Wednesday, October 25, 2006


Why Did The Authorities Spare The "White Guys" in Basi Bribes Case?

From The Link, B.C.'s leading Indo-Canadian newspaper, 6 April 2006

SURREY The sordid tale of Dave Udhe Basi and his boys Robert Virk and Aneal Basi was finally unveiled in its full sleazy details which allege cash, trips worth $30,000 tied to B.C. Rail deal.

Basi's world came crashing down when his office was searched by police as part of a raid on the legislature. Rumours of connections to organized crime, police finding grow-op on one of his rural Victoria properties and Liberal membership fraud have all but wiped Basi from the provincial and national political landscape, which had preoccupied much of his being until the downfall.

What it all comes down to is that the Basi and his boys let delusions of power go to their heads for a mere $30,000, ending their fat-cat government careers and sending them packing to Disgrace-land. The three former B.C. Liberal government aides received nearly $30,000 from lobbyist Erik Bornman involved in the $1-billion B.C. Rail deal, court documents released this week allege ...

For more, read the rest of the story: The Link, at:


[Note from B.C. Mary: I did not -- and would not -- write a story like this, which in my view casts aspersions upon the accused in the Legislature trials. But in a case where accusations of racism may arise against "White" people (ugh!), I think it's important to see how the Indo-Canadian press handles the facts of the Basi, Virk, Basi discussion. The Link deserves full credit for fearless confrontation, if not for an even-handed neutrality, as we wait to hear the evidence at trial. Thanks to Lynn who found this story for us.]

The racism charge overlooks the fact that Tony Young and Jim Duncan are white and charged.
Shouldn't the white guys also include Paul Martin, David Anderson, Judith Reid, Gary Collins, Christy Clark, Mark Marrissen, Gordon Campbell amongst others?

Without the federal and provincial Liberal parties playing unscrupulous ethnic party organizing to unseat Jean Chretien, this may have never happened.
Here is a clip from the most read Indo-Canadian paper in BC.

So the RCMP have obviously got Kieran and Bornman to agree to testify against Basi and Virk. And this leads to suspicions in the community of racial bias: Why didn't the RCMP use Basi and Virk to get Kieran and Bornman? Who approached whom to make a deal? Who is more culpable? Some of these questions might prove to be TERRIBLY EMBARRASSING for the RCMP as the trial starts.

For you conspirarcy theorists this is what the many people are asking.
Good points raised, thanks to all. Can't really answer any of these questions but it sure spurs a few thoughts ...

1) Tony Young and Jim Duncan were charged after the first Basi, Virk, Basi charges, so that would explain why they weren't included in The Link's story, eh?

2) Yeah, for sure, and in my opinion Paul Martin has one heck of a lot to answer for; but the fact is, somebody in his service -- with the correct ethnic background -- needed to take control of the Indo-Canadian groups ... so which came first, chicken or egg?

3) All anyone can do, at this point, is guess, but we can imagine that Bornman -- who was already in law school by then -- may have realized that this was a chance to save his own hide -- so my guess is that it was Bornman who approached the RCMP with an offer to save them a lot of investigation time.

What I'd like to know is why Bornman was given the boot from McCarthy Tetreault where he had been articling.

"Conspiracy theory" is a worn-out term employed to stop a discussion. Let's toss it overboard and keep on talking. Thanks to all.
The reason Basi and Virk would have been the targets is because they betrayed the public trust. They were in positions where they were trusted with sensitive info of public value. They broke that trust, so when the cops were forced to pick between greedy lobbyists or corrupt officials to get a break they viewed the breach of officialdom as the greater sin and acted accordingly.
Thanks Mary :)

Just checked and it looks like Duncan and Young were mentioned in the Link article too. Sorry, but I hate the needless playing of the race card.
Nicely put ... and it's where I'd hope the truth is. But still, we need to rein in our natural, normal imaginations until the facts begin to emerge in court, under oath.

5 more days ... October 30 ... and we should know more.
jm, thanks ... I shoulda checked too ... but if there's "needless playing of the race card" who are you pointing at here?

I thought the leading Indo-Canadian newspaper had put the race factor pretty strongly, didn't you? And like I said, I would never have written the story the way they did ... but I thought it was useful in preventing racist comments, to show what they had said about it.

