From a gossipy Globe & Mail article based on letters filed in the Conrad Black trial;
Mr. Asper's son, David, a CanWest executive, began taking issue with the Post's coverage of the so-called Shawinigate scandal, which involved allegations that Mr. Chrétien had improperly helped a business colleague get a loan from a federal agency for his hotel in Shawinigan. At the time, Lord Black and Mr. Chrétien were also sparring over his appointment to Britain's upper chamber. The Aspers were long-time Liberals and many observers were convinced they would rein in the Post's coverage.On Jan. 5, 2001, Lord Black wrote Mr. Asper to complain about David's interference saying it was “not reconcilable” with the corporate partnership. “I am aware that considerable pressure has been exerted by David on National Post editorial personnel on behalf of Chrétien,” Lord Black wrote, adding that the Prime Minister's Office “is not composed of reasonable people.”
On March 7, 2001, David wrote a column in the Post criticizing the paper's coverage, calling it unfair. The Post ran an editorial the same day defending its reporting and taking David to task.
Six days later, Mr. Asper fired off an angry letter to Lord Black threatening to sever their joint ownership of the Post. Mr. Asper called the Post's criticism of his son “outrageous” and blamed Lord Black for orchestrating the subsequent fallout in other media.
“Neither you nor I would profit from a public battle, which would give great pleasure to those who wish neither of us well, but regrettably, you have chosen to publicly throw a gauntlet, administer a public slap in the face which has both embarrassed, humiliated and held up to ridicule and dishonour both my family and my company,” he wrote. “You will readily understand why I won't remain silent.”
Lord Black replied: responded the next day, calling Mr. Asper's reproaches “completely unjustified.” “The piece [David] wrote was un-rigorous and hostile to your own employees with consequences that were foreseeable and predicted,” he wrote. “I did not orchestrate anything.”
Lord Black said senior editors at the Post had told David that if he wrote his article it would “produce great resentment amongst the journalists and would appear to anyone in [Canada] still interested in an independent press to be servile toadying to a rather corrupt regime in what is now more or less a one-party state.”
just heard part of a CBCpravda radio show where it started off saying the government is purposely disrupting the oppositions agenda. and then she went on to say there are three social democrate parties in Canada and that their agendas are not being heard.
Don Martin and some other clown were on I had to turn it off when they started to talk about the senate being a mess.
CBCpravda radio version is way left of the internet because they know nobody is recording it.
Lord Black nails it:
“produce great resentment amongst the journalists and would appear to anyone in [Canada] still interested in an independent press to be servile toadying to a rather corrupt regime in what is now more or less a one-party state.”
A prescient comment and still we have a demolished Radler's testimony maintaining Lord Black was a simple thief in his aquisitions.
The great libel and slander artists in their unceasing attempts to undercut anyone with a truly independent viewpoint.
The Asper dust up could have been amicably resolved but for dragging it all out in public. Too sad.
And in the end Mr. Beaudoin of BDC was vindicated against the senseless hounding by the RCMP, at political behest.
Beaudoin c. Banque de développement du Canada, 2004 CanLII 581 (QC C.S.)
All caused by the relentless pursuit of power and money.
'For from LOVE of MONEY all sorts of evils arise; and some have so hankered after money as to be led astray from the faith and be pierced through with countless sorrows.'
Asper editorial control of the Post has rendered it a toothless eunuch as an alternative media venue.
Can the media now stop refering to the Post as a right wing newspaper? David Asper has been exposed as another Liberal apologist an nothing more. Can only imagine the howls of outrage were he sympathetic to Mr. Harper to the same degree.
The Liberals are right wing (pro-big business/screw the labour class). They just pretend to be left wing in order to keep getting re-elected...much like Harper and the Cons are trying to do right now.
Just read the tone behind the Post commentary on the Black trial ( which I believe he will walk free from and sue some well deserved boardroom skanks)...You know Apsper pettyness is still taking digs.
Oh, and millionare Asper in a pissing match with millionare Black...and this is a battle of left vs. right?
Well I remember the smarmy, toadying, pro-Liberal article written by David Asper--which I read with a sinking heart.
My husband and I were National Post supporters from the very beginning. It's largely because of the Nat'l Post, under Lord Black's courageous, and sometimes outrageous, leadership, that Shawinigate, the HRDC, and other Librano scandals were exposed.
The National Post was a breath of fresh air, allowing Canadians access to what was REALLY happening in the backrooms of our political parties on Parliament Hill. Many of us already suspected the dishonesty and thuggery, but it's National Post journalists who did the digging and uncovered the unsavoury details.
When the Aspers took over the paper, we stopped reading it. What a sell-out they were/are. There was no antidote to the CBC and other Canadian MSM poison until Lord Black's National Post came along. Once he was gone, it became just another bland and partisan mouth piece for the federal Liberals.
In other words, Lord Black was doing what he could to ensure that Canada didn't descend into a Banana Republic Swamp. When the Aspers bought him out, turfed the best journalists (Frum, Warren, Blatchford, Laframboise, Byfield), and got soft on the Liberals, Canada began the backslide. Glug, glug, glug...
