Monday, March 25, 2013

Council seeks to revoke Cycle Logic’s business license

Castanet is reporting that West Kelowna Council is being asked to revoke the business license for Cycle Logic. Police raided it last August and said it was the hub of a stolen car, boat and motorcycle ring that would change the vins on stolen vehicles. Jonny Newcome was arrested as well as two Hells Angels from Calgary.

Is that why Jonny came up with Priest Valley Speed? If he changes the name of his stolen car ring does that mean he gets a new business license? They do have a funny youtube video advertizing it claiming they can fix any bike but they can’t fix stupid. Priest Valley Speed are advertizing bikes for sale at Cycle Logic. I guess that’s kinda like TBarz under new management. Not.

BTW Rats steal cars and motorcycles. One blog reader was wondering what that brand new big rig that's going up and down the highway all the time, plastered with Kreater Custom motorcycles logo was hauling. Are they gonna try to say they are hauling bikes to shows in PG or Calgary? Last time I checked winter wasn't the most appealing bike season in Canada.... Maybe they’re transporting plants for his dad’s gardening chain. Sad to see him support HA events though.

Update: Castanet is confirming that West Kelowna city council did in fact revoke Cycle Logic’s business license because of all the stolen property charges involving Johnny Newcome and Cycle Logic. I’m not sure how that applies to his Priest Valley Speed.


  1. Revenue Canada could have a ball turning loose a few forensic accountants loose on all these cycle and clothing shops....if you have a Harley dealership you're probably making money legitimately but these rest of these fly by night operations are a thinly veiled excuse for a way to make illegitimate funds legitimate and pay taxes on them. It's the stupid low level drug dealers who have not figured out that they need to be able to account for most if not all of their income. HA isn't (usually) stupid and definitely not low level and IIRC they require members to have a job of some type, even if it's a sham business or a no-show job.

    I've been saying for years that RC could put a dent in these folks if they really wanted to. Al Capone went down for tax evasion......

  2. TR's right, and it's our law-enforcement agencies that don't pay enough, to keep forensic accountants, on a national payroll, to deal with this great way of busting Organized Crime.

    When my sister did enforcement work with Ontario's OSC (stock exchange over-sight), she said this of her RCMP liaisons.

    There just was no priority on this.

    One needs the money and desire, to pay CA's to spend a few years, if necessary, at one time, on one case, to be effective...

    1. That clearly is a real problem. The RCMP not seeing investment fraud as a priority. Timely as a father and son from Surrey were just charged in an international pump and dump scam. This kind of fraud created the Greek Financial crisis. We need to make it a priority.

  3. I'm not here to defend Jeff Vanderzalm nor is he a friend of mine but I think you're a little off base. I've seen that "Kreator" semi trailer at Art Knapp's plantland numerous times and yes, they were transporting/unloading gardening supplies.
    A simple search will also show there's a Kreator shop in both Kelowna and Toronto. They do in fact have Toronto built bikes on display in Kelowna and vice versa. They also attend numerous shows throughout North America and BTW, check the dates on the Vancouver Motorcycle Show. Yes, bikes need to be moved in the winter.
    Have you looked into billboard advertising lately? Unless your an Indian you're S.O.L. Why pay a monthly rate to Pattison to put billboards on native land when you can pay once to wrap your semi and parade it all over the place.
    Like I said, I think you're a little sloppy connecting the dots on this one.

  4. Ah ha. Someone sent me an e-mail asking what on earth they were transporting back and forth in winter. When I found out who owned it I thought maybe they were transporting plants for his father’s nursery. That makes perfect sense and yes I can see that as good advertizing. I have a great deal of respect for Jeff’s father.

    My only concern with Jeff is the one I previously expressed. On his web site advertizing custom Harley Davidson motorcycles he said come on in and check us out. Even if you’re bad it’s all good. That is asking for trouble. The Hells Angels are a criminal organization. Most of the violence we see in the papers lately is them hiring someone to kill a rival drug dealer or one of their own puppet yahoos killing or torturing someone for a drug debt. Telling those people to come on in it’s all good is insane.

    Killing Dain Philips, Britney Irving or Geoff Mesiener was not all good. Nevertheless, the point of this post was about Johnny be good’s name change and council’s attempt to revoke his business license for dealing in stolen vehicles. Jeff saying that’s all good isn’t.

  5. AK: " I have a great deal of respect for Jeff’s father."

    If you're talking about Bill Van Der Zalm, the ex-Premier who was such an ass, he made our province the Laughing-Stock of Canada; then why put down those in public life who never could lay a hand on that idiot, for embarrassing us in BC...?

    Bill van Der Zalm is universally recognized as possibly our most corrupt and worst, Premier.

