Robbins SCE Research
Home| British Columbia Polls| Canada Polls| US & the World Polls| Contact| Register| Search| Donate
Glen P. Robbins on Hypocrisy, Incompetence & Poor Judgement in British Columbia politics and law
  Mar 07, 2021

Question #1
My Ethnic background is best described as:
White/Caucasian    76.69 %
Visible Minority    12.50 %
Wouldn’t Report    10.71 %
Question #2
Which political party in BC, of the three provided, do you support right now? (Respondents who voted in the most recent British Columbia Election October 2020). (*Party numbers grossed up to Decided totals - None of These not included)
BC New Democrats    42 %
BC Liberals    36 %
BC Greens    12 %
None of These, (Undecided)    18 %
Question #3
In your opinion, are registered gun owners more likely to be involved in criminal activity than those who do not possess any firearms?
Yes    17 %
No    80 %
Question #4
A BC religious group that requires ‘face to face’ interaction at church remains defiant against the BC government despite fines & penalties levied against it for breaching BC Covid Rules. From the following response choices, which BEST reflects what next steps should be taken?
Go to the Court and get an injunction against the Church    53 %
Escalate the fines and penalties against the Church    16 %
Leave the Church alone, bars and restaurants have face to face interaction    29 %
Question #5
The Vancouver Sun reported February 18, 2021 that the BC Government under Premier John Horgan “has refused to release a report that was supposed to assess major safety issues” related to the $10 Billion Site C dam. In your opinion what should the Government do?
Release the report to the BC Public and be transparent and accountable    78 %
Take steps the government believes makes most sense    22 %
Question #6
Have you personally ever experienced Racism?
Yes    5 %
No    94 %
Question #7
Do you support Joe Biden’s cancellation of the Keystone oil pipeline from Alberta Canada to Texas?
Yes    39 %
No    54 %
Question #8
Do you support the Trans Mountain pipeline from Alberta Canada to British Columbia Canada?
Yes    52 %
No    42 %
Question #9
Meng Wanzhou is a chinese business executive of a huge Chinese telecom giant, Huawei. On December 1, 2018 Meng was detained upon arrival at Vancouver International Airport by Canadian Border Services. The RCMP thereafter arrested her based on extradition demand from the United States. Nine days after Meng was detained in Canada, the Chinese government detained two Canadan diplomats. Our question is this: Would you agree to release Meng Wanzhou back to China on the following conditions: She agrees to a lifetime ban for her and her company Huawei from Canada, forfeits her $10 million in property located in British Columbia for the cost to Canada, and the Government of China releases the two Canadians?
Agree, Yes    76 %
Disagree, No    20 %
Question #10
Currently,from the following response choices, where are you personally in terms of how you are responding to the COVID Pandemic - and including where you live (two response choices only?
Frankly, I’m sick and tired of all the COVID restrictions - get the vaccine out and be done with it    52 %
I still have plenty of patience for the health care mandates relating to COVID    46 %
Commentary
Reader: Please note that domain www.robbinssceresearch.com possesses a Valid Platinum Plated SSL (security licence) (Go Daddy). If at any time you come across any link on any Search Engine that suggests otherwise, it is a fake. A renewal reissuance of this Security Licence was made March 2, 2021. Blue Oyster Cult: “(Don’t Fear) The Reaper”: “Seasons don’t fear the reaper. Nor do the wind, the sun or the rain.” Ready?
BC New Democrats are down in British Columbia Public Support (“BCPS”) by (13%) (48%-42%) according to ROBBINS Sce Research (1998) including Glen P. Robbins “New Final Solution Polling Algorithms” ® calculations (“NFSPA”). BC Liberals are up (8%) (33.5%-36%) while BC Greens are down (20%) (15%-12%).
Advertorial: (Some elements of these Final Solution Algorithms (“FSA”) will be featured in Glen P. Robbins & ROBBINS Sce Research (1998) Upcoming Revision of Jewish Deaths (plus deaths of other ethnic groups) from World War 2 - coming soon). Eighty years following that War that killed over 80 million soldiers and civilians, it is hoped that these revisions will draw a conclusion to the ‘overarching’ Holocaust cermonies that particulize Jewish deaths over the deaths of tens of millions of other people following World War 2 and other crisis. We believe the promotion and promulgation of Holocaust narratives -and persistent accusations and responses that anyone who questions the history is an anti semite or racist, is itself racism or at least not equitable.
Where this language is too strong to digest for some readers, and other of the more hysterical variety we offer ‘anti dentite’ apparent racism against dentists (Seinfeld) (comedy in the 1990’s prior to Section 230 for anti dentite media), where necessary to express derision about one race or another. This lovely bit of self (ethnic) deprecation (my Jewish shrink says self deprecation ought not exceed 5 percent of total humour) related to Seinfeld character’s dentist, Dr. Tim Whatley - (who, on the show) had converted to Judaism, and became a little too ‘free wheeling’ (to Jerry’s liking) (and premature) in persisting in telling jokes he was making about Jews. Famous Actor Bryan Cranston played the role of Dr. Tim Whatley before his MEGA hit Breaking Bad -now I am trying the same transition. {Thanks Seinfeld}.
Incidentally, remember comedian Michael Richardson who played the very Jewish looking Kramer on Seinfeld - and his stand up issues (post Seinfeld), particularly a rant against Blacks in his audience who were interfering with his freedom to perform professionally. Richardson really took the heat, but you know who brought Richardson to his hit boutique show Driving Comedians with Cars? Jerry Seinfeld - Class. ‘You’re my friend.’ The shocking facts opening this missive - are intended to establish not only the response to right over the top moral suasion on racism but also a platform estimating loss of free speech (even speech many people would not like). This is relevant to MY business model - incorporating the two most valuable commodities on this planet - data and free speech associated with it (GPR’s political ponderosa). Case in point our later reference to a Frank Magazine with correlation to a discussion of the predicament of former BC Premier Gordon Campbell (Bilderberger-Globalist) Plutonium level member. Quickly for context of further reading - this on Frank Magazine “Ottawa Edition” from Wikipedia:
“The Ottawa edition of Frank received notoriety in 1991 when the magazine ran a satirical advertisement for a contest inviting young Tories to “Deflower Caroline Mulroney”.” (Currently a Province of Ontario MPP). “Mulroney’s father, Prime Minister Brian Mulroney, was incensed and threatened physical harm (He’s Irish Canadian - for you Family Guy watchers) toward those responsible before joining several women’s groups in denouncing the ad as incitement to rape.”
