So much is known now about the Muskrat Falls fiasco - that even with the information we do not have - we know we've been had.
The perplexing question is how do we stop it?
Dwight Ball, Danny Williams, and those making fortunes on our bankrupt backs are counting on 2 things.
The first is apathy and the second is disorganization.
Let's talk about apathy. In the last CRA Poll of "decided" voters the Liberals held 40%, the PC's held 33%, the NDP held 24%, the Labrador Party 2% and the Greens (not a provincial party) held 1%.
Now the reality is that the undecided/refused was 43%, therefore the Liberals have support of 22.8% the PC's have support of 18.8%, the NDP have support of 13.6%, the Labrador Party have support of 1.1% and the Greens have support of .57%.
Part of this can be attributed to apathy and that suits the politicians just fine. Despite their protestations that voter participation should be higher - they are doing nothing really to entice those who either are sick of politicians or those who could care less.
Next we get to disorganization - a large chunk of that 43% undecided/refused are people who want to participate - but are so fed up with the big three choices that they can't commit to anything. They are also discouraged by the improbability that any new or marginal party would stand a chance.
There are twitter and blog trolls whose job it is to discourage active democratic movement - by simply saying things like "that won't work" "can't be done" "extremists and naysayers" etc.
Politicians are currently comfortable that this is all it will take to keep a real democratic movement from going forward. Why are they comfortable? Because the opposition to them is disorganized.
We have talented bloggers, intelligent tweeters, backroom experts, and call show gurus. They come from varied backgrounds and have personalities that are as diverse as you can get. They certainly have enough wherewithal to begin a new political movement. They could form a Cabinet that would make the current crew and the PC's before them look like rank amateurs.
For the most part - these people - many of whom have had political affiliations in the past - do not put Party in front of Province. They will take aim at the real issues and let rip.
The government (regardless of which one) will attempt to take some of them out with political appointments or engage them in another way to diminish the pool of articulate opposition.
In Quebec and other provinces - political movements are seen as advantageous and are encouraged. In Newfoundland and Labrador we have oodles of political minions who will take great pleasure in knocking them down. They don't have the capability to take them down on wits - so they get involved in name calling like "naysayer", "partisan", and/or "conspiracy theorists".
The other favourite pastime in Newfoundland and Labrador is to turn one of these people who oppose government against another who opposes government. This is done subtly - someone who knows someone says this about someone. You know - I'm sure you've all heard it. Then there is the politicians go-to, try and negatively impact the life of one of their antagonists. Yes - they do this - all the time.
The not-so-subtle approach is to just have a number of minions go beyond the normal types of insults and question a person's sanity - publicly. They also bring out "experts" to try and downplay the findings of a blogger - regardless of the validity. This public approach is also designed to deter others from becoming involved.
This is what we are dealing with. This is real.
Until the bloggers, the Tweeters, the backroom experts, and the call-show gurus (unofficial opposition) get together and plan some real action under real leadership - Muskrat and every other fiasco will continue.
We won't have a province left - but thanks to social media we'll have an historical account of the opposition.
Showing posts with label bloggers. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bloggers. Show all posts
Sunday, September 24, 2017
Tuesday, October 02, 2012
Talk with Sue - introduces For the Record
Sometime ago I established an online radio program called "Talk with Sue"
Last year it produced six programs to try out the new forum.
Since that time almost 10000 people have listened to the programs which are available online.
For the Record will be a series of shows dedicated to the Muskrat Falls debate. The idea here is to allow an hour of virtually uninterrupted time for critics of the deal or process of sanction to explain what their specific concerns are and what they feel might be a reasonable approach to this development or for energy development generally.
The government and supporters have millions to promote their side while critics are limited.
I am pleased to announce that Danny Dumaresque will be the first guest to jump in and talk to you - the people - about his concerns.
Danny is a former MHA and a former Director of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. He is a longstanding business person in Newfoundland and Labrador and has been actively involved in the Muskrat Falls debate.
Tune in tomorrow at 8 pm in Newfoundland and 7:30 in most of Labrador.
Press Here to go to the Show
Last year it produced six programs to try out the new forum.
Since that time almost 10000 people have listened to the programs which are available online.
For the Record will be a series of shows dedicated to the Muskrat Falls debate. The idea here is to allow an hour of virtually uninterrupted time for critics of the deal or process of sanction to explain what their specific concerns are and what they feel might be a reasonable approach to this development or for energy development generally.