    1. lol say what you mean. Vander Zalm was a bit before my time. I think the Fantasy Gardens scandal was blown out of proportion but don’t remember what it was really about. I think he did a good job with the Fight the HST campaign. Hearing him speak on the subject in Vancouver I was like, is this the same guy? Carol James spoke after him and said he was the reason she got involved in politics. He had some different ideas when he was in office. I remember the stop Vanderlism buttons in high school

  6. I would say the fact there is a "Kreator" in both Kelowna as well as Toronto speaks volumes in and of itself.

    He would not be allowed to run an "independent" motorcycle shop that specialized in Harley's in both cities unless it was "approved" by the HA. Or unless he was supported by a rival club - but a quick cursory examination of the locations will show otherwise.

    As for the feds, I think the real question to ask is WHY they are not investigating these businesses?

  7. Doctor Smythe: "He would not be allowed to run an "independent" motorcycle shop that specialized in Harley's in both cities unless it was "approved" by the HA."

    Oh, come on, *Doctor*, you're saying that every single Harley dealership ( I'm thinking specifically of Fred Dealey) operate ONLY b/c HA said it's OK, and from your POV, would naturally take a *cut* from all those businesses...?

    I'll take a bet ( which we can find out; by me just phoning up Fred Dealey) that they and all Harley dealerships (that DON'T have a obvious HA connection, ie., secret ownership), are just normal businesses; as any other.

    Please to back up your claim with linked facts, not ("I'm saying this").

    A Doctor would fully understand what an objective, fact-based argument is, eh...?

  8. I think you mean Trev Deeley. Although I agree every mayor Harley Davidson outlet likely does not need the Hells Angels permission to operate, I’m not so sure about smaller custom shops. They seem obsessed with controlling everything else. Your point is fair comment. However, I don’t care if someone calls themselves Dr. Spock or Dr. Dolittle. Discussing the issues and raising the bar in communication above the mindless gang mentality is what we are striving for. People can express opinions without having to link everything to someone else’s published “facts.”

  9. AK: "People can express opinions without having to link everything to someone else’s published “facts.”

    Yes, and when someone does this (University shows one WHY you need sources) we are free to completely dis-regard un-substantiated "statements", and you're on *Doctor* Smythe's side b/c YOU do that all the time; no sources for what you've said. Adults are expected to do better than that.

    Can you really be totally un-aware that folks use fake credentials; which we here have NO way of checking ...? It's their way of making their opinions have more *weight*....right...?

    1. Doctor Smythe presented a profound insight connecting relativism to a general refusal to acknowledge truth or morals. I don’t know if he claims to be a doctor or if he’s doing so fraudulently. I know a guy that chose Dr Freud for a username once. I don’t think he really implied he was Sigmund Freud. DS made a thoughtful contribution. I just don’t want to bully him off the board like you did that girl on the forum. People generally don’t want to comment. Especially if it means they will face a barrage of drama attacks every time they do. People have a right to hold and express their opinions. On this blog I tend to weed out comments that blindly endorse the Hells Angels because given their criminal history I think that is nonsense. However, splitting hairs and bullying people shuts down constructive dialogue.

    2. I think we need to remember this is just a blog. It’s all about expressing opinions. No two people agree on every issue. I make a post about something and someone says yeah I agree or hell no I disagree. People are allowed to hold and express their opinions. The last thing someone wants is to be attacked or threatened with legal action just for making a comment on a blog. I’m the one that accepts legal liability for the blog. I still want people to feel they can relax and express their opinions without being attacked or threatened with court. Sometimes when citing facts, providing links is very helpful. Sometimes when expressing opinions the authority I cite is me. It’s my opinion. I’m OK with that.

      Freddy has a ton of energy and has submitted many relevant links and made numerous worthy contributions. I don’t think Dr Smythe, Dr Spock or Dr. Doolittle think their opinion is better or any more relevant than anyone else’s. All people are equal. Just because someone has a degree or has taken some courses on a subject doesn’t make them any better than anyone else. Yet higher education is worth striving for. That can be formal or it can simply be picking up a book or researching something for yourself. Knowledge is good. Ben Franklin once said any nation that expects to be ignorant and free expects what never was and never will be.

  10. "All people are equal".

    They're not, and we all know it. Otherwise retards could be astronauts.


    We ARE supposed to treat people equally. That is a different thing. I'm not trying to be a jerk here, it's an important difference.

    One of the cornerstone of "progressive"/politically correct tactics is to control the vocabulary or choice of words (not accusing K of doing this) and thereby skew the debate in their favor from the beginning, and unless you catch them and call them on it when they do it, you find yourself debating them on their terms. They know that if the word or concept is spoken often enough, it will begin to be accepted as fact unless actively resisted.

