Toronto Life: The Trial of Conrad Black: Why the Long Pen?

Why the Long Pen?

Posted on October 17, 2007 by Douglas Bell

You couldn’t make it up. Monday evening, in a dingy warehouse-like book store in downtown Toronto, Conrad Black, under virtual house arrest in Florida, made use of a virtual technology called the LongPen to sign copies of his Nixon bio. He was introduced by the LongPen’s inventor, Margaret Atwood, and subsequently interviewed by CTV’s Seamus O’Regan before “signing” dozens of books for a mostly sympathetic audience. The LongPen allows Black to both sign the book more or less in real time (using a device so precisely calibrated that it replicates the exact pressure exerted by the writer’s hand at the other end) and carry on a two-way videoconference with his interlocutors.

While it wasn’t the first time the LongPen has been used to create a simulacrum of a book signing it was, as Atwood announced from the stage, “the most sensational.” Book signings by their very nature produce an odd assortment of eccentrics and outright wing nuts. These, combined with a smattering of the great and good (entertainment lawyer and agent Michael Levine, Atwood’s hubby Graeme Gibson, former CBC chairman Patrick Watson, the ubiquitous Heather Reisman) and a battery of photographers, print and broadcast journalists, produced more than a hint of sheer weirdness.

Among the former group was a man (much noticed in this morning’s press) dressed in what looked to be a white chef’s suit decorated with prominent red satin maple leaves. He referred to himself as “Mr. Canada.” Several hours before the event, Mr. Canada, whose face is also tattooed with red leaves, could be seen patrolling the aisles of the store, periodically wandering over to where workers were setting up the room and it’s technological doodads. For a while he stood near the rear of the cordoned-off area responding to techies testing the various mikes—“check, check, one two, check”—by shouting in a vaguely Middle Eastern accent, “Mr. Canada can hear you. That’s fine. He can hear you fine.” Later, he took a seat in the front row beside another early arrival, a Toronto Web designer and self-proclaimed “Nixonologist,” William Stratas. Their conversation turned briefly on an effort by Mr. Stratas to disabuse Mr. Canada of his sense that Conrad Black was the victim of a gross injustice. Delivered in a rapid fire staccato, Stratas could be heard saying “This is a guy who could be making license plates for the next 15 to 20 years… He won’t be playing golf, that’s for sure. He’s not headed to Club Fed, etc., etc.” At this news, Mr. Canada seemed somewhat nonplussed, but sat expectantly nonetheless gripping a news clipping and photo of Black’s encounter with Rick Mercer, which he hoped Black would later sign.

As the time for Black’s virtual appearance neared, the seats began to fill, the media arrived in force and the various participants—Atwood, O’Regan, Levine—drifted between air kiss greetings (“Hooray, hooray,” exulted Dame Peggy upon O’Regan’s arrival) and various media moments (at one point Levine leaned into a gaggle of reporters and, in a portentous half-whisper said, “That man I was just speaking to—he produced a television show called The Littlest Hobo”). Atwood danced from interview to interview extolling the virtues of her invention and praising the evening’s subject. “He’s a serious historian,” she repeated several times, emphasizing the word “serious” in a serious tone. She even pimped for one of the more obvious bits of PR bullshit—a sign at the front of the stage announcing that:

“By taking LongPen instead of an airplane to this event Conrad Black will save 1764 lbs of CO2 emissions.”

Eventually, the real show began to take shape. A techie appeared on screen sitting at a desk in Conrad’s Palm Beach study, a variety of thick tomes and the Encyclopaedia Britannica lined up on shelves behind his head. And then, in an instant, Black appeared. He looked fitter and more confident than at any time since the early days of the trial. “He’s our Paris Hilton,” someone said behind me. He parried O’Regan’s lob ball questions, always with a decisive cock of the head and a half smile playing at the corner of his mouth. In response to the one vaguely controversial query concerning Chrétien’s claim that Black had begged the former PM to let him sit in the Senate as a Liberal, Black replied cocksuredly: “On the business of sitting as a senator, I said you could do both, and as to sitting as a Liberal I said I’d consider it.” From there, it was a litany of Black versions of Nixon’s greatest hits: “When I first met him he sounded to me more like Rich Little than Richard Nixon… He was not uniquely sleazy… The country wanted David Frost to prove that they were right in chasing him from office—Nixon was never going to give them that.” In the midst of this impressive but well rehearsed recitation, Black was asked which Canadian prime minister he would chronicle if he had the chance. “Mackenzie King,” he replied without hesitation, and, in elaborating, recited from memory lines of F.R. Scott’s satirical poem W.L.M.K.

Later, a high school history teacher asked Black to sign his book with a greeting that repeated G. Gordon Liddy’s response to his prison sentence for the Watergate crimes. Again Black didn’t miss a beat. “I’m happy to quote Gordon Liddy—and happy to quote Nietzsche, ‘That which does not destroy me makes me stronger.’ Meanwhile, Gordon Liddy is 83, has a huge radio audience and is as fit as a fiddle.”

It was the sort of performance that reminded the room why it was they’d been fascinated with Black in the first place. And as the evening wore down, having genially fended off foes and jocularly made common cause with his friends, Black signed Mr. Canada’s wrinkled photo. Moments later he signed a copy for Heather Reisman, who suggested the book would make a fine seasonal gift with the startling and entirely mischievous proclamation that “Christmas just isn’t Christmas without Richard Nixon.”

Border no barrier for Black's autograph pen: Source [The Globe and Mail]

LongPen lets Black see fans: Source [Toronto Star]

Conrad Black is back ... virtually, at least: Source [National Post]

Categories: Media, Today's Top Stories
Permalink

Comments

Neither the author nor Toronto Life necessarily agree with the comments posted below. Editors will not correct spelling or grammar. Toronto Life reserves the right to edit or delete comments entirely. Read our full policy

wave99 October 17, 2007 at 9:56 a.m.

Like him or not, you just have to admire his resolve and stoic nature.

I began this Toronto Life adventure with the belief that Black was likely guilty and because I was not a fan of his style, secretly hoped he was.

I've come full circle. The Prosecution case was an over-reach. I've lost a little money more due to Breedan than anything or anyone else, and infact, Black has many admirable qualities including the above noted.

I do not believe his last chapter has been written at all. Time will tell.

Kirsten Shapiros October 17, 2007 at 10:27 a.m.

Please get this felon out of my face.

Lit 200 October 17, 2007 at 10:52 a.m.

Like to compliment Doug Bell: Thanks for the "you are there" story. Well done.

Lit 200 October 17, 2007 at 11:03 a.m.

Wave99

With minor variations, I feel as you do. I have traveled that very road. I found the anti Black brigade so self-righteous and virulent that I began by taking the opposite side as a devil's advocate. Now, I'm rooting for him to win at appeal, at least on the obstruction charge.

W101 October 17, 2007 at 11:18 a.m.

“He’s our Paris Hilton,”
-----

Black's supporters are idiots.

Lois Griffin October 17, 2007 at 12:19 p.m.

Say what you will, wave99 and Lit 200, bottom line? Black's a convicted felon and he will lose his appeals. What you take for admirable stoicism and resolve I see someone thumbing his nose at the US justice system that if nothing else, provided this crook with a fair trial. Try as I might, I only view Black as simply a dumb, crooked phony with low level pr. He isn't even smart enough to surround himself with winners who might advise this loudmouth fake to ashut the hell up. I agree with poster, Kirsten Shapiros - get this felon out of my face too.

Lois Griffin October 17, 2007 at 1:06 p.m.

The one thing that Black lacks completely and so wanted to possess as well as be viewd as one who possesses it, is class. This man is a shameful reminder that the Canadian media ( a large part of it, anyway ) and too many Canadians are lackeys, toadies, flunkies and bootlickers of those they perceive as " having made it ".