The government and supporters have millions to promote their side while critics are limited.
I am pleased to announce that Danny Dumaresque will be the first guest to jump in and talk to you - the people - about his concerns.
Danny is a former MHA and a former Director of Newfoundland and Labrador Hydro. He is a longstanding business person in Newfoundland and Labrador and has been actively involved in the Muskrat Falls debate.
Tune in tomorrow at 8 pm in Newfoundland and 7:30 in most of Labrador.
Press Here to go to the Show
Friday, June 29, 2012
What's behind the VOCM Attack?
Here's the problem. VOCM boasts about the size of its listening audience - particularly their talk-shows.
If this is true then Randy Simms and VOCM allowed out and out lies to be broadcast - about a private citizen - to thousands of people.
Is this the role of a commercial radio station? Clearly it is not. So why then did VOCM allow it and to date not address it?
And yes it continues - over the air - on twitter - anywhere Paddy can get a smack in.
The difference is - he has a mic - and he controls a commercial radio program. Each and every time he comments it goes to thousands of people. What is the purpose?
The following is a sample of Paddy Daly's tirades :
At least you're not at home "crooked" like Sue - Paddy Daly states today on the airwaves.
or this today on Twitter
@hydroqueen let's get the rules straight? you are flying solo with your ramblings. call or be quiet. gutless. hypocrite.
I have not been on his or Randy's show for a long time now and did nothing to precipitate the commentary about me by callers like "Bob".
So VOCM will do this: They will allow slander and lies about a private person - and then provide that person the opportunity to call in and talk about it. As you can see by the "rules" Paddy has set above - I am being told I am to be quiet - unless I am calling him.
Again I ask - why is all this going on? It certainly is not in the interest of public discourse on issues of societal concern.
The term gutless is interesting. He has a program on a commercial broadcast station and continues to take pot-shots - harassing me to call his show.
After reading a post on my blog last weekend - Paddy tweeted the following:
@hydroqueen you poor woman.
This is also a very revealing comment. A very interesting choice of words - indeed.
There is something behind all of this and perhaps VOCM, Paddy, and Randy can let us know exactly what that is.
Until then - VOCM, Paddy and Randy do not control my blog or my twitter - so I will carry on.
Again people take note: it's me today - it may be you tomorrow.
My interest is Newfoundland and Labrador and the future generations. If that means speaking up and asking questions - then that's what I will do. If that means I challenge government on very bad resource deals, regressive legislation, or positions of potential conflict - then I will. If that causes unfair attacks and harassment - so be it. I have been doing it for 25 years - still here.
If this is true then Randy Simms and VOCM allowed out and out lies to be broadcast - about a private citizen - to thousands of people.
Is this the role of a commercial radio station? Clearly it is not. So why then did VOCM allow it and to date not address it?
And yes it continues - over the air - on twitter - anywhere Paddy can get a smack in.
The difference is - he has a mic - and he controls a commercial radio program. Each and every time he comments it goes to thousands of people. What is the purpose?
The following is a sample of Paddy Daly's tirades :
At least you're not at home "crooked" like Sue - Paddy Daly states today on the airwaves.
or this today on Twitter
@hydroqueen let's get the rules straight? you are flying solo with your ramblings. call or be quiet. gutless. hypocrite.
I have not been on his or Randy's show for a long time now and did nothing to precipitate the commentary about me by callers like "Bob".
So VOCM will do this: They will allow slander and lies about a private person - and then provide that person the opportunity to call in and talk about it. As you can see by the "rules" Paddy has set above - I am being told I am to be quiet - unless I am calling him.
Again I ask - why is all this going on? It certainly is not in the interest of public discourse on issues of societal concern.
The term gutless is interesting. He has a program on a commercial broadcast station and continues to take pot-shots - harassing me to call his show.
After reading a post on my blog last weekend - Paddy tweeted the following:
This is also a very revealing comment. A very interesting choice of words - indeed.
There is something behind all of this and perhaps VOCM, Paddy, and Randy can let us know exactly what that is.
Until then - VOCM, Paddy and Randy do not control my blog or my twitter - so I will carry on.
Again people take note: it's me today - it may be you tomorrow.
My interest is Newfoundland and Labrador and the future generations. If that means speaking up and asking questions - then that's what I will do. If that means I challenge government on very bad resource deals, regressive legislation, or positions of potential conflict - then I will. If that causes unfair attacks and harassment - so be it. I have been doing it for 25 years - still here.