"Oh, and millionare Asper in a pissing match with millionare Black...and this is a battle of left vs. right?"
YOU said that Dip boy, not me...don't attribute statements to me that you conjure up....degenerate partisanism, must appeal to your dishonest nature.
Gotta side with Conrad in this tiff.
Further, there was an exodus of talented writers from the Post following this episode.
WLMR:
Get a grip, man! I didn't attribute anything to you; I was just making a comment.
lberia - yet again, you provide opinions without evidence.
Please provide evidence that the Liberals are 'right wing' and are only 'pretending' to be 'left wing'. Evidence please. Not just your opinions.
Big business is not a symptom of 'right wing'; after all, most of the big business in Canada is linked to the Liberal Party and was heavily subsidized by them using taxpayer money; that is not right wing; that's corruption. The 'free market' is a right wing attribute and the Liberal Corporations are hardly free market.
Equally, 'right wing' is about smaller gov't and the Liberals are all about Big Intrusive Gov't.
And the Liberals are all about big public social programs, such as our heh - health care, the gun registry, their universal day care and so on.
So, tell us, lberia, with actual facts and not just your unverified opinions - exactly how the Liberals are 'right wing'.
National Post Letters.
The Spanish Civil War: The winner was Franco.
Stalin and lberia were losers; not dead enough.
Franco put an end to the socialist's and communist's "orgy of crime" in Spain.
"It was a full year of complete terror, until the socialists and communists decided to put an end to the orgy of crime."
...-
Death in the name of anarchism
National Post
Re: Anarchism for the social good, letters to the editor, May 15.
?Ja, ja, ja! I can see that letter-writer Sarah Armstrong has never lived in a society controlled by anarchists. I did, in Barcelona, Spain, in 1936 at the beginning of the Spanish Civil War.
Power fell into the hands of the FAI (Iberian Anarchist Federation). The result: chaos, assassinations, destruction, burnings, killing, killing and more killing by the so-called "control squads" under the command of Dionisio Eroles. The anarchists killed many decent and honest people, taking them from their homes under the pretense of going for a walk and then shooting them in the outskirts of the city. It was a full year of complete terror, until the socialists and communists decided to put an end to the orgy of crime.
I advise Ms. Armstrong to become better informed about the anarchists' activities at the beginning of the Spanish Civil War.
Juan Salva, Sarnia, Ont. ...-
http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/editorialsletters/story.html?id=0e1c8b72-73f2-4bd6-96d2-d7d314b978d4
ET:
You are a hypocrite. Look at the statements you make without providing any proof.
"after all, most of the big business in Canada is linked to the Liberal Party and was heavily subsidized by them using taxpayer money; that is not right wing; that's corruption."
1. Prove most big business is linked to the Liberals.
2. Prove that those businesses linked are all subsidized by the taxpayer
3.Prove that they are all corrupt.
"Equally, 'right wing' is about smaller gov't and the Liberals are all about Big Intrusive Gov't."
4. Prove that the gov't has gotten smaller under the Cons.
"And the Liberals are all about big public social programs, such as our heh - health care, the gun registry, their universal day care and so on."
5. And which big public social programs have the Conservatives cut? Universal daycare was an election promise, not a program, so you can't count that one. The Cons are sending $100/month for child care. So come on, let's have some proof of major program cuts.
Want proof the the Libs are right wingers pretending to be somewhat leftish:
The Chretien/Martin government made promises to get rid of free trade, get rid of the gst and they signed on to Kyoto...and they didn't do any of these things. Then they made huge cuts to the public service, froze government worker's salaries for years, cut social programs and transfer payments which resulted in downloading costs on provinces and municipalities. Were these the actions of a left wing gov't?
I'd like to see your proof now.
Iberia: So it seem that what you are saying is that the Liberals campaign on policies they know they have no intention of enacting and hide the policies they are intending to enact until after they get elected. Sounds like a great example of a hidden agenda to me. And the media happily hangs that tag on the Conservatives who actually run on the platform that they want to enact.
No, lberia, you haven't provided any proof. Instead, you are changing the topic. Your theme was that the Liberals are 'right wing'. I asked for proof.
Now, you are not answering the question and are instead, diverting from the issue by inserting a comparison with the Conservatives - ie - trying to say that the Liberals are 'right wing' because the Conservatives are doing 'the same thing'. That's a diversion from the issue and is not an answer.
1) Liberal subsidies have included the big Montreal/Quebec companies (Bombardier) and aircraft companies; oil and gas industry (1.4 billion subsidies per year); shipbuilding subsidies, forest subsidies; fishing, mining...OK?
2) What is corrupt? And don't change what I said. I didn't say the companies were corrupt; I said the Liberals were corrupt - and they are. The Sponsorship was only the tip of their involvement. Corruption includes their patronage appointments to the Senate, to ambassadorships, to deputy ministers, etc. Corruption includes tax evasion, high expenses, etc.