Fintan October 17, 2007 at 1:54 p.m.

In a way you have to hand it to His Lardship. He has a neck like a jockey's bollocks!

There he is, a convicted felon with little chance of winning his appeal, with massive civil suits avalanching down on him, with his first night in jail possibly only 45 days away, and yet he continues his clowning.

This is the guy who flew private jets all over the world, remember, and now they try to make a virtue out of the fact that not coming to the book signing in person - which he couldn't anyway, because the judge rightly recognises that he cannot be trusted to come back for his sentencing - saves the planet a tiny amount of carbon emissions.

He'll reduce his carbon footprint a great deal more than that when he has to give up his mansions and share a tiny cell with Bubba.

I'm impressed with the Long Pen technology, though. Especially its ability to apply exactly the same degree of hand pressure at the remote destination as the signer applies. ("... so precisely calibrated that it replicates the exact pressure exerted by the writer's hand at the other end").

I can think of one new adaptation for that technology that, if properly marketed, could make billions.

I'll leave it to the engineers among you to figure out the details, but maybe Morticia can still wax his carrot for him electronically if the US authorities allow him to have the requisite devices in his cell.

Bob S, no disagreement with your last post yesterday. In fact, I take your point, but I'm not rolling up and crying foul just because the resident crank and sicko leaf makes ever more absurd assertions. What the sicko writes would only offend me if I even suspected they emanated from a rational mind, but they don't.

I only meant that if the Site Administrator doesn't act as he has warned he will do, then why post that notice at all in the first place?

Odd, the leaf-thing still hasn't called the number I gave, so it must still believe I'm not in Finland at all.

For those of you who understand German, the idea of the LongPen is not new. Decades ago, I heard this in Germany:

Frau Wirtin hatte einen Sohn,
der liebte das Moderne.
Er steckte den Schwanz ins Telefon,
und pimperte in die Ferne.

Barbara in BC October 17, 2007 at 2:09 p.m.

Thanks to the intrepid reporter Douglas Bell for giving his eyewitness account of this media event.

Fintan October 17, 2007 at 3:07 p.m.

From the Toronto Star:

"Do you feel hurt by politicians?" he asked Black.

Black paused. "Mmmmmm. Not particularly, no," he said.

"Why?" asked Mr. Canada.

Black's reply was simple: "They have not really been the cause of my current problems."

Is this the beginning of a return to reality? Is it beginning to dawn on His Lardship that he is in his current predicament because of his own dishonesty?

I wonder how he feels about the name Long Pen? "Long" as in stretch and "pen" as in where he'll be serving it.

W101 October 17, 2007 at 3:08 p.m.

Fintan: I can think of one new adaptation for that technology that, if properly marketed, could make billions.

The Fintanator isn't so far off:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn76...

Fintan October 17, 2007 at 3:20 p.m.

W101, LOL! Not quite what I had in mind, but actually that New Scientist article highlights completely new possibilities, and there's a gender equality aspect to it as well.

Lit 200 October 17, 2007 at 3:50 p.m.

Fintan: "Black's reply was simple: "They have not really been the cause of my current problems."

Is this the beginning of a return to reality? Is it beginning to dawn on His Lardship that he is in his current predicament because of his own dishonesty?"

Nope. Black has a better grasp of reality than Fintan. The cause of his current problems is a man called Breeden, who drained Hollinger dry, and an over-eager prosecutor who tried to convict him as an Al Capone-type gangster, among other things.

leaf October 17, 2007 at 4:01 p.m.

Fintan October 17, 2007 at 1:54 p.m.

First off fickton/drooler, i’m glad you put your brave shorts on and refused to run away from this blog. That was not looking to good on you…

In a way you have to hand it to His Lardship. He has a neck like a jockey's bollocks!

- i could swear i read that exact comment from you in an earlier post.

- better clowning than cowarding, if you ask me. Besides, Atwood is not exactly a pulp fiction writer, like Bower… sort of like comparing Lit200 and roger. No contest.

- i had forgotten all about those private jets flights ! also, i didn’t remember that he was restricted to his PB home.
Fickton, you are serving a greatly useful purpose in putting all fingers over and over and over again on the most significant facts of this trial.

leaf October 17, 2007 at 4:01 p.m.

He'll reduce his carbon footprint a great deal more than that when he has to give up his mansions and share a tiny cell with Bubba.

- what a class act, fickton ! your thoughtfullness knows no bound !

Pffttt, next to your super nova extreme performance post digital age answering machine, this is small potatoes.

I can think of one new adaptation for that technology that, if properly marketed, could make billions.

- again, i must remark on your honorable and upstanding remark. Pure unadulterated class !

- that’ll be my defense : i’m a sicko crank. Good. All bases covered now. Prepare for offensive action.

I only meant that if the Site Administrator doesn't act as he has warned he will do, then why post that notice at all in the first place?

- I don’t know, drooler. Maybe they judge my posts less offensive than yours ? could be…

Odd, the leaf-thing still hasn't called the number I gave, so it must still believe I'm not in Finland at all.

- good, it was the right number you gave ! Thanks for confirming this fickieboy.

Fintan October 17, 2007 at 4:10 p.m.

Good news for the leaf and the rest of us. Its post (just after Lit's - pure coincidence of course) actually mentions His Lardship and his trial for criminal deeds rather than just insanely rambling.

Maybe someone is getting the medication right at last. Who knows, with a few years of thereapy as well ---

Good night all.

fael October 17, 2007 at 4:12 p.m.

Spake the leaf "Fickton, you are serving a greatly useful purpose in putting all fingers over and over and over again on the most significant facts of this trial."

Like "a convicted felon with little chance of winning his appeal, with massive civil suits avalanching down on him, with his first night in jail possibly only 45 days away..."

Yes, that does seem significant.

leaf October 17, 2007 at 4:18 p.m.

yup, i might reap what i need with thereapy.
run away quickly now fickie. any good droolable movies on?

ROGER October 17, 2007 at 4:18 p.m.

FINTAN--sehr geil! LOL!
Wie in "Brave New World"! Das kino als "feelies."
Vielleicht kann Outokompu damit machen oder Beate Uhse?

PMH October 17, 2007 at 4:52 p.m.

Fintan October 17, 2007 at 4:10 p.m.

Good news for the leaf and the rest of us. Its post (just after Lit's - pure coincidence of course) actually mentions His Lardship and his trial for criminal deeds rather than just insanely rambling.

Maybe someone is getting the medication right at last. Who knows, with a few years of thereapy as well ---

No way. The leaf - thing is even sicker than was originally thought and which fact is brilliantly highlighted in the last 2 posts of this warped weasel. The leaf - pervert has mucho anger stored inside his gutless gut - Mommy must have beaten the hell out of this twerp when he was growing up and Daddy probably kicked the shi- out of him too. Leaf's obssessive fantasy with and his sicko ramblings about Fintan, a senior, point to a probable case of geriatric or gerontofilia ( or whatever the correct term is called ), caused by frequent whippings and other thangs by leaf's grandparents. No matter, old leafie's childhood and adolescence must have been a hell of a show. So whatever leaf - pervert types now or does is irrefutable evidence that this creepo is exactly that - and every post of his is more fodder for the resident psychiatrist at the institution where leaf will be dragged to soon.

ROGER October 17, 2007 at 5:24 p.m.

In seine Haende, das Kind war tod.

ROGER October 17, 2007 at 5:29 p.m.

FUTURE ATWOOD BOOKS:

The Edible Black
Alias Crook
The Robber Bride II
Handmaid's Tail Part II
Surfacing After Going Down Under
Moral Disorder: The Black Book

ROGER October 17, 2007 at 5:30 p.m.

Good Blog Mr Bell!