Friday, March 16, 2012
Darin King - Twit of the Twitter - Condemns his Own Party!
Yesterday in the House of Assembly - Darin King proved - once again that he is full of it - wit -twit twitter.
Below is a partial transcript of what Mr. King was saying during debate on Interim Supply, Bill 2.
Let’s be clear, members in this House do not debate through Twitter, contrary to popular believe. I have said that, Mr. Chair, I do not engage very often but I did engage a couple of nights ago to say that if you have important questions on the fishery or sealing – because I would love to talk about all of that today – that this is the place to do it. Not only is it the place to do it, you have an obligation and a responsibility, when you put your name on the ballot to get elected to represent the people, you have a responsibility to raise those issues on the floor of the House of Assembly, I submit to you, and I invite you to do that today.
This is not a joke people - he actually said this. What did the media do? Nothing!
When the House of Assembly was held hostage by his government for months - they did not open it - what happened? Well the Minister of Natural Resources was debating the Muskrat Falls deal 140 characters at a time - and on some occasions a host of Tory Ministers and backbenchers were on Twitter debating with other politicians, bloggers, and other Tweeters from the province.
Then he says that MHA's who put their name on a ballot have the responsibility to raise issues on the floor of the House of Assembly. No - you don't say Minister - that is what the population was telling you when your government would NOT OPEN the HOA.
With a straight face King rose in the HOA and said that rubbish. Worse he was not challenged and berated by a media who knew the difference.
So Mr. King I believe you just taught Mr. Kennedy a lesson. And as Kennedy so loves novellas and poetry - might I recommend Of Mice and Men or perhaps Bobby Burns' "To a Mouse".
So if the media is going to declare that issues as important as Muskrat Falls are over - perhaps they could stop the nonsense and deception being delivered by our Ruling Party.
Further - making this worse is the fact that when the Tories were twitting away - while the House was closed - the same media was reporting as NEWS - that the government members were now debating on Twitter.
While you're at it - let's get to the bottom of the fishery - 140 characters at a time.
Below is a partial transcript of what Mr. King was saying during debate on Interim Supply, Bill 2.
Let’s be clear, members in this House do not debate through Twitter, contrary to popular believe. I have said that, Mr. Chair, I do not engage very often but I did engage a couple of nights ago to say that if you have important questions on the fishery or sealing – because I would love to talk about all of that today – that this is the place to do it. Not only is it the place to do it, you have an obligation and a responsibility, when you put your name on the ballot to get elected to represent the people, you have a responsibility to raise those issues on the floor of the House of Assembly, I submit to you, and I invite you to do that today.
This is not a joke people - he actually said this. What did the media do? Nothing!
When the House of Assembly was held hostage by his government for months - they did not open it - what happened? Well the Minister of Natural Resources was debating the Muskrat Falls deal 140 characters at a time - and on some occasions a host of Tory Ministers and backbenchers were on Twitter debating with other politicians, bloggers, and other Tweeters from the province.
Then he says that MHA's who put their name on a ballot have the responsibility to raise issues on the floor of the House of Assembly. No - you don't say Minister - that is what the population was telling you when your government would NOT OPEN the HOA.
With a straight face King rose in the HOA and said that rubbish. Worse he was not challenged and berated by a media who knew the difference.
So Mr. King I believe you just taught Mr. Kennedy a lesson. And as Kennedy so loves novellas and poetry - might I recommend Of Mice and Men or perhaps Bobby Burns' "To a Mouse".
So if the media is going to declare that issues as important as Muskrat Falls are over - perhaps they could stop the nonsense and deception being delivered by our Ruling Party.
Further - making this worse is the fact that when the Tories were twitting away - while the House was closed - the same media was reporting as NEWS - that the government members were now debating on Twitter.
While you're at it - let's get to the bottom of the fishery - 140 characters at a time.
Wednesday, February 29, 2012
Investigation Needed! Fear of Retribution - Dunderdale's Administation
Take these three statements found in the Telegram in 2012:
- St. John’s lawyer Ches Crosbie said he doesn’t want to become a target for speaking on the Muskrat Falls project, but he’s doing it anyway.
“I don’t want to get pissed on by the government,” he said. “Like anyone, I don’t want to make myself a target.”