3) Don't change the topic; don't set up a new topic of 'the difference between the Liberals and the Conservatives'. YOUR topic was that the Liberals are right wing. I disagree. The Liberals are all about BIG intrusive gov't - all services are to be PUBLIC, rather than private. That includes day care (the Conservatives reject this, that's why they have the 100 per month to families); that includes health care - also rejected by the Conservatives; ...
4) Universal day care was not an election promise of the Conservatives. That's a promise of the Liberals. Of course I count it; YOU say that the Liberals are 'right wing' - they are the ones who set up universal day care - and certainly rejected funding families (beer and popcorn).
Free trade is right wing - and subsidies are left. The Liberals subsidize Canadian products, heavily. GST is a 'left' tax on consumption.
The fact that they signed on to Kyoto is a symptom of their stupidity, not of their being left or right.
Downloading to the provinces wasn't an ideological action (left/right) but was a political strategy to 'balance the budget'. Chretien balanced the budget by downloading costs to the provinces, by cutting the military, etc. That has absolutely nothing to do with left/right ideology but with political machiavellan strategies. Period.
The Liberals are a big gov't, socialist ideology; their tactics when in gov't are to remain in power. That's their only agenda. Power. To do that, they will bribe, subsidize, balkanize the population into identity groups and subsidize these groups (subsidies to private religious schools and centres); they will subsidize business and industry. They will do anything and everything - to stay in power. That's corruption.
And their ideology is 'left' because to stay in power means that they must control all areas of the gov't. And, the electorate. That's 'left'.
ET:
I DID provide proof. I'm not surprised that you now resort to twisting definitions in order to not accept my proof.
GST is a left tax?!!
And what is a "right tax"?
Balancing the budget is a political strategy?!!
Yeah, that's really clever...a left wing gov't pretending to be a right wing gov't.
"Kyoto is a symptom of their stupidity, not of their being left or right."
Stupidity?!! In the past you've gone on at great length about how Kyoto is a socialist scheme. And now it's neither left or right?
"Free trade is right wing - and subsidies are left."
Either we have free trade or we don't.
You haven't proven that most of the big business in Canada is linked to the Liberal Party and was heavily subsidized by them using taxpayer money. All you did was make a list. Proof!
You have a strange idea of what constitutes corruption. A gov't giving money away is corrupt, but the business receiving that money isn't?
Just give it up, ET. Your tactic of demanding "proof" from comentators you disagree with has blown up in your face.
lberia - You changed the terms of reference - and brought in the comparison between the Liberals and Conservatives.
Are you actually saying that a 'left' can't be stupid? That someone who accepts Kyotoism can't be 'left' and 'stupid'? Again, the Liberals accepted Kyotoism not because of their socialism but because of their stupidity and corruption - and Chretien's narcissistic ego to 'trump' the US.
I think I see where you are coming from; you are communist/socialist and you reject anything to do with individualism, capitalism, freedom, etc. You are in favour of Big Government, all public services - and you reject the Liberals as 'not socialist enough'. Naturally, you are against the Conservatives. I'd say even the NDP aren't communist enough for you.
Of course my list of industries subsidized by the Liberals is proof. What more do you want? The Liberals set up our economy, not to run via the market system, but within heavily subsidized systems. That money would of course come from the taxpayer; it certainly didn't come from private donors. If that's not socialism - what is?
No, the Liberals are not a 'right wing' gov't; they remain firmly on the left, with their requirement for Big Government, their intrusiveness in all areas of social life (daycare, health care, education) and their rejection of the market system.
Admittedly, to you, anything not communist is obviously 'right' wing.
Amazing !! The exchange between ET and lberia, that is.
ET provides the truth backed up with fact and examples.
lberia uses bafflegarb and provides mush. Must be a consrvative plant, ... cause it sure works.
Look Edwina:
You are obviously starting to lose it!
Just because you make up a list and claim it is proof doesn't mean it is proof. Proof would be a document showing how much money went to which company.
"The Liberals set up our economy, not to run via the market system, but within heavily subsidized systems."
What country do you live in? What the hell is the TSX then? According to you we don't have a market economy!!
I'm hardly a commie, but you are definitely a deranged McCarthyist. Better check under your bed tonight and see if any Reds are hiding under there.
Iberia: If, in your mind, you think you have a shred of dignity remaining you might want to shut up. ET is creaming you and that last shred is fast becoming toast.
bcer:
Umm, yeah, I'm being "creamed" by someone doesn't sustantiate her arguments; changes definitions to suit her arguments; and believes we don't live in a market economy.
And I should be concerned about my dignity? My dignity is intact. I'm more concerned about the lack of sanity demonstrated by small dead minds.
lberia, you can't even win the arguments you have with yourself - give it a rest.
Iberia - ET had made you moot! Corrupt governments do not blackmail business with gigantic sums of taxpayer $$ on paper, legalized on a document, in Liberano Canada....you are a very naive fellow.