ROGER October 17, 2007 at 6:02 p.m.

I SURE HOPE THOSE CIVIL SUITS START SOON AND NOV 30 IS SO FAR OFF--I can't wait to see Black frogmarched to jail with the news coverage--just like Paris Hilton!

Shareholders are entitled to get their money back from Black and Amiel and the gang. Too bad those directors have not been criminally charged, but the civil suits will get them, or at least some of them.

leaf October 17, 2007 at 6:34 p.m.

Message of public interest including TORONTO LIFE

I’d like to bring back the subject of plagiarism if I may.

please refer to wikipedia for its copyright violations policy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:C...

and wikipedia's verbatim copying policy

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:V...

the other copyright violations i have observed had copyright clearly visible :

http://www.filmref.com/directors/dirpage...

Along with roger, Toronto Life would be held accountable for these copyright violations.
Is Toronto Life guilty ? no. However it’s happened in its house so, it would be an accessory to a copyright violation.

Before anyone thinks of ‘borrowing' someone else’s words to impress the gallery, one should think of the possible and very real repercussions not only to him/herself but to the blog host as well.

Similarly, 'borrowing’ someone’s name in a blog to post misleading information is equally deceiving and dishonest, though it doesn’t carry any sort of penalty, other than to discredit its perpetrator (usually easily identifiable)

Is one not guilty if not caught ?
Everyone’s answer will reflect their own code of honor and integrity.

I propose that each poster limits him/herself to one name in order to avoid confusion and deceit.
In the eventuality that this proposal is not acceptable, i propose that no poster uses the name of an already established poster.
I have actually taken the time to decipher the blog’s pranks and other dubious claims, but not everyone has the time or desire to do so.

Thank you.

haithabu October 17, 2007 at 6:52 p.m.

Kirsten Shapiros October 17, 2007 at 10:27 a.m.
"Please get this felon out of my face."

Try another blog then.

B. Martin October 17, 2007 at 7:07 p.m.

Hey leaf? SHUT THE Fu-k UP! If you don't like what you read on this blog, f--k off creep and go post your sh-t on some other board. No one is forcing you to stay here and looks like most here hate you anyway. Frustrated loser and idiot that you are.

wavhentailcold October 17, 2007 at 7:16 p.m.

Leaf,

I decided my one name shall be a combination of my several characters.

I have also decided that I am from Iceland and that I not only drink too much, but that I like running nude in minus 25 deg C weather into outdoor hot tubs.

The attrification of all appendages is really quite amusing as long as they 'elongate' again upon entry into the warmer element.

I've had scares.

Regards.

hiccup.

leaf October 17, 2007 at 7:21 p.m.

hey roger aka B. Martin.... sorry i had to bring up that embarassing plagiarism bit again but it's just not cool for TL. don't drag others down with you through your cheating swindling ways.

and in case you didn't notice, i'm not here to win a popularity contest. i find a lot of satisfaction in outing frauds like you.

i ain't going anywhere.

leaf October 17, 2007 at 7:30 p.m.

wavhentailcold.... awwww, i wish you had picked my 2nd proposal. come back as an ensemble cast!
i'll miss all of you.

you can still be from iceland and i'm sure the account of your appendages size variations will fascinate fickton.

no sorry, i can not accept this reversal of scenario.
your cooperation will be greatly appreciated.

thank you and cheers!

Leaf October 17, 2007 at 7:34 p.m.

I was a fan of lord Black, but after the veredict,
I saw the light. The lord is truly a criminal.

Lit 200 October 17, 2007 at 7:44 p.m.

I think highly of lord Crossharbour,
his contribution to the National Post and
the fountain he erected in London in the
memory of the WW2 fallen. But when he
refused to testify under oath in court,
I got convinced that he is guilty.
I now apologize for my error to my
friends on this blog.

B. Martin October 17, 2007 at 7:51 p.m.

No one is forcing you to stay here and looks like most here hate you anyway......... B. Martin

i ain't going anywhere........leaf

Why AIN'T you going anywhere, creep? Everyone here thinks you're a smutraker, porno freak and pervert and you have a bone ( no pun intended ) to pick with everyone on this blog, including the host, and yet you hang here anyway and continue to spit your warped rants - do you really think anyone is taking you and your perverted threats seriously? Why don't you flush yourself down the toilet or fly up your own a--hole? I guess you can't do the latter because you have already done that. Just do the toilet gig and stay down in the sewers where you belong.

leaf October 17, 2007 at 8:18 p.m.

you keep this up roger aka B. martin and i'm gonna go hustle for more roger plagiarism.
i know it's all over this blog.

B. Martin October 17, 2007 at 8:52 p.m.

WOW! You sure scared Roger - he is sooo scared he ain't even responding to your threats......NOT. Answer my question, bozo - what the hell do you hang around here for where everyone hates and ignores you? And I ain't Roger. I am your worst nightmare, you fuc-ed up as-hole.

leaf October 17, 2007 at 9:12 p.m.

i don't mean to scare roger. just degrade, discredit and humiliate him. blow his cover to smithereens.
that's really the only reason i'm here.

happy now roghead?

B. Martin October 17, 2007 at 9:34 p.m.

Yeah Yeah, smuthead - you really discredit and humiliate him.....NOT. The only discredited butthol- here is you, perv. And anyway, wasn't it Fintan the only reason you are here? You are a fuc-ing liar too, it seems and can't even remember the shi- you type. Drink much? You ain't nothing but a whacked out stoner that no one has the time of day for so you fantasize about seniors like Fintan and Roger. Yeah - you sure are a perv alright.

Sugah Honeymaid October 17, 2007 at 9:40 p.m.

Why ah don't hate leafy atall. i think he's just the sweetest thang heah. Doncha be downhearted deah. y'all got the baddies on th run. And ifn ya swing by Mobile, y'll jus look up Sugah. Heah?

leaf October 17, 2007 at 9:58 p.m.

sweet baby jesus! i knew i might have one friend in here.
with a friend like mama sugah, do i really need any more friends?

i'm definitely not going anywhere!

ROGER October 17, 2007 at 10:04 p.m.

LOL! I never use profanity. When Black strutted around, he liked to threaten women who displeased him with horsewhipping-- why he was never charged with threats of violence, I don't know. Then when the Bishop of Calgary spoke out in favour of newspaper strikers in Calgary out on strike for a living wage, Black called the bishop a "jumped up twerp"! Black was liberal with his insults and put downs, but had a thin skin when others criticized him, and Atkinson was his attack dog, quick with libel lawsuits to shut up anyone with questions. It turns out those questions were more than merited and Black had much to hide. Black learnt the trick of libel suits from Robert Maxwell, that other big media crook, but at least Maxwell made some effort to be conscious of living as a member of society, whereas Black almost believed himself to be above everyone and enjoyed stomping on people he considered of lower class to himself.

In looking at the shallow people who defend Black, ethically and morally bankrupt people of little intellect and even less charm, it must be hurtful and embarrassing to Black that these are his only defenders. Poor Black, it's all the way downhill from here with nothing to look forward to but more of the same, and worse! No doubt Amiel is preparing Black for life in jail. Amiel knows about these things. She probably takes a sadistic pleasure in reminding Black of what's instore for him. All those years of marriage to the impotent Black must have been hard on her.

ROGER October 17, 2007 at 10:12 p.m.