- Fisheries Minister, Darin King, having just removed funding from the FFAW explains why.
"I've clearly learned that no matter what we do in this situation, the FFAW is always going to have a criticism to be lobbied at government. "There's no way they're ever going to be working with us for the betterment of the industry."
- Russell Wangersky on a letter the Telegram received wherein the person asked to remain anonymous.
Friday, a letter came in where the writer said “I would like to publish the attached as a letter to the editor but can't do it under my name.”
Asked for the reasons for requesting anonymity, the writer mentioned concerns about government retribution against family members.
__________________________________________________________
These are just a few examples of many wherein either people express their fear of government or the Premier and her Ministers describing bloggers, tweeters, and callers to talk-shows as naysayers, political hacks, ignorant, or foolish.
Darin King on the Fisheries Broadcast yesterday went on to say that criticism (publicly) is not necessary just come sit at the table. Number one that is a lie - to stop criticizing government does not guarantee they will ever sit at a table. Number two - the desire of this Minister and others - including the Premier - that public discourse be halted is very disturbing. Number three - the continued labelling of citizens who criticize by using very negative adjectives or adverbs - in an attempt to shut them up - is the sign of a very weak government that is not confident in its policies.
Russell Wangersky is his piece says:
"The fear of retribution is not new: whether it’s a reality or not is hard to know for sure. I know businessmen I’ve talked to in the province — and I’ve said this before — who are willing to talk a lot about Muskrat Falls in private, but who will never speak publicly.
And there have been cases where the province has removed people from positions for making comments the government didn’t approve of."
Russell is one of the few journalists we have left in the province - however - he too questions the reality of retribution. Maybe it's time for Russell and his colleagues to truly investigate this hypothesis and determine once and for all whether this is the case or not.
I am certain it is - as I personally - have been and continue to be on the receiving end.
The Dunderdale administration was trained like seals by Premier Williams on the art of attacking citizens and media who dare criticize. While the terribly weak MHA's who bless Danny Williams for their good fortune - continue to behave as told - in order to hang on to the best gig they will ever have; the media should not be so intimidated - that is unless there's something we don't know about their bosses.
The talk-shows on VOCM are NOT what they used to be - the rules are different - and they control the flow of what is debated or discussed. It is NOT a free for all. What Steele and the shareholders of Newfoundland Capital Corporation (headquartered in Nova Scotia) should understand - is that if this intimidation of intelligent citizens continues - the programs will be left with - Tony - Margorie - and Jack - accompanied by Tory Ministers and backbenchers praising the statue of Dunderdale or the inverted M archway heading into the promised Dannyland.
- St. John’s lawyer Ches Crosbie said he doesn’t want to become a target for speaking on the Muskrat Falls project, but he’s doing it anyway.
“I don’t want to get pissed on by the government,” he said. “Like anyone, I don’t want to make myself a target.”
- Fisheries Minister, Darin King, having just removed funding from the FFAW explains why.
"I've clearly learned that no matter what we do in this situation, the FFAW is always going to have a criticism to be lobbied at government. "There's no way they're ever going to be working with us for the betterment of the industry."
- Russell Wangersky on a letter the Telegram received wherein the person asked to remain anonymous.
Friday, a letter came in where the writer said “I would like to publish the attached as a letter to the editor but can't do it under my name.”
Asked for the reasons for requesting anonymity, the writer mentioned concerns about government retribution against family members.
__________________________________________________________
These are just a few examples of many wherein either people express their fear of government or the Premier and her Ministers describing bloggers, tweeters, and callers to talk-shows as naysayers, political hacks, ignorant, or foolish.
Darin King on the Fisheries Broadcast yesterday went on to say that criticism (publicly) is not necessary just come sit at the table. Number one that is a lie - to stop criticizing government does not guarantee they will ever sit at a table. Number two - the desire of this Minister and others - including the Premier - that public discourse be halted is very disturbing. Number three - the continued labelling of citizens who criticize by using very negative adjectives or adverbs - in an attempt to shut them up - is the sign of a very weak government that is not confident in its policies.
Russell Wangersky is his piece says:
"The fear of retribution is not new: whether it’s a reality or not is hard to know for sure. I know businessmen I’ve talked to in the province — and I’ve said this before — who are willing to talk a lot about Muskrat Falls in private, but who will never speak publicly.
And there have been cases where the province has removed people from positions for making comments the government didn’t approve of."
