The Other Side To The Brenda Martin Story

When I first heard about the Brenda Martin story in the MSM, I was initially sympathetic towards her case, but the more I dug into the case and the more I researched, I found that there was a second side to this story. Brenda Martin no longer seemed to be a hapless victim, who was unknowingly ignorant of her employer, Alyn Richard Waage’s activities, as she led all of us to believe.

Below is an interesting link from a 2003 article by Charles Rusnel in the Edmonton Journal.

http://www.thewantednovel.com/edjournal.html

In my post to the Blue like You blog, I noted the following quote from a person going by the pseudo name of “Sandy Smith.” Note, she was a cook and worked for Mr. Waage at the same time Brenda Martin worked for him, she even left at the same time that Brenda Martin left, so it is highly probable that the source was infact Brenda Martin.

"It looked like a friggin parking lot outside that house most days," said Sandy Smith, who asked that her real name not be used. She still lives in Vallarta and fears the Mexican federal police. The Toronto native worked as Waage's chef and lived in Castillo Cristina for 10 months beginning in July 2000.

• If the person being interviewed was Brenda Martin, and she was truly fearful of the Mexican federal police in 2003, why did she choose to remain in Mexico until her arrest in 2006?

• Why was she living illegally in Mexico for 10 years without a visa or work permit?

• Why did she disregard the advise of the Canadian consulate, once she was arrested and choose a lawyer who was not on their list of recommended lawyers? According to the Mexican government, her legal antics, including a constitutional challenge and her changing of her legal representation several times contributed to a delay in the beginning her trial.

"Brenda Kim Martin has chosen to change legal teams for her defence on several occasions," reads the statement on the embassy's Web site. "Consequently, she has been successively represented by different legal teams -- a decision taken by Ms. Martin that has significantly contributed to the delay in her trial."

Mexico blames delays on Brenda Martin

• Why did she continue to associate herself with and correspond with her former boss, Alyn Waage after he was arrested and jailed in California?

• Why did Brenda Martin deposit money that was not her's (Alyn Waage's) in her own bank account and deposit money on behalf of Alyn Waage into other bank accounts? This does not sound like duties she would perform if she was just his "chef"

• If Brenda Martin is suicidal and just want to get home to Canada as fast as possible, why is she bashing the Conservative government, by calling the visit by Conservative MPs Jason Kenney and Rick Norlock a "photo-op" when they and its diplomatic staff have been working behind the scenes with the Mexican government trying to assist her?

• If Brenda Martin is desperate to return to Canada why is she saying that if she is convicted and has the option of serving her jail sentence in Canada that she will not leave Mexico?

"I told him that if I get sentenced to 15 years and I have to serve half my time in prison in Canada I will stay here and kill myself -- that's it. I am not going back to Canada to go to prison," Ms. Martin said.

In the SDA blog, commenter ET asks an interesting series of questions that have so far been overlooked by the MSM

How is it that it's blogs that are coming up with the facts and information, while the MSM is devoting itself only to emotional hysteria totally bereft of facts or instead, creating a fictional scenario? That includes the self-defined and self-esteemed 'informative sites' of Duffy and Newman..and the news of CTV and CBC.

There are many questions:

Why would Brenda Martin be afraid of the Mexican police if she had nothing to do with the scam? If she was concerned, then why didn't she leave Mexico?

Or, was it that she could make more, without a work visa (no taxes) and cheap living costs and easy lifestyle in Mexico (and the weather)?

So, he handed 26,000 to her as settlement for firing her. There are several stories to what happened next.
One, that she re-invested 10,000 of it into his scam company unknown to him. Why?
Two, that he told her to 'take her commission' and forward the rest to a different account.
Laundering.

Why, when she was arrested, didn't she just claim that she was a hired worker in his staff and didn't participate in his scam - Instead, she focused on the arrest process itself; that she didn't have a translator. Small point, but, she's been living there ten years; does she have no knowledge of Spanish?

It is indeed possible that she wasn't part of the scam. It still seems strange that she invested 10,000 of that 26,000 in his company.

Why is the left demanding that the Canadian government apologize to Obama?

Over the last couple of days, my colleagues on the left have gotten into a fit over US Democratic Presidential candidate, Barak Obama being exposed for his inconsistent position on NAFTA. Instead of insisting on Obama to clarify his position, since it will affect trade and jobs with our biggest trading partner, they have gone after the Harper government

"Will he now apologize to this House, the American people, and Senator Obama, and will he fire his chief of staff?" NDP Leader Jack Layton asked during the daily question period.

The one thing that I don't get is that Obama was the one who got caught speaking from both sides of his mouth on the NAFTA issue and was justifiably exposed for doing so. He was caught telling the American people that he would seek to re-negotiate NAFTA, while at the same time an Obama aide told Canadian officials that he wasn't serious.