(U.S. law Section 230 (protects predominantly Jewish owned Social Media from any liability as publisher) “is a piece of Internet legislation in the United States, passed into law as part of the Community Decency Act (CDA) of 1996 (Clinton), formally codified as Section 230 of the Communities Act of 1934 at 47 U.S.C - 230.”). (This was sold (con for donations really) as big free speech, instead Black Christmas suffocation).
Now this is political rock n roll - and free speech. I backed Mulroney in the exchange. Going after a man’s daughter - you bet you are going to get your ass kicked (feel me ‘bro’?). From rock band FREE - “All Right Now”: “I took her home to my place. Watching every move on her face, She said look, what’s your game baby, Are you tryin’ to put me in shame”
Less than one in five BC Voters 2020 (“BCV-2020”) are of the opinion that ‘registered gun owners’ are more likely to be involved in criminal activity than those who do not possess any firearms. The Globe & Mail through Canadian Press published the following article entitled “Trudeau government posed to introduce new gun-control legislation”. The date of the publication is February 12, 2021.
“The federal Liberal government is posed to introduce legislation as early as next week aimed at strengthening gun control.” “The long promised bill would flesh out last spring’s ban on many firearms..” The bill is expected to propose a program to buy back these firearms at fair market value, but allow owners to keep them with strict conditions.” The article notes that many different firearms will be subject to ‘the ban’ and or the ‘buy back’. What isn’t known is who will be most affected by this.
The Province of Ontario has 628,174 individual firearm licenses, a number, far less than Ontario’s population relative to Canada. Approximately 4.26% of adult people in the Province of Ontario (2020) possess firearm licenses (2019). The Province of Quebec has 497,862 individual firearm licenses (2019), very slightly above Quebec’s population relative to Canada, and representing an estimated 6.10% of Quebec’s adult population (2020). Albertans possess licensed firearms very slightly above their population contribution to Canada. British Columbians have a larger population than Alberta with {20%} fewer gun licenses.
What's Trudeau’s problem? Why is his bill supposed to be such a big deal in the coming municipal elections in BC? Obviously, an overwhelming percentage of British Columbians do not see this as a pressing issue as inferred from polling outcomes which substantially show that an equivalent number of British Columbian voters do not make a connection between registered gun owners and crime.
From Dee Snyder “We’re not going to take It”: “We’ve got the right to choose it, There ain’t no way we’ll lose it. This is our life, this is our song. We’ll fight the powers that be just don’t pick our destiny ‘cause you don’t know us you don’t belong.”
In our ROBBINS Sce Research (1998) Question 4 - we consider a Langley BC religious group whose church services apparently require ‘face to face’ requirements for church service (thus breaching the provincial mandate of separation (social distancing) - masks). Our 3 response choices offer a BC Supreme Court injunction, escalation of fines, or leave the church alone (like bars and restaurants). ‘Go to the BC Supreme Court and get an injunction’ is the obvious winning response choice from British Columbians with a clear majority of the voters in the province choosing this, followed in distant second by leaving the church alone, with escalation of fines (from ‘dunce cap’ Mason (secret society BC Judge) in a distant third place.
In fact, apparently unknown to respondents (fewer & fewer people are reading mainstream news often now referred to as “Fake News” or “News for the Stupid” or “Make Up the News by unnecessarily & selfishly wearing controversial political garments to the Workplace), the British Columbia government has already applied for an Injunction against the Church - which injunction application, clearly favoured by the population of British Columbia from suggestions from this Robbins SCE Research (1998) poll-- was rejected by the BC Judge - whose own recommendations of escalation of fines are clearly rejected by the BC public.
We note also for reference that this ‘brick headed’ Injunction judge (Injunctions are normally short term orders), was also involved in the matter of Trinity Western University (also Langley) where BC Law Society members (including honest ones) voted against the University banning ‘gays, queers (language often used) et al’ (and others) from a proposed law school there - while BC Law Society Executive petitioned the increase in revenues from prospective new (neo) lawyers to that FOR PROFIT Society, gained like Hitler moving through Poland but at the expense of blowing a hole in Canada’s Charter Rights. Quite clearly, based on the standard promoted by the government on racism and prejudice ad nauseam of late, the Trinity Western University claim resulted in obvious prejudicial decisions from the BC Supreme Court and BC Court of Appeal for which they have never been held accountable relative to the neo standard of moral suasion put upon the public by moralizing fools in Elected office - in the ‘ain’t it a pity it’s so shitty’ *mainstream news etc.
In the Case Summary of Law Society of British Columbia v Trinity Western University, (June 15, 2018) SCC 32 as described in CanLII Connects: ‘In this case the Supreme Court of Canada was conducting a judicial review of the decision of the Law Society of British Columbia (“LSBC”) to not accredit Trinity Western University (“TWU”) law school. As an evangelical Christian postsecondary institution the law school required its students and faculty to adhere to a religiously-based code of conduct, the Community Covenant Agreement (Covenant). The Covenant prohibited “sexual intimacy that violated the sacredness of marriage between a man and a woman.’ (ED: In other words: Homosexual, general fornicators (or happy wanderers), adulterers need not apply (this took up hours and hours of court time and millions of tax payer dollars).
This from the Kinks - “Lola”: “I met her in a club down in old Soho. Where you drink champagne and it tastes just like coca cola C-O-L-A…..She walked up to me and asked me dance and in a dark brown voice she said Lola….Well I’m not dumb but I can’t understand why she would walk like a woman but talked like a man.”
My {Glen P. Robbins, on behalf of Robbins SCE Research (1998)}, review of the Charter and applied to this case goes like this: Under the “Constitution Act, 1982 Part 1, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms” specifically “Guarantee of Rights and Freedoms”. Section 1: “The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms guarantees the right and freedoms set out in it subject only to such reasonable limits prescribed by law as can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.” Under “Fundamental freedoms: (a) freedom of conscience and religion, (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression including freedom of the press and other media of communication, (c) freedom of peaceful assembly, (d) freedom of association.”
Under “Equality Rights” “Everybody before and under the law and equal protection and benefit of the law.” Section 15 (1) “Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimation and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.” Section 15 (2) reads: “Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its objective the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or ‘disability'’”.