Russell is one of the few journalists we have left in the province - however - he too questions the reality of retribution. Maybe it's time for Russell and his colleagues to truly investigate this hypothesis and determine once and for all whether this is the case or not.
I am certain it is - as I personally - have been and continue to be on the receiving end.
The Dunderdale administration was trained like seals by Premier Williams on the art of attacking citizens and media who dare criticize. While the terribly weak MHA's who bless Danny Williams for their good fortune - continue to behave as told - in order to hang on to the best gig they will ever have; the media should not be so intimidated - that is unless there's something we don't know about their bosses.
The talk-shows on VOCM are NOT what they used to be - the rules are different - and they control the flow of what is debated or discussed. It is NOT a free for all. What Steele and the shareholders of Newfoundland Capital Corporation (headquartered in Nova Scotia) should understand - is that if this intimidation of intelligent citizens continues - the programs will be left with - Tony - Margorie - and Jack - accompanied by Tory Ministers and backbenchers praising the statue of Dunderdale or the inverted M archway heading into the promised Dannyland.
Friday, December 30, 2011
Dunderdale Continues as Amateur Psychologist! McLeod Complies?
Perhaps James McLeod of the Telegram can let us know if he got anywhere with the Premier as she continued to attack critics and psychoanalyse them.
In Dunderdale's discussion with the reporter, she managed to focus more on her critics than on anything of substance.
First off the mark is Ms. Dunderdale's assessment that the year has been good once you get past the "political noise". She is in politics right?
Next our Premier "wished people could set aside political posturing and gamesmanship".
Followed up with this assessment regarding the fishery, Dunderdale dismissed a lot of the rhetoric as “foolishness” and said, “I would like to cut through all of these agendas and positions and so on.”
Muskrat Falls? Well Dunderdale says the constant drumbeat of criticism from the Liberal Opposition was mostly picking away at tiny “snapshots” of the project, instead of considering the larger picture.
As for the House of Assembly our great leader said The criticism for leaving the House closed was driven mostly by the NDP and a handful of pundits online.
And how does our Premier know this? “I’ve got a Twitter account; I know who’s making the noise. It’s the same people who are making the noise about everything else, and it’s politically driven,”
And this from the partisan of the year - “I think it’s really important to discriminate between what’s political noise driven within the machine of a party.”
Then the most telling line of the article by McLeod: Dunderdale argued that leaving the legislature closed doesn’t really matter to ordinary people.
Then the leader of the Progressive Conservatives demonstrated her math skills by saying: “We’ve got more political representatives on the ground than any other political party; we have more volunteers than any other political party in this province, and we have more supporters of a dozen different ilks,” she said. “We’re not out of touch with what people are saying, and this is not an issue.”
Let's end this "enlightening" piece of fluff with this: The thing about politics, Dunderdale said, is that when you fail, you fail publicly.
“There’s a lot of risk involved in it,” she said, but added that in the past year, she can’t think of any time when she’s faced that sort of public failure.
If McLeod was any more successful in asking the Premier to answer specifically who and what she is talking about - he's not letting on. Just another day of media allowing the Premier to throw out innuendo in an attempt to warn her critics that she has them psychoanalysed and is watching them.
Sue's Blog will take each of the Premier's comments and blog individually on them.
In Dunderdale's discussion with the reporter, she managed to focus more on her critics than on anything of substance.
First off the mark is Ms. Dunderdale's assessment that the year has been good once you get past the "political noise". She is in politics right?
Next our Premier "wished people could set aside political posturing and gamesmanship".
Followed up with this assessment regarding the fishery, Dunderdale dismissed a lot of the rhetoric as “foolishness” and said, “I would like to cut through all of these agendas and positions and so on.”
Muskrat Falls? Well Dunderdale says the constant drumbeat of criticism from the Liberal Opposition was mostly picking away at tiny “snapshots” of the project, instead of considering the larger picture.
As for the House of Assembly our great leader said The criticism for leaving the House closed was driven mostly by the NDP and a handful of pundits online.
And how does our Premier know this? “I’ve got a Twitter account; I know who’s making the noise. It’s the same people who are making the noise about everything else, and it’s politically driven,”
And this from the partisan of the year - “I think it’s really important to discriminate between what’s political noise driven within the machine of a party.”
Then the most telling line of the article by McLeod: Dunderdale argued that leaving the legislature closed doesn’t really matter to ordinary people.