LOUDMOUTHED BLACK WAS TOO SCARED TO TESTIFY IN HIS OWN DEFENSE IN CHICAGO

Nothing he says now is of any relevance. History will record that Black invoked the Fifth Amendment right not to incriminate himself---a guilty mind, if ever there was one! Black, who believed himself to be a master orator, a brilliant tactician, a witness with no peer, chickened out and when as silent as a Mandarin. Black's impotence must have disappointed his followers. I am sure that even Amiel was shocked by his cowardice. What little respect I had for Black disappeared in an instant. No matter what his lawyers said, no matter what anyone said, it was Black's decision to make, as demonstrated when the Judge asked him to personally state on the record whether he wished to testify in his own defence and Black whimpered he did not! What a humiliating end to Black's lifetime of bluster! Compare that to his memoir where he claimed in 1982 to have dazzled the judge in the Hanna/Norcen Mining case, when he did testify. Of course he was lying, and when he testified in Delaware before Vice-Chancellor Strine, Strine called him an unreliable liar, a teller of tall tales.

leaf October 17, 2007 at 10:30 p.m.

All this thing about the LongPen is to attract attention to sell the book about Nixon-the-crook. Probably the book is not selling well and the publisher is in the red. Can anyone
in his right mind read 900 pages about Nixon-the-crook? There is lot of competion among crook's biographies today, with Mulroney-the-crook's book out on the shelves. Poor, poor, Canada how the crooks are hurting you. but don't cry for me Canada, I will be in the slammer by November 30th.

B. Martin October 17, 2007 at 10:50 p.m.

Sugah Honeymaid October 17, 2007 at 9:40 p.m. is really leaf - for the record.
Leaf is such pond scum and so desperate for acceptance that the little twerp has to pretend to be someone who wants him to stay here. What a crock of sh-t. He ain't foolin' anybody and it sure looks like he loves it when posters here make fun of him. I guess it must be all the years of being physically and emotionally abused as a kid that have turned him into a first rate sicko masochist and sadist.

JLT October 17, 2007 at 11:08 p.m.

Hey pssssssssst. Conrad, you are wasting precious time. Get ten bricks of gold and make sail to the city of Abidjan, Ivory Coast. No extradition treaty there.

leaf October 17, 2007 at 11:11 p.m.

"and it sure looks like he loves it when posters here make fun of him"

yes i do. please don't stop. tell me how you really feel about me. we're cracking up here.

keep posting using different IDs. makes me look like i'm having a big impact on the blog at large.

thanks!

Jo Momma October 17, 2007 at 11:20 p.m.

we're cracking up here. - leaf - pervert

Yeah, WE is you and Mommy. And we hear dat soon Bubba gonna be your mate in da instatooshun for da insanity and dem misfits. You gonna be real populare in da instatooshun. Eggsackly who you think you is foolin', leaf perv?

ROGER October 17, 2007 at 11:38 p.m.

Marilyn October 17, 2007 at 11:54 p.m.

Now here's a life worth celebrating: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ek1iIOTsi...

ROGER October 18, 2007 at 12:29 a.m.

NICE UPLIFTING POST MARILYN!

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 1:44 a.m.

Loved that link Marilyn. Agree with Roger that the Black supporters here are a lackluster crew.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 1:48 a.m.

On the other hand, the anti side can be sickening. Can't say I'm impressed with B. Martin who is quite the rude and insensitive person to make fun of abused children when referring to leaf:

"I guess it must be all the years of being physically and emotionally abused as a kid that have turned him into a first rate sicko masochist and sadist."

leaf October 18, 2007 at 1:54 a.m.

Another priceless item here, from ethically and morally upstanding roger, of infinite intellect and even more charm.

ROGER August 9, 2007 at 10:45 p.m.

(roghead admonishing Phil)
« Europeans ought to be eternally grateful to Muslims! We gave you so much for such little gratitude and you plagiarize without any credit! »

Only muslims can plagiarize without any credit !

See roghead do it :
ROGER August 9, 2007 at 8:39 p.m

Verbatim found here : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades

Go on rog, tell me how morally bankrupt i am…

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 2:33 a.m.

Leaf: Calm down about Roger and his so-called plagiarism. Do you think people are BORN knowing about the Crusades? Of course any information provided comes from a source outside of his own head. Nobody is expected to provide material strictly off-the-cuff in a historical discussion. Don't be silly.

An actual charge of plagiarism only applies to someone being marked by a teacher or paid by an employer. Roger didn't claim his material was original.

Colin October 18, 2007 at 4:51 a.m.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 2:33 a.m.

An actual charge of plagiarism only applies to someone being marked by a teacher or paid by an employer. Roger didn't claim his material was original.

The brain that produced this post must be that of a child's. Whilst I am all for a completely open and democratic blog in which anyone, young or old can post, it is sometimes unfair to adults on this blog to be forced to wade through the childish and childlike opinions of a poster who I am sure cannot be much older than a 10 year old. One has to wonder where the parents of this poster are or what they must be thinking to permit their youngster to stay up so late and to log onto what is clearly a site more adult friendly or suitable.

leaf October 18, 2007 at 6:57 a.m.

colin is nice for defending me. all those oldies are so mean. i am going to expose all of you, creeps!

B. Martin October 18, 2007 at 7:54 a.m.

leaf October 18, 2007 at 6:57 a.m.

colin is nice for defending me. all those oldies are so mean. i am going to expose all of you, creeps!

He wasn't defending you, you dumb fuc-, sounds like he was stating that the poster B in BC is a kid whose parents allow her to stay up too late. What planet were you hatched on anyway, leaf? Reading through the posts here, it appears that you are a despised pervert whose only friend is that rodent you keep for a pet.

wave99 October 18, 2007 at 8:46 a.m.

Brutal blog segment. New lows. B.Martin aka Donna the good, effectively ruined it.

a simple question October 18, 2007 at 9:08 a.m.

How would Conrad Black be judged if he was to be tried in a Sharia court? I direct this question to Barbara in BC because she has revealed herself in this blog to be a tireless promoter of civil rights for everyone, including the 600,000 Muslims in Canada.

Despite what the Islamaphobes would say, Sharia would deal with Black in a more efficient and equitable manner - equitable for the whole community not only for the individual - than the US or Canadian systems.

So why shouldn't there be a parallel legal system which most Muslims in Canada want and need? After all, there are sentencing circles in Aboriginal communities and the Jews have a separate quasi-court run by rabbis for civil and family disputes within their communities. So do the Roman Catholics.

Why not a Sharia court in Canada for Muslims, at least for civil matters at first, if not criminal ones?

It's a simple matter of equity, don't you agree?

leaf October 18, 2007 at 10:12 a.m.

i don't know why there is no sharia court in canada but i know why there are no italian muslims.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fXe0pgRrO...

jab3 October 18, 2007 at 10:45 a.m.

The aboriginal peoples of Canada had their own laws before the rest of us, or our ancestors, forced their way into this land. Treaties were formed, allowing us to live here. The legal status of First Nations people is therefore somewhat different than the rest of us.

Otherwise the laws of the land should be the same for everyone. That we have religious law intervening for civil matters for a couple of groups is a serious flaw in Canada's legal system.

What this has to do with long pen, I don't know. What it has to do with Conrad Black is also very tenuous, as he is not Muslim. Indeed the logic of a simple question's post would be a suggtestion that Canada develop a separate criminal law system for Catholics (as well as other religious groups) and that Conrad Black be sentenced under Catholic religious law.

DC October 18, 2007 at 11:36 a.m.

I cant' believe you people are all still doing the same thing. Haven't been here in a couple of weeks, and it is still the same.

Leaf - you add a small grain of sanity, in an insane way, to this silly place. Don't stop because someone here can divine that you must like porno movies because you call out FinAtan and Roghead for thier foolishness.

You should leave because you have better things to do in life and pointing out the glaringly obvious will not convince the people here of their own foolishness. They are addicted to hearing themselves shout. They will go on shouting, in the only place where they can do so and not be hauled away by the guys in the white jackets.

Hey ... was riding the streetcar last week, there was a guy shouting at one of the stops, he had no shirt on, was pretty dirty and was holding 3 dead pigeons (true story - couldn't make it up)

I think it was Roger.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 12:17 p.m.