REASONS from Political Judge Glen P. Robbins (he’s everywhere): So, Section 1 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms says “everyone” has the guarantee of equal rights… it’s guaranteed. This guarantee might only be undone (only) “subject to reasonable limits.” Trinity Western is wanting to rely on its religious freedom under Section 2 (a) Freedom of Religion. I would say however that the LGBTQ community might rely to a higher interpretive degree on the same subsection under “freedom of conscience”.
The actions in life style and sexual orientation of queer persons are not (always) arbitrary. Often a conscious- conscience decision has been made to “come out of the closet” not an easy thing to do if you wanted anonymity. The Subject Matter of the Charter jurisdiction includes specifically “sex” argued by textualists to mean male and female. I believe it is sufficient to cover sexual orientation, or at least not be a misadventure in the attempt (particularly when the Charter of Rights and Freedoms was written 1982). The logical thinker might then ask ‘ why would a queer person want to go to this University anyhow?’ The response to that is what if the queer is Christian and lives near the school? The theoretical reply to this response would have to be (particularly Evangelicals) queer people cannot be Christian. The further theoretical reply to this response by the LGBTQ community would be, ‘but I say I am Christian, you cannot say that I am not’. ‘My personal knowledge, my conscience says I am who are you to say otherwise’.
Section 2 seems like a powerful winner for TWU - freedom of religion - Once again, the logical thinker must say - hold on, the context of analysis must always be Public Interest (I agree) when considering public institutions like the Law Society of BC (or any law society of that matter), what happens when this Church gets the Law School it wants based on its religion exclusion, and then demands another? What if, hypothetically, 80% of BC lawyers in total in BC were devout religious Christian people. Lawyers are gatekeepers (more like ferrymen) to access to justice, (that role has gotten out of control). Just imagine 80% devout Christian.
Considering this in an open minded way, (given it is lawyers we are talking about). The Charter relates to law. Law is unique from other professions on this account. It should be the last place that right thinking persons would play this game. Also, this wouldn’t be functional because of the Legal Profession Acts - I’m thinking of the Province of Ontario, where lawyers would have to disclose to their Executive (colleagues) and more specifically to the client, any potential for bias (their conscience). A recipe for disaster, if an Ontario lawyer doesn’t follow these guidelines within the meaning of the legal representation “the Task”. A lawyer would never win this one. What if the lawyer has some type of bias against the client’s actions, their person, and doesn’t deal with it properly through the Law Society Rules, then ambushes the client with the bias? Would this be sufficient for disbarment? An olde school public hanging (GPR always keeps a 2nd horse around for a lawyer or politician)? Would a plaintiff, petitioner or requisitioner be able to sue that lawyer?
On the other hand, the hypothetical Accounting school at Trinity Western University might be a better example of how the Religious Freedoms Section might have more solid practical ground. Accounting textbooks seldom reference the Charter of Rights. Documents at BC Court of Appeal reference the Charter (Tax Code) - it’s everywhere and in all places in legal documents including boilerplate forms found at Court. BC Court of Appeal commencement forms reference Constitutional issues. What potential negative impact might a theoretical pool of BC accountants at, say 80% ‘ardent (how Frank Magazine describes Gordon Campbell as an “ardent heterosexual”) Christians’ from Trinity Western University (hypothetically) otherwise have on the Public Interest? Certainly, not the same as the lawyers given the existence of the Charter - a legal document, the top of the food chain of law in Canada (where?).
The different knowledge inferences of both professions cited, at both practically and philosophically make the proposed ‘conditional law school’ @ TWU, a problem at every turn in thinking through the process in the Public Interest. Section 15 (1) references “Every individual is equal before and under the law”. The words “Every Individual” would appear to give “the individual” - in this instance, the LGBTQ person, clearly known through various languages to the public, (a conspicuous minority of some noteworthy population) more power under the Charter than the better known likely better defined religious institution “Church”. It is the individual that has the equal right, not the institution. (The Institution has enacted the equal right). This “equality” must be without discrimination, another bounce off the TWU ‘strength’ in this case, because Christians who were not queer, would receive a potential benefit that the LGBTQ community (queers) could never receive based on the TWU Community Charter. It is unfair - under the Charter - in my view. Unfair - is Juultimately tested by the zero sum (I win - you lose) axiom. Clearly TWU’s proposal for a law school is zero sum at some point. Banning queer people from a law school is as unfair as permitting Jewish people with plentiful resources the opportunity to secure ownership and control of 70-90 percent of major media and cable in my Charter Rights protected opinion. Nor right thinking person armed with the facts would disagree.
I might add that Section 15 (2) does make reference to “promoting any law or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups.” I read generally that slightly over 40% of British Columbians are Christian. That’s a much bigger pool of people than the 3-6% who may be LGBTQ “queer”. Here is how the Supreme Court of Canada saw it:
“The Supreme Court (of Canada) considered the statutory obligations of the LSBC and the limitations on the religious protection under s. 2(a) of the Charter.” “The court (Supreme Court of Canada) found that the LSBC was entitled to consider an inequitable admission policy in determining whether to approve the proposed law school. The Court wrote at paragraph 44”: ‘...Its (LSBC) mandate is broad. In promoting the public administration of justice and, relatedly, public confidence in the legal professions, the LSBC was entitled to consider an admission policy that imposes inequitable barriers to entry. Approving or facilitating inequitable barriers to the profession could undermine public confidence in the LSBC’s ability to self regulate in the public interest.’ “The Supreme Court agreed that the LSBC actions did infringe upon TWU’s students freedom of religion under s.2 of the Charter. The court then looked to justification under s.1 of the Charter. The court ultimately concluded”:
‘The refusal to approve the proposed law school means that members of the TWU..community are not free to impose those religious beliefs on fellow law students, since they have an inequitable impact and can cause significant harm. ‘The refusal to approve TWU’s proposed law school prevents concrete, not abstract, harms to LGBTQ people and to the public in general.’ ‘The LSBC’s decision ensures equal access to the legal profession, which could be undermined by the LSBC’s decision to approve a law school that forces LGBTQ people who they are for three years to receive a legal education.’
The entire BC Court of Appeal (not one New Democrat appointment) came to the opposite conclusion of the Supreme Court of Canada (and I) prior to the matter arriving at the S.C.C., writing at para {190}: ‘The TWU community has a right to hold and act with beliefs, absent evidence of actual harm. To do so is an expression of its right to freedom of religion,’ and again at {191}. ‘In light of the severe impact of non-approval on the religious rights at stake and the minimal impact of approval on the access of LGBTQ persons to law school and the legal profession, and bearing in mind the “Dore” obligation to ensure that Charter rights are limited “no more than necessary”,...we conclude that a decision to declare TWU not to be an approved law faculty would be unreasonable.’