I was talking about the LINK artilce and the post above, nothing else. I totally agree with your approach in bringing it to our attention. I don't know if we are see a little of the old lawyer trick: if the facts don't work for you, try and argue something else like racism, disclosure, conflicts of interest etc... PS I'm JM here out -- too many Anonimi
Thanks, JM ... ya had me goin' there, for a minute.

So I had to check it out. The dates are: Basi, Virk, Basi were charged on 21 Dec.' 04 ... Basi, Young, Duncan were charged on 4 April '06.
Looks like there is still movement (the secret raid on the Liberal HQ), so maybe more charges are pending. If David Basi is charged again, in a third round of charges, it might explain why the cops are so focused on targeting him that they were willing to let others go to get him. Namely, he is/was up to so much (BC Rail Fraud, ALR Fraud, Liberal Donations???, Grow Ops) that they wanted to catch him at all costs.

Once again the oxygen line you have thrown us is invaluable, especially given the vacuum we must all enter to get a close-up look at this issue.

They charge Young and Duncan and thus, according to the chattering classes, the race card disappears. Let us not talk race but point out the obvious.

Why not charge Bornman and Kieran? Even with a simple slap on the wrist, that would give me some comfort in knowing that justice was being done. It takes two to tango as the song goes...

Let us look at the Gomery Inquiry where people were charged and giving light sentences in exchange for their testimony Jean Brault vs Chuck Guite. Why is there a different standard here?

Unless we have some facts the rumours and innuendo will continue ad nauseum until this trial starts.

The sooner the better!
joseph d., I agree with you that this trial is now overdue. Very likely, Basi, Virk & Basi feel the same way. Who do you think is dragging their feet on this? And why would they?
JD, there was no agreement for tesimony at Gomery -- there was a guilty plea at the subsequent criminal trial of Brault. At the inquiry, seperate from the trial, Jean Brault and Chuck Guite were compelled to appear and testify under oath. Also, Brault and Guite were already targets in investigations when they testified at the inquiry and much of thier testimony was rejected. Reading between the lines it looks like the police had little or nothing in this case, so they had to offer immunity in advance to get a break. If they hadn't done that we might have never found out what Basi and company were up to or had the opportunity of a trial.
Here is an interesting ethical question. You have dirty government worker who is extorting money from folks who must deal with government. Are the people forced to pay the toll as guilty as the person demanding the payment? Not saying this is what happened here, we'll find that out soon enough. I worked for several years in the former Soviet Union and there were some things that you simply could not do without paying something extra to some government type. At that time I really didn't see the folks being extorted as crooks. Would you agree that the government worker who extorts a bribe should be held to a higher level of accountability than the person forced to pay the toll?
Good question. As a wise person said to me once, long ago: "I didn't make the system. I just have to live with it." From which I understood that citizens had best keep a sharp eye on the system to keep it healthy.

With the Legislature Raids -- which I think you're referring to -- I don't see it in terms of 1, 2, or 3 accused individuals. Rather, I see it as reflecting that something might have gone terribly wrong within our system of government -- provncial and federal. And that's why I believe that Basi, Virk, and Basi are our point men who (if the trial goes well) may reveal what has gone wrong within that system.

Spanish history is filled with warnings about systemic bribery -- where Spaniards or their colonists had to buy their way into jobs, or sinecures, or high office.

Not so far-fetched a possibility ... remember that Sooke bumper sticker: "Who do I have to bribe to get a new marina?"

So what I worry about is organized crime infiltrating our whole system until it goes completely rotten, as RCMP Sgt Ward warned ...

I think what you're saying is: "Is it OK for me to bribe the Mayor to get a new marina -- if that's how we do business in B.C. these days?"

Maybe someone else will give you a better answer to your question. But that's how I see the situation.
I agree with Mary, if the trial goes well it'll bare some big problems with our current system.

In response to Unsure, I say if you have rotten apples in government the whole system breaks down.

It sure does seem like the guys charged in the Leg Raids were shaking down whoever they thought they could get a couple bucks from on the side.
Mary said: "... remember that Sooke bumper sticker: 'Who do I have to bribe to get a new marina?'"

How about a new Sooke bumper sticker: 'Who do I have bribe to land out of the ALR?' -- I guess we all know answer to that one
Post a Comment

<< Home