New lows indeed. Black's supporters hate Muslims, no surprise there. In the 1930's it would have been Jews.

Lit 200 October 18, 2007 at 12:49 p.m.

Good morning Barbara. Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed today?

How about me. Do I hate Muslims too? I don't support Conrad Black the man, but I do support the idea that he is getting a raw deal in Chicago and I hope his conviction on obstruction of justice charges is overturned.

I wonder, since all Black supporters hate Muslims and all Black haters (I guess) love Muslims... well, you see my difficulty when it comes to applying your axioms to my own situation.

Help! I don't know who I love any more!

Fintan October 18, 2007 at 1:05 p.m.

Well said, Barbara in BC: It's all been done before. The Jews were the scapegoats then, and today it's the Muslims. It goes down well with the pig-ignorant, poorly educated and easily led, but cultivating those prejudices accords very well indeed with the agenda of the neocon neo-imperialists and those who support their cause, like His Lardship, Morticia and the Schweyn.

The same nasty little jokes you see from posters like the leaf (who is, I suppose, more of an unhinged whacko than a racist as such) are sadly reminiscent of the ones that used to be published in the Völkischer Beobachter in the 1930s. It's déjà vu all over again.

Twit 200 is wrong to create a dichotomy between Muslim-haters and -lovers and equate them to those who oppose and support His Lardship, respectively. I oppose His Lardship because he is a nasty champion of nasty and ultimately very evil causes, and because he is a convicted thief. It has nothing to do with any religion, although he is the one who so ostentatiously practices a religion, despite the fact that he has broken so many of its Commandments.

The idea of separate courts for separate religions is absurd and unworkable in a modern state.

Where would you draw the line? Courts for Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Sikhs, 100 different denominations of Christians, Mormons, and so on. And what about Atheists? It would never work here anyway, because our Constitution declares that everyone is equal before the law.

However, wouldn't it be funny if there were separate courts for Catholics – even phoney ones like His Lardship? For all his lying, cheating and stealing, he’s probably get so many Rosaries and Hail Marys as his penance that saying them could well take 20 years – probably even longer than he’s going to have to spend in the hoosegow. That would keep him out of circulation, LongPen or not!

That is, of course, unless he went to Father Raymond de Souza, one of the true faithful. He has made it clear, Black lackey that he is, that His Lardship has done nothing wrong. The only people in whom Father de Souza can see wrong, apparently, are those Canadians who choose to cohabit rather than marry. In his latest column in the Nazional Post, he calls for them to be stripped of the equal treatment vis-à-vis married couples that they currently enjoy.

Doesn’t that fellow have a bishop to tell him to wise up and stop applauding crooks?

leaf October 18, 2007 at 1:24 p.m.

Shaking up the moral majority ?
I love it !

BBC has no sense of humor. No sense of ridicule either.
No sense for me wasting my time proving this.
Let her do it !

I thank Fickton for not labelling me as racist. That would be rong !
Unhinged whacko suits me fine.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 1:27 p.m.

Lit 200 asked:

"Do I hate Muslims too?"

When you attack Roger's religion because he is against Conrad Black, then yes. But in your attempt to discredit Fintan I've seen you try to paint the Finns as devils too, so I guess anything goes. Where does it end...the bottom of the barrel?

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 1:40 p.m.

"Shaking up the moral majority ?
I love it !" crows leaf.

You and Rush Limbaugh.

leaf October 18, 2007 at 2:03 p.m.

- BBC, you know about the grey zone?
- grey zone? what's a grey zone?
- it's the level of density between black and white
- there's no such thing!!! it's either black or it's white! where do you come from?!!!! who do you take me for?
- a rigid uptight wasp. am i wrong?
- what's wrong with rigid uptight wasps?!!!! is there any other kind? get out of my face! don't you know i'm right? always right? always been right!
more right than right! I AM RIGHT!

wave99 October 18, 2007 at 2:15 p.m.

Barbara.

Religion is something I have a hard time with. Apparantly, 'they' are all correct. What a coincidence. That either means they all have the same God ( nice of me to use a cap there, eh ?) or their God just happens to be better than the other God's.

It must be a tough call and well worth alot of civil strive and international war.

All Pro justice typs hate Muslim's you say ?

This one hates religion and that does include Islam. So, run with that if you like...my little minded liberal girl.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 2:53 p.m.

Leaf said:

"a rigid uptight wasp"

Ah, but there you are wrong. I'm not a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant but a Roman Catholic just like Conrad Black.

Protestants "protest" against Catholicism.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 2:55 p.m.

wave 99: surely you realize that religion just doesn't come into this legal case at all. Even mentioning it on this blog is in bad taste.

JLT October 18, 2007 at 3:18 p.m.

Hey pssssssssst. Conrad, you are wasting precious time. Get ten bricks of gold and make sail to the city of Abidjan, Ivory Coast. No extradition treaty there.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 3:30 p.m.

leaf: Here's why religion baiting and racial profiling of Middle Eastern people is not cool. Someone might end up being tortured:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uslatest/story...

"Lawmakers apologized Thursday to a Canadian engineer for his detention by U.S. officials, who took him to Syria where the man says he was tortured and held for nearly a year without charges.

Maher Arar, 37, appeared before a joint hearing of House subcommittees by video, because he is still on a U.S. government watch list...."

JLT October 18, 2007 at 3:36 p.m.

Psssssssst. Conrad. What you will need is
(1) Ten bricks of gold.
(2) Two suits, one for daily wear, one for Sundays.
(3) One slow cooker.
(4) Assorted writing tablets
(5) A pistol
Think about it Conrad; no extradition.

Lit 200 October 18, 2007 at 3:43 p.m.

Barb in BC: "Black's supporters hate Muslims..."

Fintan: "Twit 200 is wrong to create a dichotomy between Muslim-haters and -lovers and equate them to those who oppose and support His Lardship"

Just to help you get the story right for once, Fintan: it wasn't me who invented the dichotomy, OK? That was the beauty in bucolic contemplation.

The Griffin family October 18, 2007 at 3:53 p.m.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 2:53 p.m.

Ah, but there you are wrong. I'm not a White Anglo-Saxon Protestant but a Roman Catholic just like Conrad Black.

You neglected to also mention that you are an idiot with the intellectual capacity of a leaf. You have finally succeeded in lowering the intelligence quotient of this blog to your mental age and status. The only time this blog picks up is when Roger comes around and even he leaves much to be desired.
If we promise to send you a guaranteed - to - win lottery ticket worth millions, will you promise to hang out on a site more child oriented, say a Disney, Sesame Street or Mr. Rodgers board rather than on this site? Our youngest family member has now surpassed you in intellect and he is only one year old.

Bubba October 18, 2007 at 3:54 p.m.

June 1, 2018
Mah Dear Mebbelle-Lou,

Jest a few wo'ds t'let yo' knows ah miss yo' real bad an' wish ah c'd git outta hyar an' be wif yo' agin. We've been parted fo' 12 years now, only a couple of years af'er we got hitched, an' yer still th' prettiess gal fum Booger Holler, although yer pushin' 30 now. Mah cellmate Con th' Kinadian has been hyar fo' ten years now. ah have t'say he kin be a real pain in th' booty a lot of th' time. He used t'tell ev'ryone he was a real English Lo'd an' about all th' trimenjus honchos he knowed, but he sho'nuff changed his tune af'er Al th' Razo' made him his bitch. Now he spends most of his time hyar in th' cell writin'. ah look at his stuff, but ah cain't make haid o' tail of it, thass fo' sho'nuff. He still talks real peekoolyar, but he's gittin' t'soun' mo'e South Car'linan all th' time. Jest th' same, I'll be glad t'see th' back of him when he gits out in three o' four years' time.

leaf October 18, 2007 at 4:07 p.m.

