most prosperous province in Canada down to one of the poorest, but they awarded McGuinty a nice little salary increase of $40,000 a year and voted for all MPPs to get a 14% increase?
Is this the Jim Bradley Currey was talking about, or do I have him mixed up with someone else?"
Yeah, of course: that's them - that's the same James J. Bradley, the secretive Liberal MPP from St.Catharines, and his leftier foil Kim Craitor, Liberal MPP from Niagara Falls, stars of the Gritty Jimmy'N'Kimmy Show.
And don't forget Jimmy'N'Kimmy's and Clean-Air McGuinty's Liberal lies about "closing all the coal power plants down by 2007"...
And don't forget Jimmy'N'Kimmy's disgusting health care monopolism ...
Monday, July 12, 2010
Yes They Can!
Their July 12, 2010 greenpaganda does a great job of pretending that Jim Bradley, the Liberal liar from St.Catharines, had nothin' whatsoever to do with this new tax - why, the green propagandists wouldn't even dare call this wonderful tax, a tax. Nope - to them and Jim it's a "fee", magically imposed by these Stewardship folks.
Jimmy had nothin' to do with it! Why ask Jimmy to explain anything?!
Of course the Green teamsters would want us to believe that all was wonderful with Jimmy's New Tax, because, well... it has the word "eco" in it, and "fee" - so it must be Good!! Isn't this what the greenies wanted all along - higher prices, less consumption?
"People can complain about the extra costs of moving forward with this initiative, or instead focus on whether we can afford not to" is Julie Greco's supportive, non-analytical rationalization, of Liberal Jim Bradley's secretive tax-increase; in other words, go FLICK yourselves, folks - we love Jimmy and we love what Jimmy's doin'!! Jimmy's 'movin' forward'... but, oh yeah... we can't mention Jimmy.
Jimmy's Liberal eco-tax (disguised as an 'eco- fee') was covered in Rex Murphy's July 11, 2010 National Post column "Dalton McGuinty, begin thine eco-incantations".
Murphy calls out the hypocrisy and the propaganda associated with the purveyors of "green" and "eco" - an observation that not only applies to McGuinty, but to his loyal bootlicks throughout Ontario, doing their best to support the Liberal cause in whatever way they can.
Interesting how no-one at the St.Catharines Standard /Jim Bradley Brown-Noser Society has yet bothered asking Jim Bradley to cite and explain which "scientific sources" he based his global-warming hysteria upon. Back in the early 2000's, Jim Bradley kept on shrieking at every opportunity about global warming and Kyoto, he even got kicked out of the House at Queen's Park on this issue. Yet, Jim Bradley has still not revealed (and, naturally, no one at his media fan club has ever bothered to ask) what Bradley's specific sources, which supposedly 'proved global warming', actually were.
As Terence Corcoran wrote re the IPCC and Climategate in "Climate science's watery reprieve":
""Emails," said the review, "are rarely definitive evidence of what actually happened."
True, in one sense, but tell that to Wall Street bankers who have gone to criminal trial on the basis of a few lines of email. "
In public office, Ontario Liberal MPP Jim Bradley peddled his similar kind of global-warming (now morphed to climate-change) deceptive hysteria FOR YEARS... and yet, has never provided us with his sources!
Just because Jim Bradley said so, it must have been true (!), so, Bradley's Asslick Fan Club couldn't be bothered to examine Bradley's bullshit; they were busy helping Jim demonize Harris and Eves, after all. Why would Jim Bradley's Brown Noser Cheerleading Society bother to analyze or question Jim Bradley's Liberal climate assumptions, his hyperbole, his GreenFearTM-mongering, and his politically-motivated deceptions?
Bradley proudly peddled his smug brand of climate GreenFearTM without question from a largely supportive and biased media. Upon what sources was Bradley's enviro-fear based?
Most likely, Jim Bradley was enamoured with the Michael Mann hockey stick graph, which to a hockey fan such as Good Ole Jim, was probably enough to convince him that the world was going to end unless Dalton McGuinty won the election.
Peter Foster in "Checking the hockey team" (National Post, Jul.10, 2010) writes of Andrew W. Montford's book "The hockey stick illusion; Climategate and the corruption of science" [...btw - I wonder how many copies of this book the St.Catharines Library will carry?! That certainly would be a real Inconvenient Truth to know, wouldn't it?!! Will the Green Team ask?! Hahaha... what "team" are they on?!...] Foster notes that the scandal imbued around Mann's man-made graph was not that it was central to proving man-made "global warming", but that the IPCC promoted it as if it were.
And many gullible greenshevist power-seeking statists believed this fraudulent, orchestrated deception. St.Catharines, Ont. Liberal MPP Jim Kyodiot Bradley, one of Canada's most prominent climate change fearmongerers, was among the earlier ones, before Al Gore's inconveniently-revealed bag of lies came along. This pseudo-science fit their political views like a glove, justifying their innate green bolshevism, and encouraging their greenshevik policy implementations, largely based on hysteria-fuelled GreenFearTM.
Let's hear Jim Bradley's views on Montford's book!!
Let's hear what "scientific evidence" Good Ole Jim Bradley had back in 2002 which "proved" global-warming!
Let's hear your answer, Jim!!
Let's hear Jim Bradley's Asslick Society Friends ask the question of their dear secretive leader!
Let's examine Jim Bradley's record of political enviro-fraud, of which the deceptively-named 'eco-fee' is but one incantation.