    "We live in a democracy". How many times do you hear this phrase mindlessly repeated? In a democracy, majority rules. That is the definition of a democracy. It doesn't take much to see why we wouldn't want that, 51% votes to do whatever to the 49% and it's legal. Might not be moral or right, but it's legal.

    We live in either a Parliamentary Democracy (Canada) or a Representative Republic. (USA)

    ".....readers may recognize the term “Newspeak,” from he George Orwell novel 1984 about an oppressive socialist world. Socialists, Marxists, and liberals want to, need to redefine words. They may be morally bankrupt, but they are smart enough to realize that most people will not accept their distorted worldview. So they must redefine their bad ideas into good ones, and redefine good and practical terms into bad ones.

    The pattern has been for liberals to redefine all political debate to the point that anything which does not conform to their agenda is instantly characterized as “rancor,” “extremism,” or “hate.” While liberals have engaged in such tactics for many years, the degree to which it is currently done has grown in recent years. The Tea Party’s devotion to fiscal sanity is “draconian” or “mean spirited.” Concern for the moral preservation and restoration of the nation and its foundational institutions including traditionally defined marriage, is “homophobic” or “hateful.” Protection of the unborn is “sexist” or “anti-woman.” Recognition of the cultural and spiritual roots of the nation, and their critical importance to its future are “religious intolerance” or “xenophobia.”"

  11. Sorry, I’m a constitutionalist. All people are equal.

    1. If all people are IN FACT equal, then everyone is capable of matching Gretzky's record, everyone can run a sub-ten second 100m dash, everyone has an IQ identical to the person to their left and their right. People are not ACTUALLY equal. People are all different, as we well know. And if they are different, they are not then also equal.

      This is not to say we don't treat them equally, (We do) and we SAY that they are equal for the purposes of civil rights, having an equal chance at something in life, "equal under the law", etc. and we proceed with that being said and considered to be true.

      We guarantee equality of opportunity. We don't guarantee equality of of result, because not everyone is capable of generating the same results from that ""equal opportunity" that they are given. Everyone has a an equal opportunity to run a sub 5 minute mile. What they do with that chance is up to them/based on their genetics.

      Surely you are not laboring under the impression that I am NOT a Constitutionalist?

    2. No I just think it’s a difference in semantics. Someone being able to score more goals in hockey than someone else does not make them a better person. One person one vote. Rich or poor. Degrees or not. No one has the right to oppress or enslave another. Martin Luther king quoted:

      “We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.”

    3. I never said it made anyone better, didn't mean to imply it either. We are not talking about "better", we are talking about "equal"......if they were the same thing we would not need two different words that had different definitions. What a word actually means is very important. People will say, "well, you know what I mean". And some times you do, right? But not always, and thus choice of words is important when trying to communicate a concept or one's meaning precisely. Politicians have made a sick art form out of appearing to say one thing and meaning another.

      Yeah, I think we are pretty much on the same page, I just think we need to be careful with words and their definitions, the "progressive"/PC crowd specializes in redefining words to suit their own agenda driven politics and I feel it never hurts to be sure we know exactly what we are saying.

      I think one of the reasons we are where we are these days is because there are far too many people who don't question what they are told by the media, pols, and those who want "change" that turns out to bad rather than good. All the negative stuff gets sold as positive through the misleading use of language (propaganda) and people need to be more educated about this than they are. The way in which some pols ambitions have been thwarted recently (Surrey Casino) are reason for hope but they will not stop much could have been saved if people had questioned closely what the Campbell government was saying about their proposals for BC Hydro rather that accepting their pronouncements at face value? That's sort of where I am with all this.

      The people who try all this crooked shit usually say something about it first, but they don't tell the truth, the use slanted or misleading language. If they succeed and folks start squawking afterwards, they say, "We'll, we said blah blah, and you didn't complain then". This is how they try and make what they do look legitimate, if you didn't object, it was OK, you gave your consent by not objecting.

      So, are there semantics involved? Sure. But the difference between reality and falsehood, and the intent of those we need to guard against, are couched therein, thus I feel it behooves us all to pay close attention to them.

    4. I dunno man, that is my definition of equal. Just because two people are different doesn’t mean they aren’t equal or shouldn’t be treated equally.

  12. They should be treated equally. I don't dispute that.

    But, people are different, and therefor not really equal. The "treated equally" thing is different. This has been my whole point here, people BEING equal and being treated equally are two different things, people are confused about this, and just saying all people are equal with no qualification as to whether the statement is absolute or whether is is a moral, legal, or civil standard we must observe as a society is something where the meaning gets used as they please by the people who wish to re-engineer society for their benefit.

  13. Whereas I would word it that just because people are different doesn't mean they aren't equal. It's just semantics really.


Comments are moderated so there will be a delay before they appear on the blog.