- sorry BBC... an uptight rigid roman catholic
- get out of my face ! and don’t you EVER make jokes about religions. Religions are SACRED ! it is NOT a laughing matter !
- I was not laughing at the religion.
- oh no ? and just what do you think you were doing ?!!!
- just pointing out that the head gear was not practical for eating spaghetti.
- What if they like not making everything easy, like i do ?
- Hum. I guess. If you look at it like that way, i guess you’re right.
- Of course i’m right ! I’m always right ! always been and always will be ! I AM RIGHT ! I AM RIGHT ! I AM RIGHT !

(BBC falls to ground. If you lean, you’ll hear her whispering : i am right, i am always right, right i am, always right, right right right…)

bless the pope !

what’s his name ?

Lit 200 October 18, 2007 at 4:08 p.m.

This is going to be politically incorrect so buckle up.

Comparing those who fear Islamic fundamentalists today and those who hated Jews in the 1930s is a crock.

So far as I know, there was not a Jewish fundamentalist organization leader in Europe, in the 1930s who threatened to bring down a country and destroy a way of life, or who urged the citizens of a foreign nation to convert en masse to Judaism in order to prevent further terrorist attacks.

The comparison is odious, fatuous and disrespectful of Jews.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 5:02 p.m.

Lit 200: Your latest post shows that somehow you've ended up in the wrong blog. Islam has no connection with The Trial of Conrad Black. Not interested in hearing any more of your paranoia. Hitler was equally paranoid.

ROGER October 18, 2007 at 5:13 p.m.

WHY DO PEOPLE WRITE ABOUT THINGS THEY KNOW NOTHING ABOUT? MOST OF THESE BLACK SUPPORTERS HAVE NO IDEA HOW THEIR OWN SOCIETY WORKS, YET THEY FREELY OFFER ADVICE TO OTHERS.

For the pedantic, this is a wholly original post off the top of my head, being subject to the norms of academia, allowing for the fact that opinion pieces on the internet are not quite the same as refereed journal articles or doctoral theses. Finer print is available upon request.

Has it escaped these narrow minded rednecks that a woman is riding around in Pakistan, a country founded as an Islamic state, the first country in the modern age to be founded solely on the basis of religion, apart from Israel.

But let us look at the suggestion of having a religious based civil law system in Canada, as a prelude to criminal law as well. Until recently, there were alternative dispute resolution services available to those people of the Jewish faith who wished to access it in Ontario, and had been for many many years. Those services are now gone because of the uproar created over Sharia alternative dispute resolution services. Are these alternative dispute resolution services necessary or a good idea or a bad idea?

The issue is not alternative dispute resolution--ADR is a proven useful process supported by the legal community in many jurisdictions around the world. Courts are blunt instruments that do not properly resolve issues, such as family law, for example. But ought the state to institutionalize religious ADR? I think not because ADR is an informal process that can be informed by any value system of the parties to the dispute and ought not to be hamstrung by the state creating institutional structures. The absence of ADR and the outlawing of religious values from the process would lead to injustices, just as the insistence and requirement that a separate religious-based system would lead to injustices.

If one examines the country Fintan will be travelling to, then one can observed the problems of civil law based on religion. For example, Indian Catholics are subject to separate laws in Indian with respect to family civil law, which has been viewed as unfair to Catholic Indian women, and does not always work well for Catholic Indian men either. The same is true with family law for Hindus, Sikhs and Muslims in India. Now if Lit and other Black supporters actually knew something about the subject they have rushed in to discuss, then they would have cited other parts of the world, and also Canadian experiences with separate religious and ethnoracially based laws, but they cannot because they have no real education, cannot think and have nothing original to say, nor anything informed by scholarship.
.

ROGER October 18, 2007 at 5:13 p.m.

Furthermore, one could examine the problem in this regard to law and religion by reviewing the life and thought of the famous lawyer, activist, pacifist, nationalist, martyr and nation-builder, M.K. Gandhi, the Mahatma. The problem with Gandhiji was his concept of Swaraj, which was a theocratic political concept. But how can one discuss such things with people like Lit? Es ist wie Perlen werfen vor Tiere

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 5:20 p.m.

leaf: the spaghetti video was pretty funny, but the joke about Muslim women with black eyes wasn't. And the crack about "only Muslims can plagiarize" showed something ugly.

The current Pope: Even I don't know his name, but he's against the War in Iraq, which is enough for me to know.

ROGER October 18, 2007 at 5:25 p.m.

LIT 200 ASSERTED THAT BLACK'S CASE WAS SIMILAR TO THAT OF GUY PAUL MORIN AND TO MULLINS-JOHNSON.

As Barbara in BC pointed out, the situations involving miscarriages of justice where the wrong person is charge and convictd usually involves murdered children, where there is a frenzy and pressure on the police to quickly catch the perpetrator. But LIT continued to claim that Black was the victim of a miscarriage of justice, in the same way as Morin and Mullins-Johnson. Pressed to explain his claim, LIT has failed to do so and seeks to detour into other discussions, like about Sharia.

Lit 200 October 18, 2007 at 5:33 p.m.

Roger: "LIT 200 ASSERTED THAT BLACK'S CASE WAS SIMILAR TO THAT OF GUY PAUL MORIN AND TO MULLINS-JOHNSON"

Another outright lie. Shame.

Lit 200 October 18, 2007 at 5:38 p.m.

Repost from previous thread:

don't know why Roger and BBC have such difficulty with my core arguments, which are very simple:

A)the prosecutors over-reached when they brought Conrad Black to trial. To back that up I argue that 1)the prosecutors dropped a number of their charges before the trial came to a conclusion and 2) the jury found him not guilty on nine of the 13, including the most serious one.

Now Black has appealed the four remaining convictions. Despite all this the anti-Black brigade is calling him a criminal and relishing his incarceration in advance with undisguised glee, to the point of wishing and hoping that he will be raped in prison to finally "put him in his place." This is premature as well as squalid.

What I am saying is:

B) the same as I would say of any defendant who has appealed his conviction: Whoa! Let's wait for act two before characterizing Black as a criminal and enjoying so fulsomely his downfall. The Fat Lady hasn't yet given voice to her aria!

In support of this, I remind my opponents that the justice system is not perfect in either the United States or Canada or anywhere. Mistakes have and are being made, and I cite some obvious examples to buttress this point. (In answer, my opponents contemptibly charge that I am soft on murder and pedophilia and that I believe, for example, that notorious serial killers are innocent and should be set free. To which I reply 'faugh' and 'shame').

Let's see what happens at appeal before calling Black a criminal and relishing his incarceration and homosexual rape in prison. That's a fatuous thing to hope for. But, let it ride.

Now, after backing the ABB down on these essential points, Roger comes up with a new attack on my supporting arguments. Black is in a different class than those other wrongly convicted persons because they had substandard legal representation. Did they? I don't know that. But I do know that pro bono lawyers are not necessarily substandard. But let it ride.

In fact the ABB made a lot of noise during Black's trial ridiculing the poor representation he got, describing his counsel as over-promoted, over-the-hill, incompetent and puffed up bozos who made many mistakes. Now, when it suits his purpose, Roger has reversed his ground and describes Black's representation as "very competent" But, let it ride.

One of the sillier attacks put forward by the ABB is that I, and a few others here, are Black's relatives, or that we are paid to be a part of this blog... how utterly ridiculous.

But, let it ride.

Frankly, I am getting bored with the low level of discussion in this damn blog.

ROGER October 18, 2007 at 5:38 p.m.

BUSH, CHENEY, BLAIR, BERLUSCONI, AZNAR, BALKENENDE, HOWARD, HARPER AND THE OTHERS claimed that Saddam was the equivalent of Hitler. They compared Hans Blix to a kind of Neville Chamberlain.