Only two of nine Supreme Court of Canada Judges (Cote and Brown JJ) (Brown J. read the criminal charges against BC lawyers (Judges) in GPR’s Intervenor submissions in Google v Equustek) dissented from the ruling from the majority in the Trinity Western case. The Supreme Court of Canada decision -putting the boots- to both lower court decisions in TWU (Langley, BC) occurred June 15, 2018 and was summarily followed with an article August 15, 2018 in the Vancouver Sun (Matt Robinson) entitled “Trinity Western University, community covenant no longer mandatory.”
The Vancouver Sun writies: ‘Trinity Western University will no longer require its students to sign a controversial covenant that includes abstinance from sex outside of heterosexual marriage. The covenant has been blocking the university’s bid for accreditation of a long-proposed law school.’ ‘Last week, the Langley school’s board of governors voted to remove the requirement for students this fall. The decision was characterized by LGBTQ people and their supporters as a...first step but one that did not go far enough.’
“There is no restriction”, (TWU President) Kuhn said. We welcome, and have for decades, individuals who wish to study in a Christian environment. We desired to clarify that point to people who have misunderstood, especially over the number of years when there was a debate of whether we were welcoming of students, which we want to make clear we certainly are.’ ‘Kuhn said the change does signal a shift in TWU’s values: It stands behind the religious perspective behind the covenant, but made the “operational decision” to not require students to sign the agreement.’ “Staff and faculty at TWU, however, will still be required to sign the covenant, university staff confirmed.”
‘For Michael Mulligan, a Victoria lawyer who has been active in the fight against the covenant, that mean that TWU “may have gotten half way there” if it continues for such accreditation.”
*Advertorial: This is an important question going forward with submissions from Glen P. Robbins and Ita Robbins (Ita Robbins v Cambridge Mortgage & BMO Bank BCSC H130330; SCC 35772) (Glen P. Robbins versus Law Society of BC SCC 35772, BCSC S111171) (GPR & IR versus The Queen - Cambridge et al BCSC 149328 (New Westminster) having been confirmed received by the Cullen Commission Investigating money laundering, who has indicated the filings have been transferred to the legal department. It should also be noted that an application was made to Civil Forfeiture (the Director) for compensation owing to unlawful activity of a number of lawyers (judges). Ron Bakonyi for Cambridge - and Robert Ellis for BMO Bank of Montreal obtained orders unlawfully during a period of ordered Stay of Execution (Kloegman April 7, 2014 BCSC H130330) which severely prejudiced both Ita Robbins and Glen P. Robbins.
‘Bent’ Law Society Compliance Officer Michael Kleisinger conspired with ‘Double Bent’ BC Chief Justice Hinkson, the same dim witted and dishonest lower court ‘racist judge’ (lol) “RACIST” who gave birth to the TWU 1st Institutionally ‘racist’ court case, (as Fox Cable Tucker Carlson mockingly crows) - who favoured the Trinity Western case, and who just screwed up the injunction decision following application for the same by BC NDP Attorney General David Eby.
This conspiracy involved filing documents in court that on their own created a fraud on the court, and assisted Jewish law firms Bakonyi* and Ellis Roadburg* --- (*signifies Star of Robbins - The Juultimate ) and who had also committed other court filings by fraud to cover up usury and money laundering at Land Title BC. And where there's smoke there's fire. Hundreds if not thousands of these. But none documented like this - (a type of modern era Anne Frank Diary @ Robbins SCE Research (1998) - the only murder being everyone’s rights) by *Star Researcher Robbins - The Juultimate ® ).
A lawyer for the Attorney General, Michael Lawless (in the midst of this shit show that’s his real name) - originally from O’Connor Bion et al law firm (O’Connor is a 3 or 4 time loser candidate running for federal Liberals-nevertheless this Lawless delaying tactic will be charged by Robbins SCE Research (1998) to Trudeau’s reelection account) who indicated that no “unlawful activity” has been yet identified (therefore), Glen and Ita cannot thus be eligible victims. The interpretation being that an eligible victim of unlawful activity must exist because of a specific unlawful activity to their victimization. A sort of horse and cart spin on reasoning. Not the way I read that mofo. The way the Act reads, one would imagine that eligible victims might draw from the Compensation Fund in the Finance Ministry described in the law in a general way, as being present in the Financial Minister Selina Robinson* Finance Ministry accounts. It’s all a commitment to obstruction of justice in Glen P. Robbins opinion, attracting further pressure (and pain) from Glen P. Robbins. (There are at least 3 Robbins SCE Research (1998) polls where former BC Liberal AG Geoff Plant is described as “BC’s Elephant Man”). Like Campbell and sex this is how Plant’s career will be illuminated in the Robbins History Books (lol).
The ‘book’ on this Civil Forfeiture across Canada reveals that it actually prostitutes due process of law to raise money predominantly for police administration funding, which itself in terms of due process makes little sense, when the focus of the legislation is predicated on “illegal activity” to a standard of balance of probabilities. Wouldn’t a reasonable person with an IQ over room temperature believe it a type of conflict between Police duties (paid for by government) and administrative jobs produced in support of those same Police (duties) (paid for by government)? If I am the Police I like more administrative staff to help make my job easier (theoretically) - would I not be more invested in determining more of these cases of forfeiture - where breach of due process is an ever present issue. Shouldn’t real victims be getting the compensation where they have experienced illegal activity predicated on a civil standard of law (balance of probabilities)?
It's flawed law for certain. The writer doesn’t snort coke or take hallucinogenic drugs - making it difficult to understand why many BC laws are written so poorly (see LSBC and Robbins S111171 (the Kleisinger Hinkson court filing fraud as well) (I know that is the heart of the scam) - requiring more magic than language from BC’s Interpretation Act. It is also difficult to put a viable assessment together (yet) from case law or other, and given the nature of the criticisms against the method - its not concluded. Lawless (his real surname actually) has professional experience in obtaining REM orders in “unlawful activity” cases, clear irrefutable evidence of these activities by fellow BC lawyers was provided to him, I believe he is continuing the process of covering up for crooked lawyers and some suspicious efforts by Judges, particularly the court filing fraud permitted by former law partners, Michael Kleisinger of the Law Society of BC and Chris Hinkson Chief Justice BC Courts.
