Friday, June 29, 2012

Surrey says no to RCMP bar



The tsunami of insanity continues to flood the earth locally and globally. Today the Surrey Leader is reporting that City Hall just turned down the RCMP’s application for a new giant bar in their new Headquarters in Green Timbers but did recommend a liquor license for special events. What are they thinking?

Bob Poulson is supposed to help fix the RCMP’s disastrous problems with alcohol and sexual harassment in the workplace. The RCMP making an application for a giant bar in their new Headquarters is absolutely absurd. It makes you think they really don’t give a shit about the public and we are left with no alternative but to pull the plug on that broken and disgraced circus and create a Regional Police force. I thought we could save it. Evidently not.

Vicileaks Toews thinks it’s a great idea to give the RCMP a liquor license for a giant bar in their HQ. Isn’t that special? The Christian adulterer who had an affair on his wife and fathered a child with a younger woman thinks it’s a great idea. No wonder.

We are still reeling from the offensive injustice of transferring that drunken pig with a long rap sheet of sexual harassment and drinking on the job being sent to BC. What are we going to do, send him to Surrey and give him a giant bar? God help us. These people are maliciously insane.

11 comments:

  1. But, denying the RCMP the license makes no difference at all:

    "I've never heard before of the federal government ever asking the local government's permission to get a provincial government licence," says [Surrey Councillor] Hunt.

    "The reality is, they can do whatever they want, because they're the federal government," Hunt said."

    "RCMP Cpl. Bernie Conroy told The Leader Friday the hall would be used for other purposes than just a bar..."

    Worse,

    "He also noted a bar currently exists at RCMP headquarters in Vancouver (which is moving to Green Timbers)."

    "Currently, the mess in Vancouver is open from about 3:30 (p.m.) to about 8 o'clock at night," Conroy said..."

    http://tinyurl.com/7z4bz6u (SurreyLeader)

    The public might also be forgiven for asking, " $ 263 million?" I hope that's a figure for more than just BC, because NO Police Force could, surely, justify that amount for an HQ. for just the one Province?

    That sounds like a figure straight out of the Quebec Gov't.'s construction graft Commission...

    ReplyDelete
  2. I noticed that quote by Marvin Hunt. I don't like him and didn't vote for him. If any federal organization wants to put bars in their places of employment, they are bound by the municipal law. To claim any federal organization is allowed to put bars on their premises without the permission of local cities is in my opinion absurd. One of the articles claims they can and might go to the provincial government and get provincial approval. That would be just as absurd. It shows they have absolutely no respect and no regard for the public whatsoever and consequently have no real desire to fix their dysfunctional mess only perpetuate it and silence whistle blowers. If there currently is a bar in their Vancouver HQ, it should not be there. Not with the problems they have created.

    ReplyDelete
  3. If you consider the alternative, maybe a bar at the RCMP's headquarters isn't such a bad idea?

    Without the bar on site, RCMP members are sure to drink at public establishments with the result being drunken thugs ganging up, getting into fights and abusing pub patrons.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I suppose but there's nothing stopping them from getting drunk on site, then robbing and assaulting a newspaper delivery man after they got pissed up. Since many of them have drinking problems, maybe drinking at work is something they should be discouraging. It's like that new ridiculous seize your car after two drinks rule. They're going to enforce that rule on everyone but themselves?

    ReplyDelete
  5. You might say that they were drunk on power AND alcohol....

    One can debate about licenses and such, but the reality is they are not self policing, they make very clear by their actions what they think of the public, and they will do what they please. They are the police and can do what they want, no one will arrest them and they will only arrest themselves in the most egregious (what does that mean with these guys anyway) cases, so they are basically untouchable. They know it, and don't care what you think.

    Wake up people and face the true nature of the society you live in, or more correctly, under.....the fact that you find the realization distasteful does not change what it is.

    ReplyDelete
  6. you still support a conservative approach to drug enforcement, why the opposition to this?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I don't understand what you're asking. I support law and order but Stephen Harper is not conservative. The RCMP are trying to fix a horrible reputation for drunkenness and sexual harassment within the force. The last thing they need to fix that bad reputation is a bar on site.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Well, the Commissioner himself has spoken, they need to keep all this stuff out of the public eye. What better way to do that than their own bar where they can talk openly without any civilians overhearing their drunken indiscretions, and where no one will ever call the cops on them....if they were out in public with the citizens, who knows what could happen.....

      Delete
    2. There was that case during the Olympics where they were caught bringing a stripper in a hockey bag on board a security ship. There was a great deal of alcohol involved and a female officer accused a male officer of raping her. I don't think keeping these indiscretions out of the public eye is safe for the other officers.

      Delete
  8. Minister Vic Toews has to show up in Surrey, to say this astoundingly out-of-touch thing, about the RCMP bar, [AFTER published reports showing Surrey public opinion!];

    "This (pub) is not divergent from past practice and it has not been identified as a problem," Toews told the Now."

    "Toews said he was "somewhat taken aback" to hear liquor would be served that early in the day..."

    http://tinyurl.com/7cj89x7 (theNow)

    Toews is an idiot. A walking time-bomb...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Toews was in Surrey?! Good thing I didn't know at the time. I would have thrown eggs and rotten tomatoes. He was also surprised about the content of his warrantless surveillance bill because he hadn't read it.

    ReplyDelete