Nazi Germany was a superpower, with a massive military industrial complex with advanced aviation, naval, artillery, ballistics rocket programs, fighter jet production capacity, and state of the art tanks and tank technology. In art, literature, music, opera, film making and cinematic industry, sciences like physics and chemistry, and manpower, Nazi Germany was a powerhouse in the world. Saddam's Iraq was compared to Hitler's Germany! This is the level of intellect of Bush, Cheney, Blair, Harper and the rests supporters! Ignorance is what gets people like Bush and company elected. Ignorance by the citizens of their countries. Lit and the gang are testimony to this ignorance. They have no real argument, except epithet and invective of the proud red-neck.

DC October 18, 2007 at 5:41 p.m.

Hitler's paranoia was equal to Lit200's?

How do you know how paranoid Hitler was - were you there?

Wow, amazing. Which side were you on? How many times did you meet him? Must have been fascinating - being such a stalwart of political correctness in such a difficult time.

So - you are not afraid of Islamic fundamentalists? People who use terror for power - they do not concern you?

Oh wait - Hitler used terror to wield power. But you don't like him. then again - you witnessed it first hand.

BBC - did Donna take over your mind? Vulcan mind meld? Do you read what you write before posting?

ROGER October 18, 2007 at 5:54 p.m.

DC >So - you are not afraid of Islamic fundamentalists? People who use terror for power - they do not concern you?<

America and NATO have killed over one million people, overwhelmingly civilians, in Afghanistan and Iraq. They have used heavy bombers, cruise missiles launched at sea to hit ground targets in densely populated Iraqi cities, they have used chemical weapons (Fallujah), they have used indiscriminate automatic battlefield calibre gunfire in cities and killed whole families at checkpoints and in the streets, they killed an Italian secret service agent in random fire, they killed men, women and children, and left tens of thousands maimed.

Jimmy Carter, when he was president, said an oil embargo would trigger war--America would invade to steal the oil! Who is using power to impose political decisions on people? Why are white christian soldiers from Europe and N America killing Muslims in their homes in Iraq and Afghanistan?

HOW IS THIS RELATED TO BLACK? Did Saddam get a fair trial?

DC October 18, 2007 at 5:54 p.m.

Roghead - you make no sense - what does this mean from your recent post:

"Has it escaped these narrow minded rednecks that a woman is riding around in Pakistan, a country founded as an Islamic state, the first country in the modern age to be founded solely on the basis of religion, apart from Israel."

Does it have anything to do with the attached?

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/s...

What point are you trying to make - that Pakistan is a great place to be a woman?

Or is your point that women can ride around in pakistan?

try to finish one thought before you launch into another rant 'right off the top of your head"

and definitely a little editing ... you can be quite wordy sometimes ... well actually ... all the time

does anyone but leaf read their own post before they hit send? (I know you do Bob)

have you ever gone back to re-read one of yours rog? barb? guts?

hey .... donna seems to have disappeared .... can't say i miss her ...... but several others have stepped up in her place ..... too bad

ROGER October 18, 2007 at 5:55 p.m.

Lit 200 October 18, 2007 at 5:33 p.m.

Roger: "LIT 200 ASSERTED THAT BLACK'S CASE WAS SIMILAR TO THAT OF GUY PAUL MORIN AND TO MULLINS-JOHNSON"

Another outright lie. Shame.

===

Really? Then what was your claim?

JLT October 18, 2007 at 5:55 p.m.

Psssssst. Conrad. Don't pay any attention to these people; they all have marital troubles. Stop reading this stuff. You are wasting precious time. Get ten bricks of gold and make sail to the city of Abidjan, Ivory Coast. No extradition treaty there.

Lit 200 October 18, 2007 at 6 p.m.

WHY DO PEOPLE WRITE ABOUT THINGS THEY KNOW NOTHING ABOUT?

For once I agree with Roger but the accusation, as is usually the case with Roger, is pointed at himself.

his pedantic exposition on ADR COMPLETELY misses the point. It is not the PROCESS but the SUBSTANCE of the ADR that is at issue. And if he knew how thoughtful Canadians approach this issue he would know this.

I will give Roger something to chew on to give him a bit of a leg-up, so that, if he wants to discuss this he can approach something of an equal footing.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/s...

This is an article by Saeed Rahnema, a professor and political science co-ordinator at York University's Atkinson Faculty. After some REAL scholarly work in the area of a separate Sharia court, Rahnema concludes this:

"In a truly democratic system, all religions should be free to practise in the private sphere of life without any limitations, but should stay separate from the state and the laws of the land that must be equally applied to all citizens. Violations of these principles will only lead to the weakening and erosion of democracy itself."

PS and, not that it matters, but Roger did NOT produce his long dissertation off the top of his head. Anyone who has seen his posts "off the top" of his head will spot the different immediately.

Lit 200 October 18, 2007 at 6:09 p.m.

Roger's last two or three posts are examples of what he produces when he argues "off the top of his head."

wave99 October 18, 2007 at 6:09 p.m.

Well well well.

The time has finally come in which Roger actually states that he is supportive of terror being used as a response to supposed and real western aggression.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 6:11 p.m.

DC asked about Hitler & me:

"How do you know how paranoid Hitler was - were you there?"

He wrote a book which I thumbed through... also the results of his paranoia speak volumes. Your typical right wing debating strategy is noted.

DC October 18, 2007 at 6:12 p.m.

Roggy - i was following the previous posts - keep up will ya.

You your very own self have said repeatedly that America stands for a fair trial and allows accused to defend themselves. They process was perfect for Black according to you.

Black had lawyers to defend him.

Sadam had an entire army. Do you really think he got a raw deal? Falsley accused?

Do you think the US caused all of the problems in Iraq? Do you think soldiers did not kill Iraqi citizens and use bombs, chemicals and guns to kill civilians before the US got there? The alternative was better? you know this from your worldliness - I am sure you were once an iraqi, weren't you rog. Is that where you got your 12 degrees? Is that where you gained all of your wonderful insight?

Do you think the killing would stop if the US were gone? Should they pull out now Rog? Is that your solution? Then the entire middle east would be fixed wouldn't it. No more problems. Just send the US home. Then a peaceful society could return to the peace loving ways. Do you really think that Rog? When they do pull out - why don't you go there. See how you do, living in peace and tranquitlity. See how many internet bloggs you get to. Have yourself a merry old time.

you can send us all live updates - when you're not dodging bombs.

Why did you come here anyway Rog. Why leave that bastion of peace? Could it be - for all of our many faults in the west (there are lots) - this socitey is making a little more progress than some others? Or did you come here to convert us all to your way of thinking? Or did you come here to set up a terror cell? Just what was the reason? Why move to a different country, different society, then complain when you get there?

If you had a friend. and they invited you to their house to stay over. Would you complain about their house Rog?

DC October 18, 2007 at 6:15 p.m.

Roggy - send a reply - but you won't get a response.

Really didn't miss this place the past few weeks. Won't miss it again.

Maybe for the 30th - or the appeals.

Till then - keep spinning.

Hey Rog - was that you with the pigeons on king street? all the shouting - it sounded like you.

DC October 18, 2007 at 6:18 p.m.

Lit - sorry forgot to include you in the small group of people who read their own comments before they are posted.

Those who do not - probably don't even realize they could look at what they write before sending it out for the rest of us.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 6:24 p.m.

DC: you can take your bigotry and shove it. Do you actually think you're helping Conrad Black here? Quite the contrary.

DC October 18, 2007 at 6:25 p.m.

BBC - your typical left wing debating strategy is noted.

You compared lit200 to Hitler. Because you once thumbed through a book he wrote and saw the results of his paranoia. Have your read more than a few internet posts from Lit? How do you make such a comparison?