The Cullen Commission lawyers will uncover the unlawful activity but a response amending the original application to Civil Forfeiture seeking a determination of unlawful activity along with compensation will be made nevertheless - moving forward-but here is the point to be made to David Eby (AG) and John Horgan (Premier and Head of Cabinet) - in conjunction with a letter to Eby demanding that under the federal Judges Act - he investigate the actions of Chief Justice Hinkson (GPR v Law Society of BC S111171) and Fenlon J of BC Court of Appeal (and others possibly) because.----
The Sons of Anarchy Season fictional representation of Biker life decrees Mayhem against a member who has acted in serious contravention of the Biker Rules among Members. Accordingly, the political lever will be to say prior to the next effort on track of escalation of a resolve (financial compensation - apologies etc) prior to Mandamus at Supreme Court of Canada (force the Province to file the Stay of Execution Order of Justice Kloegman, Made April 7, 2014) (and other) the following:
BC AG David Eby a former civil liberties lawyer in his personal capacity and as Attorney General of BC --will not only be directed by Glen & Ita Robbins to demand the (Quebecois) Federal Minister of Justice to investigate (Hinkson and Fenlon) (we offered to accept apology - no money from Judges) so long as orders were reversed in the crooked court administration - compensation (and see you later) - but, David Eby will also be asked to file the Stay Orders and make other changes, or cause them to be filed, the filing of Orders already made is an administrative activity.
Eby will also be asked, based on lawyer Lawless’ pitiful reluctance to permit our application for compensation under Civil Forfeiture to the Director as the law provides, and to cause an investigation of the matter to occur from his Ministry (based on submission of forthcoming documents to him), and/OR pursuant to the Civil Forfeiture Act. Eby has jurisdiction to do all of these things. It is in his power completely. The BC Ombudsperson has jurisdiction to investigate and make recommendations where complaints about the Public Service have been made. Given the fraudulent Order Made After Application (H30330 SCC 35772) is a direct wilful court document filing fraud, the Ombudsperson or AG can reverse it. Also, the Order for Stay of Execution by the do as I please Jewish lawyer *Bakonyi for Cambridge unfiled was made, exists on tape in Court Clerk notes and is ready for filing. That the courts do not have a backup mechanism to ensure these Orders are filed with the Court registry is laughable - (or tragic).
Ita and Glen P. Robbins have already provided draft submissions to the court including affidavit evidence of the Stay of Execution Order (and other) of Madame Justice Kloegman DATED April 7, 2014. (That application also sought money out of court and other orders). A BC Court Services lawyer (who wouldn’t sign his or her name - (weak, shameful & pitiful) responded to that application by saying that the orders could not be filed pursuant to the order of Justice Hinkson (the bent one in this poll) versus Glen P. Robbins S111171 (S.C.C. 35302). That order, as contentious as it is, was made April 10, 2014, three days after the Stay of Execution order was made on April 7, 2014. It was obviously completely unrelated to the matter between the Bent BC Judge (“BBCJ”). In my opinion a response amounting to another lie by another BC lawyer obstructing justice and refusing to produce a name. It isn’t fair to say lawyers are all crooks...but the conversation is necessary don’t you think? They eviscerated ICBC funds. Gutted it for an easy peezy 30% contingency fee.
Although Lawless’s name is more than a little ironic - his method of ‘obstruction’ in my opinion remains a contributing factor in bad faith in the overall matter in Glen P. Robbins. (L)awless represents the BC State of Affairs ® (lol) and is compelled by law to act in good faith which when absent is legally considered to be a state of bad faith. Premier John Horgan and the Executive will have to cause events to produce a quick remedy to scream out loud (sol) perversion in the administration of justice and mountains full of “unlawful activity”. Political Bounty Hunter - Glen P. Robbins is presently on the hunt in Victoria BC bringing his US brand of street fight developed through the Trump years (in the hunt with John F. Kennedy, another one term President as US best in modern time). Like playing NFL Football and then getting a few licks in - in the BC Junior league.
The point to convey through this section of communication is either Eby and Horgan bring Mayhem to the cheaters at the law courts - by squeezing these clearly dishonest (disingenuous) justices (legal acne) Hinkson and Fenlon (a bushel of real creepy justices from Harper’s legacy) - and this is done to the Federal government by letter of request for Inquiry which Eby can do ‘tomorrow’, an action on its own sufficient to make things move faster toward a financial compensation concluding, and pursue through their mutual jurisdictions under the Civil Enforcement Order (it would clearly be to the NDP’s political advantage as these are Harper Conservative Judges), (it would hurt the credibility of the Trial Lawyers $900 million case against the BC Government related to ICBC - fault and no fault - lawyers are starving like ragged coyotes because of change in policy), and cut the knees out of otherwise lobby efforts for more Judges increasing the energy of the Trial lawyers-----OR
Robbins SCE Research (1998) brings political his Neo Made in the USA - Mayhem (forged like steel through the 1st Trump era) to David Eby - John Horgan and the BC NDP. Kevin Falcon’s going to get (40%) as new leader - from Surrey. Only Robbins SCE may keep him under that. (Gordon Campbell was his mentor). If political Mayhem is enacted “at the Table” against the NDP, the likelihood of another rendition of 2017 or loss of government (again) to the so called institutional free enterprise party will be made plausible. A million dollars of good publicity, or a million dollars worth of Extreme Free Speech against you. Protect Stephen Harper’s Institutions or protect your NDP members seats. Up to you! --From Rock Band Cream “Sunshine of Your Love” - “I’ve been waiting so long. To be where I’m going. In the sunshine of your love.”
Moreover, if you believe simply by changing the deck chairs and using Institutional negation of the facts, the law, and serious problems involving BC lawyers occurring - be advised, that Robbins SCE Research (1998) can court IT’S double massive estate of data, political history and commentary to the First page of Search Engines everywhere. Optimizers and public relations people working for personalities - politicos - actors - trying to control page 1 of Search Engines with positive spin will be confronted with only Robbins spin. Captions attached to links based solely on the choice of Robbins SCE Research (1998). It's pretty simple -
“At ROBBINS Juultimately we will soon control how your history looks (will look)”. From Midnight Oil - “Beds are Burning”: “The time has come To say fair’s fair. To pay the rent. To pay our share. The time has come. A fact’s a fact. It belongs to them (the Robbins) let’s give it back.”