Then the leader of the Progressive Conservatives demonstrated her math skills by saying: “We’ve got more political representatives on the ground than any other political party; we have more volunteers than any other political party in this province, and we have more supporters of a dozen different ilks,” she said. “We’re not out of touch with what people are saying, and this is not an issue.”
Let's end this "enlightening" piece of fluff with this: The thing about politics, Dunderdale said, is that when you fail, you fail publicly.
“There’s a lot of risk involved in it,” she said, but added that in the past year, she can’t think of any time when she’s faced that sort of public failure.
If McLeod was any more successful in asking the Premier to answer specifically who and what she is talking about - he's not letting on. Just another day of media allowing the Premier to throw out innuendo in an attempt to warn her critics that she has them psychoanalysed and is watching them.
Sue's Blog will take each of the Premier's comments and blog individually on them.
Thursday, December 29, 2011
Dunderdale's Interview - You be the Journalist
“The criticism can sometimes be relentless, and from a small handful of
people, but they tend to be very loud and scathing, and personal, and
mean”
Okay so the Premier makes the statement above during a media interview. You be the journalist!
What questions would you ask of her?
How about the following:
Premier - What or who specifically are you talking about?
Premier - Can you give me some examples of this?
Premier - What criticism is acceptable?
Premier - Who do you think should be allowed to criticize you?
Premier - Isn't this just a part of democracy?
Premier - Do you attack critics personally?
Premier - What's personal?
Premier - Do you think refusing to open the House of Assembly has precipitated some of this?
When they get answers to this - perhaps the media can ask for the other side to comment on the Premier's remarks.
As it stands - the media is allowing all bloggers to be tarred with the same brush. They are allowing the Premier to threaten free speech by casually throwing out innuendo in an attempt to thwart justified commentary by the people She serves.
It is not acceptable for CBC to simply place the following poll online:
Dunderdale is not the first politician to be peeved with the tone and content of online criticism. What do you think?
Do the right thing CBC - get the answers from the Premier and then allow those she is attacking personally to respond.
Okay so the Premier makes the statement above during a media interview. You be the journalist!
What questions would you ask of her?
How about the following:
Premier - What or who specifically are you talking about?
Premier - Can you give me some examples of this?
Premier - What criticism is acceptable?
Premier - Who do you think should be allowed to criticize you?
Premier - Isn't this just a part of democracy?
Premier - Do you attack critics personally?
Premier - What's personal?
Premier - Do you think refusing to open the House of Assembly has precipitated some of this?
When they get answers to this - perhaps the media can ask for the other side to comment on the Premier's remarks.
As it stands - the media is allowing all bloggers to be tarred with the same brush. They are allowing the Premier to threaten free speech by casually throwing out innuendo in an attempt to thwart justified commentary by the people She serves.
It is not acceptable for CBC to simply place the following poll online:
Dunderdale is not the first politician to be peeved with the tone and content of online criticism. What do you think?
Do the right thing CBC - get the answers from the Premier and then allow those she is attacking personally to respond.
Wednesday, December 28, 2011
New Blogger Society
A Newfoundland and Labrador Blogger Society is being formed to comment officially on public issues. It is also being created to respond to back-hand snide comments by politicians under fire.
See you soon from the Peanut Gallery - we will be open more to the public than the Gallery at the House of Assembly.
Dunderdale's words: “The criticism can sometimes be relentless, and from a small handful of people, but they tend to be very loud and scathing, and personal, and mean,”
See you soon from the Peanut Gallery - we will be open more to the public than the Gallery at the House of Assembly.
Dunderdale's words: “The criticism can sometimes be relentless, and from a small handful of people, but they tend to be very loud and scathing, and personal, and mean,”
Wednesday, October 19, 2011
"Talk with Sue" - A new Online Talk Show
Hi all - I am starting a new radio talk show "Talk with Sue"
The introductory show will take place this evening at 8 o'clock.
To listen in please go to http://www.blogtalkradio.com/talkwithsue
This is a test this evening - so who knows how it will go.
This program will talk openly about issues important to Newfoundland and Labrador.
Let's see what happens when commercial and political party interests are not at play.
The introductory show will take place this evening at 8 o'clock.
To listen in please go to http://www.blogtalkradio.com/talkwithsue
This is a test this evening - so who knows how it will go.
