Even I don't always agree with my opinion


Guergis & Jaffer Have Had Their Free Bite

Posted May 1, 2010 by jim young in Politics

– jim young

Blah, blah, blah. So what happens now?

The Commons committee has heard conflicting stories from both Jaffer and Gillani.

And let’s face it. Neither one has presented himself as a very credible witness although, if you had to pick the lesser of two evils, Gillani was the clear winner.

Gillani DID after all, produce a signed contract between himself and Glemaud, Jaffer’s partner in GPG thereby proving Glemaud and Jaffer are both liars. The date the contract was signed was AFTER the date that Jaffer claimed they had broken business ties with Gillani.

So I think we can finally and safely start to separate the wheat from the chaff in this on-going scandal.

Perhaps there were no busty hookers or photos of Guergis and Jaffer using cocaine. Perhaps.

And we can be pretty confident in saying that Jaffer did NOT have the power to open the doors to the PMO.

Did anyone really believe Jaffer was ever that intelligent or important regardless of who claimed what? The issue was really about who made the claim and Gillani has accepted responsibility for that, claiming they were boastful exaggerations on his part.

Of course that does not exclude the possibility that Jaffer may have likewise made some exaggerated insinuations.

But I think it is safe to suggest the following points are true even if they have not yet been proven in a court of law.

– The “allegations” and “assertions” made against Guergis at the time the Prime Minister rightly fired her ass out of cabinet and the Conservative caucus were NOT “baseless” and “unfounded” as Helena claimed.
– Guergis, former Minister for the Status of Women, DID have a conflict of interest when she sent a letter of support of Wright Tech to her cousin, Tony Guergis who was warden of Simcoe-County at the time.
– Despite public denials from both Guergis and Jaffer, Jaffer DID use his wife Helena’s parliamentary office and email accounts to conduct his private business and furthermore, he lied to the Commons committee when he claimed he did not.
–  Jaffer is guilty of illegal Lobbying as he is not a registered lobbyist – pending a final ruling on whether or not the legal definition of Lobbying determines whether Lobbying unsuccessfully and incompetently actually constitutes Lobbying. Of course if one considers the intent of the Lobbying law, regardless of a loophole that may be found in it, I think it is still safe to suggest that Jaffer is at least guilty of abusing the loophole.

A private citizen, exhibiting the behaviour of Helena Guergis in the Charlottetown Airport incident would likely have been charged and convicted of a criminal offence.

A private citizen caught speeding, drinking and driving and in possession of cocaine would likely have been convicted of a criminal offence.

If Guergis and Jaffer were dogs they have both been awarded their proverbial “free-bite”.

I think it’s important to note here that the “free-bite” law even for dogs is just a myth.

I also apologise to dogs all over the world for making this analogy to Guergis and Jaffer. They (the dogs) deserve so much better.

And yes there’s always the presumption of innocence.

But if Guergis and Jaffer are as “innocent” as they claim to be, I think they would have a pretty tough time charging me with libel for making these statements if the onus is on them to prove that these statements are not true.

So when are we going to see some charges laid against Guergis and Jaffer?

When are Guergis and Jaffer going to be held accountable for their illegal activities?

Let’s hope the Commons committee is not just a smoke screen to fool the public into thinking actions are being taken when in reality nothing is being done.

It’s time for the real authorities to step in and start laying charges.

– 30 –


Be the first to comment!

Leave a Response