To Be Or Not To Be
Posted on Wednesday, April 06 at 10:04 by John Tiller
“In an age of instant communications and greater freedom of the press, one would think that this kind of publication ban would obviously prove futile, especially when dealing with the kind of corruption that the Gomery Commission is investigating. However, if Perreault is to be believed, no one even considered the notion that someone might talk. Either M. Perreault is hopelessly naive, or he gets the Captain Louis Renault award for being shocked--shocked that free speech goes on in a democracy.
However, despite the publication of the material in an American blog and its review by thousands of Canadians, the Gomery Commission insists that the information is not public. Perreault warns Canadians that any link to CQ or even a mention of the blog name in any Canadian publication could lead to prosecution: Perreault warned that even if Brault's testimony has been outed by a U.S. website, it doesn't mean it's now public information. "Anyone who takes that information and diffuses it is liable to be charged with contempt of court," Perreault said. "Anybody who reproduces it is at risk." Well, you've been warned, my Canadian neighbors.
Conservative deputy leader Peter MacKay even suggested yesterday that the testimony, which is under a publication ban, could lead to criminal charges against senior Liberals. "It's an interesting story. It's fascinating," MacKay said. "First off, I think it's a terrible thing that you guys can't publish this. This is the type of thing that a free press exists for, to hold (its) government accountable . . . it should be you guys reporting this."
When Peter MacKay is right, he is right. We shouldn’t have to act like we live in Hitler’s Germany of Stalin’s Russia just because we are Canadians trying to discover the truth. The publication ban does not restrict Americans from publishing or broadcasting the details of the in-camera hearings. This isn’t private or secret like how an American grand jury operates. The political parties have access, mainstream reporters have access, pedestrians off the street have access, only the voters don’t have access. Wasn’t our mainstream media’s rather meek stance in favour of public trials why Karla Homolka got a sweetheart deal in a secret one? Shouldn’t a pro-Canadian blog step up this time and tell them where they can shove their dirty little secrets? Do we, especially at this web site, really need Americans to do this for us?
Its time for Canadian politicians and judicial inquiry officials to express shock when we agree to such undemocratic terms for public enquiries instead of expecting everyone to honour such unfair press muzzling; indeed, even implicating Americans living a thousand miles south of our border. We are worth more consideration than this. We are the public in public enquiry, after all.
[Proofreader's note: this article was edited for spelling and typos on April 6, 2005]
Contributed By
Topic
Article Rating
(0 votes)
Options
Stumble It!Comments
view comments in forum
Page 1 2
No, it doesn't. But it should. We respect US law in many matters. Why shouldn't they respect ours?
With all the focus here on Vive towards big media, what is to stop someone from being tried and convicted by the media? What is to stop the trial of some big media mogul, or darling of the industry being made out to be a victim by the media he owns, forever tainting any potential jury before a trial has even begun?
Media bans do not limit free speech. They limit, for a time, what the media may publish with regards to a matter before the courts in order to protect a citizens right to a fair trial.
You'd like the chance at a fair trial, wouldn't you?
---
"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill
What I found so shocking that it was CTV, and not the RCMP or any other police agency for that matter that "outted" the Captin's Quarters website. Do we now have to rely on the media and not the RCMP to enforce our laws? I personally do not trust any of the major Canadian news networks.
For example, last night on the National (Global) they did a story suggesting that Canadians don't want an election. They published a poll, from last week (March 29) as their evidence that Canadians are against an election call. But, it's too bad though that the poll was taken BEFORE this recent news from the Gomery Inquiry came to light (well, sort of). That's pretty poor journalism.
And it would appear that the opposition is biting, but I guess we should wait and see if that's the case once Brault's testimony comes to light. It's just a poll like that shown to the public on a major national news cast will ensure that many voters will take that kind of journalism seriously. After all, they're ALL crooks aren't they? That's what one observer of the Inquiry said last night.
The issue of holding a government accountable comes up in this article, and it's a serious issue in this country. Political activism is what inspired the American blogger into getting involved in the first placed. Misplaced as his activism was I think a very good point is made. Do we let Americans hold our politicians accountable for us? Of course not.
Interesting question period today though. The PQ may have given the Bloc money ill gained from Groupaction. Talk about another LIEberal plan backfiring
---
"If you must kill a man, it costs you nothing to be polite about it." Winston Churchill
Nonsense, this is being done in the hopes that the information ban will out last peoples attention spans, and it probably will. It is a fascistic, cowardly attempt to stifle information that would enable Canadians to make informed decisions about their government.
What I find most telling is how many so-called “liberals” have come out to defend censorship when it suits their ends.
This crooked, thieving, lying, government… The most pathetic thing out of all of this is that this miserable pack of liars will be re-elected over and over again because they are most skilled at demagoging the issues, playing the tired anti-American card and lavishing money and attention on the noisy provinces at the expense of the productive ones.
