the grey
rabble-rouser
Member: 4604
Joined: Jan 21 2003

Dana Larsen wrote:

I know that when the ON NDP took away the membership of Buzz Hargrove, he didn't get any kind of hearing, he just got dumped. So I don't know if I would ever get a chance to formally defend myself against these accusations, and probably I would just get an emailed letter informing me that my membership in the NDP had been revoked.

Darwin OConnor wrote:

Buzz Hargrove had the right to take his case before provincial council. He choose not to exercize that right.

Unionist wrote:

 

That would have been one fair hearing, wouldn't it? Dana can expect the same "justice" when his turn comes.

The suspension of Buzz Hargrove's membership was in fact the subject of an intensive debate at the Ontario NDP Provincial Council, and Buzz Hargrove was made aware that it would be happening in advance.  There were delegates advocating both for and against his suspension, and the fair and democratic process was followed.


Investigation into treatment of Dana Larson and the marijuana resolution needed By: Darwin OConnor (114 replies) August 27, 2009 - 1:05pm
  • The issue here is not BC or By: MUN Prof. (Aug 28 2009 - 3:42pm)
  • remind wrote: If heroin By: Sineed (Aug 28 2009 - 3:39pm)
  • melovesproles wrote: I wish By: Slumberjack (Aug 28 2009 - 3:30pm)
  • Quote:Yes, as we have seen, By: melovesproles (Aug 28 2009 - 3:26pm)
  • But Mexico is also building By: pcml (Aug 28 2009 - 3:24pm)
  • Mexico apparently did an By: Snert (Aug 28 2009 - 3:00pm)
  • Dana, I agree that it is a By: remind (Aug 28 2009 - 2:55pm)
  • edit just not worth the By: Bookish Agrarian (Aug 28 2009 - 2:49pm)
  • Quote: Larsen and his gang By: Dana Larsen (Aug 28 2009 - 2:40pm)
  • ... it is obvious the NDP By: remind (Aug 28 2009 - 2:34pm)
  • Sineed wrote: And crack By: ocsi (Aug 28 2009 - 2:17pm)
  • MUN Prof. wrote: Yes, as we By: Sineed (Aug 28 2009 - 2:12pm)
  • To clarify, I never said By: ottawaobserver (Aug 28 2009 - 1:45pm)
  • Yes, as we have seen, single By: MUN Prof. (Aug 28 2009 - 1:40pm)
  • I have not been here for a By: pcml (Aug 28 2009 - 1:07pm)
  • Stockholm wrote: And the By: Darwin OConnor (Aug 28 2009 - 12:50pm)
  • Regulation and strict By: ocsi (Aug 28 2009 - 12:48pm)
  • Stockholm wrote: Darwin By: mahara (Aug 28 2009 - 12:42pm)
  • Stockholm wrote:   As has By: ocsi (Aug 28 2009 - 12:39pm)
  • Maybe they weren't being By: Stockholm (Aug 28 2009 - 10:51am)
  • How could they have given By: Darwin OConnor (Aug 28 2009 - 10:36am)
  • Darwin OConnor wrote: SSM By: Stockholm (Aug 28 2009 - 10:36am)
  • Darwin OConnor wrote: Even By: Sineed (Aug 28 2009 - 10:27am)
  • SSM was unpopular in Canada By: Darwin OConnor (Aug 28 2009 - 10:11am)
  • Actually, I've never met By: Stockholm (Aug 28 2009 - 10:00am)
  • Me too, Boom Boom (nice to By: Sineed (Aug 28 2009 - 9:47am)
  • I agree Dana was treated By: Boom Boom (Aug 27 2009 - 6:43pm)
  • ...just like in the BC By: Stockholm (Aug 27 2009 - 6:38pm)
  • I think the Green party is By: melovesproles (Aug 27 2009 - 6:31pm)
  • Daniel, I'd like to see what By: Stockholm (Aug 27 2009 - 5:33pm)
  • MUN Prof. wrote: How about a By: kropotkin1951 (Aug 27 2009 - 5:23pm)
  • How about a Royal By: MUN Prof. (Aug 27 2009 - 2:58pm)
  • There was no filibuster, By: sandpiper (Aug 27 2009 - 2:56pm)
  • I highly doubt there was By: madmax (Aug 27 2009 - 2:51pm)
  • You may want to add to it By: Daniel Grice (Aug 27 2009 - 1:10pm)