So I am trying to understand the reasoning of those on the left who want the Prime Minister to apologize to Obama and the American people. Are they saying that a serious inconsistency in the position of the frontrunner of the Democratic Presidential candidates on the NAFTA agreement, which will affect all of us, should not be exposed? On what basis does Canada owe Obama an apology? Maybe Obama and his campaign team should be the ones who need to apologize to the American people for being less than forthright with them, since whatever decision his government makes on NAFTA, if he becomes President, will have as much of an impact on American jobs and companies, as it will on Canada.

Karlheinz Schreiber loses latest bid to remain in Canada

Karlheinz Schreiber has lost his latest bid to remain in Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada has refused to review earlier judicial verdicts that cleared the way for his extradition to Germany to face bribery and tax evasion charges.

Despite this ruling from Canada’s highest court and countless lower court rulings, Schreiber gets to remain in Canada until he testifies in the Mulroney-Schreiber public inquiry. Since this latest ruling, Schreiber's lawyer, Mr. Greenspan has attempted to get the Federal Justice Minister to delay the extradition indefinitely, but to his credit, he has refused to do so.

Earlier this week, Nicholson sent a letter to Greenspan rejecting any claim that he had the authority to delay extradition indefinitely.

But the minister agreed that Schreiber could remain in Canada until he testifies at the public inquiry promised by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

In a statement issued Thursday, Nicholson said the course he's adopted will ensure "the public interest is served as Canadians will have the benefit of hearing Mr. Schreiber's testimony on Canadian soil."

In his previous testimonies before the Airbus Inquiry and the HOC Ethics Committee, Schreiber contradicted himself on numerous occasions. So much so that he has lost creditability even among many Liberals.

In my view, nothing more will be gained from having Schreiber remain in Canada for more testimony. Since the testimony that he has given up to now has been full of contradictions and his words cannot be trusted, I don’t see the benefit of any further testimony from Schreiber during a future public inquiry. It will just be another "he said", "he said" affair between himself and former Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney.

Schreiber has been allowed to manipulate the Canadian courts for 8 years, even though he lost every ruling against his extradition. To make matters worst, he has also managed to manipulate the HOC into freeing him from jail. It’s time to say enough is enough and immediately put him on a plane back to Germany

Legislation to end CWB Barley Monopoly to be Introduced In Parliament on Monday

Tomorrow, Federal Conservative Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz will introduce legislation to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act to allow Prairie barley producers to choose whether they sell their barley on their own or through the wheat board.

I hope that this bill passes because for too long many farmers have been being systematically shortchanged by the CWB not paying them a fair price for their product. The CWB have never been able to give a satisfactory explanation to farmers in British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan as to why there is such a difference between barley prices that they are forced to accept from the CWB and barley prices on the open market. Some are complaining that they can get between $4.00 and $4.50 a bushel on the open market, while the CWB is only paying $3.00.

These farmers are assuming all the risks in the growing and harvesting of their own crops, so it is hard to see why should they not have the same right as barley farmers in the other Canadian provinces to sell their own products to whoever they want. Is it wrong for the Prairie barley producers to be allowed to seek maximum returns for the risks that they absorb and the hard labour that they must do in order to produce a successful harvest?

Is will be interesting to see whether the government makes this bill a confidence motion. The Federal Liberals and the NDP have for a long time opposed amending the Canadian Wheat Board Act to allow the Prairie barley farmers to have the choice of selling their products on the open market. Is it because they are so determined to maintain a bureaucracy that is bent on practicing 19th century economics in the 21st century to the detriment of the farmers that they are supposed to serve? If this bill becomes a confidence motion are the Liberals willing to fight an election over this issue? Stay tuned.

Tony

National Post ordered to surrender 'Shawinigate' documents

Thanks to the Ontario Court of Appeal, the RCMP will finally be able to conduct a full investigation of the Shawinigate affair.

On Friday, the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned an earlier decision by Ontario Superior Court Justice, Mary Lou Benotto, that quashed a RCMP search warrant against the National Post and reporter, Andrew McIntosh. In 2001, Mr. McIntosh was sent a 1997 loan document from the Business Development Bank of Canada.

In 2004, the Shawinigate investigation by the RCMP was stalled because Ontario Superior Court Justice Mary Lou Benotto quashed the search warrant and assistance order on the grounds it would break McIntosh's pledge to protect his source. The reson she gave was that it would violate the media's "constitutionally entrenched right'' to gather and disseminate information.

"In this case, the eroding of the ability of the press to perform its role in society cannot be outweighed by the Crown's investigation,'' Benotto ruled.

The three-judge Appeals Court panel disagreed.

Enforcing the law must at times outweigh the need to protect an anonymous source, Ontario's highest court said Friday as it ordered the National Post to surrender documents at the heart of conflict-of-interest allegations against former prime minister Jean Chretien.

Paper ordered to surrender 'Shawinigate' documents (CTV link)