Control of your name or corporate brand by Robbins SCE Research (1998) can occur as described through massive valuation increase (dominant page - search engines for good or ill) or just happenstance. Take this happenstance case of former Premier Gordon Campbell, rising to page 1 everywhere based simply on simmering interest (and the public doesn’t know the whole story yet). It may be many years after the fact, but the former premier at age 72 appears done. Let me commence this evidentiary segment by laughing out loud. End Advertorial.
On Feb 16, 2019 the Toronto Star published the following title : “PR firm suspends contract with former B.C. Premier amid groping accusations”. “London” - “A global communications,,firm says it is suspending its contract with former British Columbia Premier Gordon Campbell in light of an allegation in a British newspaper that he groped a woman in the United Kingdom.” “Campbell had served as special adviser to the firm since last July, and was engaged on a part time basis as a consultant through a retainer agreement.” “However, the company says it and Campbell have “mutually decided to suspend their..arrangement until a police investigation in the United Kingdom is complete.”
“On Friday, the Daily Telegraph reported that London police are investigating a complaint from a woman who was an employee at the Canadian High Commission when Campbell was high commissioner to the UK.” The pressreader online publication wrote (also) on February 16, 2019 “Scotland Yard is investigating an allegation of sexual assault make against Gordon Campbell, the former Canadian High Commissioner to Britain by a female London embassy worker.” “British government sources indicate that Canada may open its own inquiry and could waive Campbell’s diplomatic immunity if able to do so.”
“Campbell’s (alleged) victim, Judith Prins, accuses him of groping her before a meeting at the embassy, Canada House, in Trafalgar Square.” “Prins, then a Canadian embassy worker, had been climbing the main staircase..unaware that Campbell had been following close behind her.”
Self proclaimed sort of conservative online news in Canada The National Post published July 18, 2018 an article entitled “Former BC premier Gordon Campbell will lead (Ontario premier) Doug Ford’s inquiry into (previous government) Ontario Liberal’s spending.” “Toronto” “Ontario’s new Progressive Conservative government has appointed a former British Columbia premier to lead an independent inquiry into the previous Liberal government’s spending.”
Premier Doug Ford says Gordon Campbell will head the Commission of Inquiry, which will issue a public report on its findings by Aug 30 (2018).” “What we are witnessing is a betrayal of the public trust,” ‘Ford said’. (ED: presumed in context to be related to Ontario Liberal’s spending and not allegations of ass grabbing legally groping or even sexual assault allegations).
On September 21, 2018 just 5 months prior to the alleged UK ‘assgrab’, (known in Denmark as the ‘buttockal snootch’) the Province of Ontario released the “Independent Financial Commission of Inquiry” which stated: “On July 17, Ontario’s Government for the People created an Independent Commission of Inquiry into Ontario’s past spending and accounting practice. Under the direction of chair Gordon Campbell and commissioners *Dr. Al Rosen and Michael Horgan the inquiry was authorized under the Public Inquiries Act, 2009.”
For its part, CTV News (Winnipeg) published the following article February 2019 entitled “Province pausing relationship with former BC premier after allegation.” This article asserts that “The Manitoba government says it is “pausing its relationship with Gordon Campbell following an allegation in a British newspaper that..former B.C. premier (Campbell) groped a (Dutch) woman in the United Kingdom.” “Campbell was hired by Manitoba last fall to review two major hydro projects that have added billions of dollars to the provincial debt”. “The government says that appointment is on hold until the allegation is investigated.”
In an article published weeks before Campbell issued his Inquiry to the Ontario Government (the people) dated September 2, 2020 the article entitled ‘Gordon Campbell says assault complaint when he was top diplomat to U.K. was ‘dealt with fully, has no comment on new lawsuit.’ “Vancouver”: A sexual assault complaint at the centre of a new lawsuit against Gordon Campbell was “fully and independently reviewed” and “dealt with fully” said Campbell. The allegations involve Judith Prins…(which) date back to 2013. “They first came to light last year, when Prins told the (T)elegraph newspaper she was climbing the staircase of Canada House on Trafalgar Square to a meeting, and Campbell who was Canada’s top diplomat to the U.S.''
“Campbell’s lawyer Peter Gall (ED: “indeed”) said Thursday that the alleged assault “never happened” and called the assault allegation “ludicrous”. “Campbell also confirmed to CTV News that the 2014 settlement (relating to this incident) included a non disclosure agreement.” ….”Peter Hardy, administrative officer with London County Court wrote CTV that (the court) “granted...service (out of jurisdiction to Canada) to Prins.” “He said Prins was representing herself.”
“A London Metropolitan Police spokesperson said: “No arrests have been made and inquiries are ongoing.” “There is no statute of limitations on sexual assault in the United Kingdom.” “Britain lacks a strict statute of limitations on sex crimes…” The New York Daily News wrote an article in a case similar to the Campbell alleged assault insofar as UK sex crimes are concerned. From an article entitled “Harvey Weinstein criminal charges more likely in England due to the laws of statute of limitations”, Christopher Brennan writes.
“British law also does not have a statute of limitations on less serious offences, including groping”. “Sexual touching is now an offence under section 61KC Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). It carries a maximum penalty of 5 years.”
Additional reports in this Prins v Campbell matter include: (1) Prins reports her Boss in London warned her about Campbell; (2) There are 3 other incidences of complaint unrelated to Ms. Prins but inferred upon Campbell. This is interesting because if the police verify Prins rendition of her Boss’s from the Boss, it puts the Boss in a bad light, for putting the women in harm’s way with potential knowledge of a Canadian Predator (“CP”), (not a new song by Country singer Dean Brodie). (3) Ms. Prins is representing herself (pro se), had already collected a settlement from Campbell for I believe $15,000 with provisions of non disclosure - this isn’t enough to assert Campbell is guilty in court, but likely with other information - to cause a prosecutor in a case involving two countries - and High Office to have a good look, and the reasonable right thinking Canadian or Brit to demand answers - based on Ms. Prins 2nd charge at Campbell predicated on the coming of the MeToo movement. The MeToo movement. Watched Canadian Media all over the MeToo movement in the US - some in Canada.
Why are thousands and thousands of Canadians, Americans, Chinese - people all over the World coming to Robbins SCE website December 17, 2003 reading the following: “Robbins SCE Research (1998): “A random survey of 415 respondents through the Province of British Columbia between December 15 and 18th, 2003.”