Or, was this to avoid the debate at all. Nothing to say so ..... out comes Hitler.

I'm sure you won't miss me. And I won't miss you. I'll watch the door on my way out.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 6:33 p.m.

DC: No, you misunderstood. Mein Kampf showed the paranoia, the Holocaust showed the RESULTS of such paranoia.

DC October 18, 2007 at 6:33 p.m.

BBC - what bigotry is that? Do you know what that means? Have you checked it on Wiki?

Ohhh .... wait ..... like the Hitler thing .... dang Hitler didn't work .... I'll call him another name

so ..... being against terrorism is to be a bigot? Is that the point you are making?

Bush may have been wrong to invade .... not sure i believe he made the entire mess in iraq on his own .... lots there when he arrived .....

but .... does that make terrorism acceptable? That is what it sounds like you are saying .... is that your point?

leaf October 18, 2007 at 6:36 p.m.

THE GUESSING GAME

i won't be online till tomorrow evening so any leaf sighting till then will be plastic.

in the meantime: juror Jean aka ???

Jean July 15, 2007 at 9:14 p.m.

I've read all of the entries here. As one of the jurors, I've never heard Mark Kipnis portrayed as St. Mark. I was one of the (minority) not guilty holdouts for count 5. The matter of the buyer requesting non competes was not a factor. The minority jurors for this count were basing our decision on the law given to us. Unlike the APC transactions, this one had the so called paper evidence. I would like to agree with the statement that everyone should be held accountable for their actions in this case. Everyone from the accounting firms, lawyers and management for the company dropped the ball here.

DC October 18, 2007 at 6:37 p.m.

BBC - you think i am having any effect at all on CB? ARe you out of your mind?

Hey wait - If we have opposite viewpoints - and mine is "quite the contrary" to helping his cause. Does that mean that you are helping him?

I know the logic is tricky - but I think i get it now - your strategy is designed to help conrad. wow - you are really a closet conrad supporter.

Mahatma Coat October 18, 2007 at 6:39 p.m.

Yeah - that Ghandi guy - pretty swell. Went to visit at his place once. Stayed over with a guy named Rog.

But rog kept complaining about the 'apple juice' we drank in the morning. Dunno why.

W101 October 18, 2007 at 6:40 p.m.

"Psssssssst. Conrad. What you will need is ..."
-----

Black is hardly the camping out type. Club Fed is much more suitable -- while perhaps not quite the valet and maid service he's used, bothersome domestic concerns such as clothes and cooking, making sure the windows and doors are safely locked, that's all taken care of.

Surrounded by crooks, he'll feel right at home.

Prison is Black's kind of place!

How many years has Black planned and plotted to get where he is?
You would have him throw it all away for an ill-advised lark abroad?

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 7:05 p.m.

DC: Don't leave in a huff... leave in a minute and a huff.

gary e October 19, 2007 at 12:42 a.m.

Barbara in BC October 18, 2007 at 7:05 p.m.

"DC: Don't leave in a huff... leave in a minute and a huff."

Groucho Marx, Duck Soup.

Perfect quote, BBC.

ROGER October 19, 2007 at 12:55 a.m.

DC's rant > Should they pull out now Rog? Is that your solution? Then the entire middle east would be fixed wouldn't it. No more problems. Just send the US home.<

The US be allowed to leave? Of course not! America will leave when Iran decides they can leave and not one minute sooner! Iran has around 200,000 Americans hostage in Iraq, just in case America tries to attack Iran.

Within minutes and hours of an American attack on Iran, Iran and their Shi' Iraqi allies would be re-enacting Little Big Horn on Iraqi soil. You might not understand this, but even Bush and Cheney understand this.

As for Americans bringing peace to the Middle East, sure. Where is the democracy Bush promised? America is supporting the dictatorships in Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, throughout the Gulf and the dictator in Pakistan. Karzai is kept in office in Afghanistan by foreign armies--Karzai's own personal bodyguards are all foreigners. Najibullah lasted 2 years after the Soviets withdrew. Karzai would not last 2 minutes.

There will be no face saving retreat for America from Iraq or for NATO from Afghanistan. They will stumble out under fire, battered and bleeding, defeated. So in answer to your question, no, America ought to stay and take their lumps. Iraq and Afghanistan are two of the worst strategic blunders in modern American history. Afghanistan is far more dangerous in the long term than Iraq. NATO will be defeated there, just like the Warsaw Pact was defeated, then the former Soviet central Asian despotic dictators will face justice. Guess who is supporting those murderous dictators? LOL! Yeah, not hard to guess.

ROGER October 19, 2007 at 1:05 a.m.

IRAN THANKS AMERICA FOR GETTING RID OF SADDAM AND HELPING TO FOUND GREATER IRAN! LOL!

Hopefully Bush takes it in his head to overthrow Assad in Syria too! One can only hope they would attack Q'addafi as well. Bashir in Sudan would make a great target too. Poor DC has no clue what is happening.
I am so glad that Saddam was executed! It is not something DC understands.

Barbara in BC October 19, 2007 at 1:47 a.m.

gary e: I knew it was Groucho but I didn't know the exact movie it was from.

Fintan October 19, 2007 at 2:09 a.m.

How interesting to read the contributions posted during my night.

Once again, the unquestioning supporter of His Lardship and apologist for his greedy criminality attacks me for cautioning against broad-brush hate-mongering.

If the Twit had any inkling of history, he would realise what systematic and sweeping and massive demonisation of the Jews and Judaism led to in the 1930s and 1940s.

I see the potential for something equally evil in today's pervasive sniping at every aspect of Islam.

In his "defence" the Zit points to a few individuals (out of a billion+ Muslims) who have made what many perceive as outrageous statements. Then everyone of that faith is tarred with the same brush.

Back in the 1920s and earlier there were plenty of examples of the same thing. Jews were seeking world domination, they controlled the global purse strings, they manipulated media, movies, entertainment - indeed, the Völkischer Beobabchter even reported that syphilis had been transferred to humans by Jews fornicating with goats and then passing it on to Gentiles! It was often disguised as humour.

As incredible as it seems, lots of people believed that kind of stuff. And hardly surprising in light of how much media manipulated their thinking, and how many sh1ts like His Lardship control(led) the media.

Back then, there were probably people like me cautioning about such hate-mongering and urging more tolerance and understanding. And there were certainly many like the Sh1t who sneered at us. And a lot worse.

The so-called journalists and intellectuals, in whatever country, who contributed to baiting any group, Jews, Gypsies, Slavs or whomever, were, wittingly or unwittingly, doing Hitler's and Goebbels' work for them. The Zit and company are doing the work of the neocons, who are no less evil, but with their massive nuclear arsenals are potentially even more destructive than Hitler.

Roger: Good posts, especially about the different marriage laws in India. Sadly, when you address the likes of the Zit and the leaf and their various sock puppets, it truly is, as the great Oscar put it, a case of casting false pearls before real swine.

Barbara in BC October 19, 2007 at 2:17 a.m.

Fintan: Don't know if you saw this news item today:

"Playwright Oscar Wilde, who even managed to mutter on his death bed "Either those curtains go or I do," was named in a poll Monday as Britain's greatest wit."

http://www.reuters.com/article/topNews/i...

Fintan October 19, 2007 at 3:18 a.m.

Good morning/night Barbara in BC:

The actual quote (or at least the one usually given) was "My wallpaper and I are fighting a duel to the death. One or the other of us has to go." The wallpaper in question was finally replaced a few years ago.

How interesting that he is described as British, like so many other greats of literature and science who immigrated to the UK.

If he'd carried a bomb, of course, he would have been called Irish.

Our Pundits Weigh In

About Authors
The Trial of Conrad Black RSS Feed