This program will talk openly about issues important to Newfoundland and Labrador.
Let's see what happens when commercial and political party interests are not at play.
Monday, July 30, 2007
Innuendo???
Lot's of that to go around.
For anybody wondering why Ryan Cleary might take pot shots at a blogger - here's a theory.
When I posted the response on Sue's Blog to Cleary's suggestion that I may be in a conflict - essentially questioning if I am blogging for cash - speaking for somebody else - who should come directly to the particular page but Ontario Hydro.
My My - I guess the questioning of my credibility would come in handy for Ontario Hydro as I am one of the strongest public proponents to prevent Lower Churchill Power from being exported to them - instead to be used in Labrador. In fact the discussion has been hot and heavy lately.
As I have mentioned before - my site has a meter which can be viewed by any reader to Sue's Blog. This meter provides information on who is accessing the site - not ordinary mortals like you and I - we just come up as Aliant or Rogers etc.- instead of by name. However if you are the Federal or Provincial governments - or the RCMP or Exxon or even Ontario Hydro - the meter identifies that.
Here for the record is the visit by Ontario Hydro and the page they entered on.
Domain Name (Unknown)
IP Address 142.47.133.# (Ontario Hydro - Telecom)
ISP Ontario Hydro - Telecom
Location
Continent : North America
Country : Canada (Facts)
State/Region : Ontario
City : Toronto
Lat/Long : 43.6667, -79.4167 (Map)
Language English (U.S.)
en-us
Operating System Microsoft WinXP
Browser Internet Explorer 6.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
Javascript version 1.3
Monitor
Resolution : 1024 x 768
Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit Jul 30 2007 12:20:06 pm
Last Page View Jul 30 2007 12:22:13 pm
Visit Length 2 minutes 7 seconds
Page Views 6
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page http://nlpost.blogsp...ary-independent.html
Visit Exit Page http://nlpost.blogsp...ary-independent.html
Out Click
Time Zone UTC-4:00
Visitor's Time Jul 30 2007 12:20:06 pm
As you can see somebody at Ontario Hydro has an interest in this whole thing. Makes you wonder doesn't it? Why would Ontario Hydro have an interest in Ryan Cleary writing about my credibility? Why would somebody here send Ontario Hydro the post address?
For anybody wondering why Ryan Cleary might take pot shots at a blogger - here's a theory.
When I posted the response on Sue's Blog to Cleary's suggestion that I may be in a conflict - essentially questioning if I am blogging for cash - speaking for somebody else - who should come directly to the particular page but Ontario Hydro.
My My - I guess the questioning of my credibility would come in handy for Ontario Hydro as I am one of the strongest public proponents to prevent Lower Churchill Power from being exported to them - instead to be used in Labrador. In fact the discussion has been hot and heavy lately.
As I have mentioned before - my site has a meter which can be viewed by any reader to Sue's Blog. This meter provides information on who is accessing the site - not ordinary mortals like you and I - we just come up as Aliant or Rogers etc.- instead of by name. However if you are the Federal or Provincial governments - or the RCMP or Exxon or even Ontario Hydro - the meter identifies that.
Here for the record is the visit by Ontario Hydro and the page they entered on.
Domain Name (Unknown)
IP Address 142.47.133.# (Ontario Hydro - Telecom)
ISP Ontario Hydro - Telecom
Location
Continent : North America
Country : Canada (Facts)
State/Region : Ontario
City : Toronto
Lat/Long : 43.6667, -79.4167 (Map)
Language English (U.S.)
en-us
Operating System Microsoft WinXP
Browser Internet Explorer 6.0
Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)
Javascript version 1.3
Monitor
Resolution : 1024 x 768
Color Depth : 32 bits
Time of Visit Jul 30 2007 12:20:06 pm
Last Page View Jul 30 2007 12:22:13 pm
Visit Length 2 minutes 7 seconds
Page Views 6
Referring URL
Visit Entry Page http://nlpost.blogsp...ary-independent.html
Visit Exit Page http://nlpost.blogsp...ary-independent.html
Out Click
Time Zone UTC-4:00
Visitor's Time Jul 30 2007 12:20:06 pm
As you can see somebody at Ontario Hydro has an interest in this whole thing. Makes you wonder doesn't it? Why would Ontario Hydro have an interest in Ryan Cleary writing about my credibility? Why would somebody here send Ontario Hydro the post address?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)