“Question 1: Recently, Ottawa based Frank magazine published an article, which declared that Premier Gordon Campbell has a longtime girlfriend who works in the Premier’s Office alongside him. Her name is Lara Daphinee and she receives $160,000 per year…” “Last week, Premier Campbell went on Global TV and declared that people were out to smear his marriage, and further declared that their marriage was very happy. Who in your opinion is telling the truth?”
“Premier Campbell and his wife Nancy are telling the truth (06%); The publishers of Frank magazine are telling the truth (61%); Neither Gordon Campbell and Nancy Campbell, nor Frank magazine are telling the truth (31%).
Looking back, this poll considers Campbell and sex in the Premier’s Office (note that Gordon Campbell and his wife divorced and Campbell remarried - who?) - and should be considered in light of previous reckless events by CBC News March 24, 2003 entitled: “BC premier fined for drunk driving.” “British Columba’s premier was fined $913 US (about $1,350 Cdn) Monday after pleading no contest to a drunk driving charge in Hawaii. Maui police arrested Campbell Jan. 10 as he returned from the home of friends.” “Campbell’s blood-alcohol level was more than twice the legal limit, according to court record records.”
(It was well known that Gordon Campbell attended the home of former broadcaster, the late Fred Latremouille and his wife - and radio co-host Cathy Baldazzi - without his wife but with another woman). These folks were known to like an adult beverage or two………….., why would they send their friend (Gordon Campbell) driving pissed drunk? Why wasn’t Campbell’s lady companion driving? Was she pissed drunk too? Or was the Premier simply being a gentleman (albeit loaded).
Gordon Campbell was BC Premier along with Conservative buddy former Prime Minister Stephen Harper, when Hinkson and Fenlon were made BC Judges. The asshole(s) doesn’t fall from the tree huh? (The Facebook expose run by Black Lives Global - CTV - Facebook precipitated by a woman - who our research team has discovered had worked as a prostitute for years - still under investigation by the Glen P. Robbins Court of Public Opinion. (sshh hide your assets)).
Mount Polley & Site C Dam
Speaking of hypocrites and poor judgment (aka the B.C. standard) let’s discuss BC Premier John Horgan’s standard on Industrial Safety commencing in his role as BC NDP Opposition Leader: Subject matter - The Mt. Polley Mining Disaster when he was BC Opposition Leader and now Site C Dam in northern BC. From CBC News Posted September 26, 2014 1:35 PM PT entitled “Mount Polley dam tension crack detected 4 years ago, says NDP Leader John Horgan.”
“A four-year old report on Mt. Polley’s tailings pond, which collapsed this summer, notes that inspectors found a tension crack in the earthen dam, and NDP leader John Horgan - says he wants to know why the report was hidden away.” “In a press release, Horgan said the information contradicts statements made by the Environment Minister Mary Polak, in which she said the government had make public all the information about the mine.”
“The Liberal government knew for four years there were problems...but they deliberately suppressed the information.” “Horgan said the report indicates that the company, Imperial Metals, and the ministry knew there was a potential for disaster.”
AND more recently from Online publisher Policynote and author (Ben Parfitt) dated August 12, 2020 entitled “A Big Fracking Mess”: “As Site C dam construction bogs down in geotechnical problems, thousands of earthquakes triggered by fracking operations occur nearby.” “Earthquakes triggered by natural gas industry fracking operations near BC Hydro’s troubled Site C dam construction project are far greater in number than previously thought, raising troubling questions about whether they are adding to the already formidable geotechnical challenges at the site.”
“Not only are more earthquakes occurring in proximity to the costliest public infrastructure project in British Columbia’s history, but may of the fracking-induced tremors..two years ago (were so hard) “that workers were ordered to evacuate, (and) are occurring in a fault riddled zone to the south of the dam.” The article by a journalist with expertise in environmental matters (Parfitt) indicated that “geoscientists have warned (the tremors) can become quickly unstable during fracking operations”
This from Environmental Journalist Sarah Cox July 31, 2020 at Narwhal newsletter:
“The Site C dam project is facing unknown cost overruns, schedule delays and such profound geotechnical problems, that it’s overall health has been classified as “red”, meaning the project is in serious trouble, according to two overdue project reports released by BC Hydro on Friday.”
“BC Hydro and BC Energy Minister Bruce Ralston blamed the Covid-19 (Chinavirus) pandemic for the Site C’s project deepening woes.” “Yet BC Hydro’s own reports show the project was facing significant cost and scheduling pressures long before the pandemic emerged in BC. On March 18, BC declared a state of emergency, but the province deemed the Site C dam an essential service, allowing the $10.7 Billion dollar project to continue.”
Our Question 8 - Site C Dam is a political issue now (Tucker Carlson here - NOT RACISM) and a monster in the making. Site C Dam was a political issue destined to that profile given the historical controversy surrounding it. It will frame a big big part of the next BC Election - as the safety issues could cause the Site C costs to take off like a rocket - out of control $20 Billion ??, or the cessation of the project altogether. By not addressing the Site C problem, the BC NDP will be handing the BC Green Party a big political stick with which to thump the BC Government. The BC Liberal government baked the Site C debacle cake, now the BC NDP are forced to eat it.
It's fair to say Horgan evaded likely the most important (lurking) issue (following COVID) in the Province- Site C by employing the cover of the ‘cheap and tawdry’ anti racism campaign for distraction coming out of David Eby, BC NDP Attorney General's Office. BC has a {1%} Black population. In a portrait of 1,000 British Columbians, 12 would be visibility Black. As one Conservative American said - ‘don’t accuse me of racism until you have to live with them’. Racist? Or exercising freedom of choice for personal safety?
Our ROBBINS Sce Research (1998) Polls of the past few years, (regarding Site C as an important issue in the Province of British Columbia) - over the past few years - have shown that when John Horgan had tough decisions to make about Site C following years and years of BC Liberal mismanagement and other disingenuous conduct toward the public on the matter - with $10 Million already out and few British Columbians believing the low ball government estimates, knowledge of mining disasters (Mt. Polley) - with poor professional management of Safety - known to the Government - and a Report on Safety coming) - he made them. Why not be courageous and be transparent now?