They are above any accountability, and that seems fine with the more easily lead among you.
I thought I had enough in 1997. During the election of that year, Elinor Caplan in front of television cameras denounced her Reform Party opponent as being an anti-semite...who was a Jew! I thought then I had enough. I had enough when the people took her word for it and elected her as their MP. Unbelievable.
I'm not saying this as a Conservative or a New Democrat, but as a voter with a little common sense. I sit and listen as Liberals in this province will literally foam at the mouth at how much they hate Conservatives or New Democrats, but when you ask them to give you a reason why they just sit there with a blank stare on their face. They feed crap like this to Ontarians and they lap it up. Canadians aren't the sheep, Ontarians are. And they will most likely back the Liberals in any upcoming election.
Canadian passports are seen world-wide as the preferred nationality for criminals, terrorists, and illegal immigrants to better countries.
The best thing to come out of the soon-to-be breakup of Canada, for the rest of the world, will be the attention drawn to those who continue to hold "Canadian" passports.
Die, Canada, die. Split apart, and those parts that contain valuable resources, and are smart enough to learn about capitalism, honor, and friendship will survive. The rest of you commu-socialists, ... enjoy the winters, eh?
It's immature to say that they are anti-Canadian, just as it is immature to call Democrats anti-American.
Just because someone disagrees with you doesn't mean they're unpatriotic.
There are many patriotic Canadians in the Conservative Party. Some have merely closed their eyes regarding the direction their party has taken. Others are there for one reason only, hatred of the Liberals. Others have considered themselves Conservative all their lives and believe in the old adage "my party right or wrong." Others believe that they can somehow, from the fringes of the party, influence its direction.
The Liberal Party is facing the same deterioration that faced the Progressive Conservatives in 1993. The rot sets in when you have a one-party system with no moderate party in the wings to take over. That is what we are facing today.
If Harper thought the mood in the country was moving his way he would be pushing for a snap election. The fact that he is not indicates that internal polling is not telling them that things are moving in their direction. People are telling me that no matter how bad the Liberals appear, they believe the Conservatives would be worse because of Harper. For some reason none of them even mention the NDP.
---
Dave Ruston
I have always been leery of the self-serving nature of the media in demanding that they have the right to try people in the media. In my opinion once charges were laid against individuals who would be forced by law to testify at the inquiry, then the inquiry should have been delayed until after the criminal action was completed. In other words, no one should be required to testify in this matter if it was going to impinge on their right to a fair trial.
This whole matter is a mess and some in the federal Liberal Party government may have intentionally tried to create the legal mess so that no one would ever convinced of an offence. While this scenario is possible I believe it is unlikely. It is more likely simply incompetence. The Prime Minister has a great deal to answer for in the way he has handled the matter.
And do you think the situation is any different within the Liberal Party? At least those Conservatives who are pro-American are at least open about it. There are as many pro-American factions within the governing Liberal Party as there are within the Conservative Party, at least these Conservaties have the decency to be honest about it! To Canadians the Liberals use anti-American rhetoric, and then turn around to the Americans and try and get the "slice of the pie" as one might say and get away with it.
They are the problem, not the Conservatives. There is a big difference between wanting to do something as certain Conservatives would want to do, and actually doing something what the Liberal have been doing for 12 years. Their sin is that they play all nice and innocent infront of Canadians by claiming to oppose the Conservatives when in fact they steal ideas from the Conservatives as they do with the NDP and get away with it.
My wonderful aunt is a die hard Liberal, like many Ontarians are and her own logic, like many Ontarian federal Liberals is that it is MY PARTY RIGHT OR WRONG. There's a double standard in this country fueled by the Liberals who stand to benifit most from this double standard.
They'll paint Conservative, our fellow Canadians (my parents and grandparents by the way), as being Barbarian republicans from south of the border who want to sell the country off to the Americans so people go and vote the Liberals in and the Liberals actually try to pull off what certain people within the Conservative Party want to do in the first place. People say the Conservative Party has an agenda, and what the Liberal Party doesn't? And there's the double standard.
Take a close look at the Conservatice Party, they support Gay civil union, just not the redefinition of marriage. So the Liberals turn around and attack them for this stance by labelling them with all the worst names one can possibly imagine and then turn around and enshrine themselves in the Charter of Right & Freedoms. And of course people by it. My gay uncle who lives in Toronto thinks the Conservatives are "scary", but he can't tell you why because he's been hoodwinked by Liberal propaganda.
My point is, if you really honestly believe that there aren't as many pro-American, anti-abortionist, anti-gay people within the Liberal Party as there are in the Conservative Party you're dangerously naive. They go to extremes to say Conservatives are against Canada? So that's why there's a Canadians flag flying outside my parents house then...