The ‘Mount Polley Mining Disaster’ (see also New York Mining Disaster - Bee Gees) which occurred under the BC Liberal Government’s 2001-2017 reign of political terror in the Province of British Columbia (Gordon Campbell (the White Idi Amin)/Christy Clark (hygiene mangelhaft) - just awful - that’s my opinion). The issue of problems with safety and mine structure became more about Reports from engineers in Corporations with offices a long ways away from the mine - in the Big City. When John Horgan was in Opposition - he was a critic for Energy and Mines. Naturally he is on Hansard blubbering all over the BC Liberal mistakes. Now he’s Premier of BC and doesn’t want to release a safety report on the Site C Dam, a report sufficient to potentially bring costs to the Dam by double the original estimates or cause the stoppage of further construction altogether,
Now think of those circumstances where you absolutely want the Safety protocols of infrastructure and specialized manpower. Site C Dam - where applicable, BC Mining Operations, thinking out loud about the Port and other circumstances like what the extra Trans Mountain pipeline ships etc may require. Will any trouble here also be covered up by switching back to BC Liberals?
Racism - the most overplayed card in the policy distraction deck (“pdd”) originating in the US - New York PR Boardrooms and exported to Canada.
This from British Columbia Attorney General David Eby July 5, 2019: “Everyone has a right to live without fear of violence or discrimination, yet too many people face racism and hate as part of their daily lives.” “Police-reported hate crimes have risen in B.C. in recent years, from 164 reported incidents in 2015 to 255 incidents. …”Despicable acts like the recent assaults of...a gay couple.” From the Georgia Straight: “In its year-end report for 2020 released on February 3, the Vancouver Police Department stated that hate crimes increased from 142 incidents to 280 in 2020.” “More specifically anti-Asian hate crimes escalated from (12 cases) to (98 cases) in 2020.
In our Question 9 on “racism” - clearly racism isn’t an issue for an overwhelming majority of British Columbians. (Two percent) of Whites have experienced racism, while (7%) of visible minorities say they have. The Visible Minority totals used in this poll are lower than actual @ {30%}. The percentage provided for “Yes” could be adjusted upwards by as much as (1%) (one half of one percent is generally rounded upward where no basis points are included).
My professional opinion on “racism” (at least of late) generally, and the Godfather of ALL RACISM (we are told (brainwashed)) - the very worst of all (we are told) (brainwashed) - (from what I’ve been told by Semite Media (“SM”)) “Anti Semitism” defined as prejudice against Jews (and Arabs - Middle East people to be accurate & particularized as a special unique type of racism more than racism that covers Blacks, Hispanics, Asians and Whites for reasons still unexplained to me) --- is that its a political smokescreen abused like the old ‘Do you still beat your wife’? Lose - lose proposition - say anything to the contrary you're vilified. Serenity now!
The US Democrats used COVID than Antifa rioting as cover to hide Joe Biden’s obvious lack of mental acuity and physical energy - while their allies in the Media particularly Social Media like Facebook and Google manipulated their (alleged) Section 230 neutrality for huge monopoly stake in control of free expression - in conjunction with all Cable News including Fox to a significant extent to suppression Trump. Black Lives Matter - over and over on the 45 like the flip side Quid Pro Quo - Mueller - and elected people on media with coulda shoulda woulda - the fraud election (US Supreme Court will Rule on many matters involving the 2020 Election in October 2021) - was Canada’s cue.
(Got some bad news for some of you. Trump’s coming back and coming back like a Tsunami - Robbins SCE Research (1998) will be riding shotgun - on that Wild Ride you can Bet). (See also Cowboy Doc Holiday - Wyatt Earp). Bachman Turner Overdrive “You Ain’t Seen Nothing Yet”. “Bbb Baby you ain’t seen nothing yet”.
Trudeau started the ball rolling with $90 million for Black Entrepreneurship in Canada. I have already responded with sarcasm to what I perceive as an implied contradiction. The community ads were present all over BC Media. I think this was Trudeau’s way of flipping a few dollars to starving and unimaginative Mainstream Media in Canada looking for handouts - but rejected because the public was against it. Black Lives Matter was registered as All Black Lives Matter in Canada (how’s that for commitment (lol)). BC has precisely {1%} Black population, not enough Black people to be racist about.
Next on Horgan’s anti racist campaign were the Aboriginals in BC - at {5%} population. How many Aboriginals does one encounter in mainstream society? Not many, more perhaps than Black, but not many. That is because Aboriginals want to live in their own communities and are not inclined to reside among the general population. Now Horgan wants to marry the aboriginal prison overpopulation with Black overpopulation in Canada. It's a way for elites to divide and conquer or otherwise mollify the common people - including mostly intimidated Whites. Is there even one Black person resident in Horgan’s constituency. TC here - you are “Racist”.
But Horgan and Eby wanted to conjoin the aboriginals with the Blacks - like a new alliance on Sons of Anarchy and distract from real issues like the cost of energy including the Site C dam-- will it really balloon beyond $20-25 Billion when the dust settles? Our Keystone pipeline and Trans Mountain pipeline questions reveal that British Columbians believe that Alberta should be able to sell its oil to the US - (Texas) and that Alberta should also be able to finish its Trans Mountain pipeline from Alberta to BC’s coastline. For many years our polls showed the BC public wasn’t supporting the Trans Mountain pipeline - environment and aborignal issues. Over time, and with more benefits flowing to aboriginals in the deal - and a change in public mood - the only difference is that by contra inference there is more support (and less against) from British Columbians to the Alberta to Texas Keystone pipeline. More BC New Democrats want those high paying oil jobs. The point to be here is that the Super Majority of British Columbians don’t have experience with racism they have to be told it exists (which it does) but manufacture (I believe) how bad it is.
Our Shuswap businessman ponders the irony of the cancellation of Keystone and Texas going cold, events occurring during the commencement of this poll period. Interesting to measure against Donald Trump’s successful Energy Independence policies for the US. Alt Right Researchers believe Biden’s decision to cancel Keystone is part of his advisor's overall effort to provoke more lack of stability in energy in the United States- making the Middle East a more prominent player in oil again - translation more need for Israel. You know how this narrative goes---
British Columbians are willing to give China’s Meng - a conditional get out of jail (but not) for free card. Leave, don’t come back and take your company with you. Sign over BCProperty (or alternatively consider writing the check (cheque) to Glen P. Robbins - I just did more for you than your lawyers ever will (lol)). From The Cult: “She Sells Sanctuary” - “The fire in your eyes keeps me alive”.
Margin of Error. 3.043% plus or minus
GPR 778 951 4927 -30-

Home| British Columbia Polls| Canada Polls| US and the World Polls| Contact| Register| Search| Site Map
Copyright Robbins SCE Research Inc. ©2021