The National Post and the rise and fall of Lord Black of Cross Harbour

As promised in our previous post (scroll down to footnote), here's the story of how Canada's National Post got its name... and how its founder got his comeuppance. 

Back in the 1980s, a Canadian business tycoon by the name of Conrad Black decided he wanted to be a media mogul -- a sort of latter-day Lord Beaverbrook -- if only to see his turgid op-ed pieces in print. 

First he bought some lesser-known newspapers, including the Jerusalem Post, which he acquired in 1990 through his company, Hollinger Inc., for a mere $17 million. Under his ownership, the paper underwent an editorial shift to the right. It was eventually sold in 2004 following Mr Black's departure from Hollinger, which Walt will explain momentarily below. 

But the Jerusalem Post was just a beginning. Wanting a national, conservative-leaning voice in Canada to challenge the Groan & Wail, Mr Black acquired the Southam newspaper chain, including its flagship Financial Post, a weekly which was to be relaunched as a daily. 

But what should the new rag be called? Disrespectful hacks suggested that in view of Mr Black's circumferential challenge, a good name would be Daily Tubby. 

For some reason, Mr Black chose instead to launch the "new" paper on 27 October 1998 as the National Post. (Here at WWW, we usually refer to it as the Notional Pest.) The "new" newspaper was soon losing money briskly, with an estimated $190 million lost during its first three years. 

Conrad Black went from strength to strength (as he tells it, anyway) and his greatness was eventually recognized by Queen Elizabeth II, who granted him a life peerage in 2001, giving him the title of Baron Black of Cross Harbour. He had to renounce his Canadian citizenship to accept the title, since Canadian citizens are prohibited by law from accepting British honours. 

Just months before his elevation, Lord Black sold 50% of his stake in the National Post to CanWest Global Communications Corp., then owned by the loathsome Izzy Asper, a prominent member of Canada's Jewish community and great friend of the Zionist Entity. A few months later, CanWest bought the remaining 50% from Lord Black, who, after all, had all those fancy robes to buy and very high-maintenance wife to support.

Seated at his right hand in the photo is Lady Black, née Barbara Amiel, whom Walt met, just once, in the offices of a student newspaper somewhere. Conrad Black (as he then was) was her fourth husband. 

Things started to go south for M'lord and M'lady in 2003, when the tax and securities boys in the US of A started to look at the books of Hollinger Inc., including some which were in the hands of Lord Black when he had his collar felt. Caught black-and-white-handed, he was.

It took some time for the wheels of justice to grind Lord Black down, but in 2007 he was convicted of felony fraud and obstruction of justice for a scheme that involved stealing roughly $6.1 million from Hollinger International investors. He served over three years in an American prison, but was fully pardoned by President Trump in 2019. To this day, Lord Black's gratitude is expressed regularly in his columns in the NP.

As for his peerage,  Conrad Black was removed from the British House of Lords in July 2024 for non-attendance, losing his seat as a working peer. But he got to keep his title. In 2023, the Canadian government of Prime Minister Blackie McBlackface decided that Mr Black's renunciation of his citizenship had been only "temporary". His title is effectively meaningless, as was that of Officer of the Order of Canada which was stripped from him in 2014.

Yes, all is forgiven, and Tubby's relentless pro-Israel, pro-Trump and pro-America propanda can be read in the National Post regularly... too much so for our liking.

Cuckservatives hired PR firm to "seek and destroy" People's Party

Canada's self-styled "national newspaper", the Globe and Mail, reported Friday that Mr Kinsella and his Daisy Group consulting firm worked on a secret campaign to "seek and destroy" the fledgling People's Party of Canada and keep its leader, Maxime Bernier, out of the national Leaders' debates. Internal Daisy Group records obtained by the Glob show a team of Daisy Group employees worked on a plan called "Project Cactus" that focused on portraying People's Party supporters as racist.

The records make several references to a "client" for the project, including sending a bill for payment, but the client's identity is not revealed in the documents. A source (unnamed by the Globe for reasons of condfidentiality) with direct knowledge of the project said the client listed in the documents is... wait for it... none other than the self-styled Conservative Party of Canada. Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer declined to answer numerous questions about the dirty tricks on Saturday, saying only, "As a rule, we never make comments on vendors that we may or may not have engaged with."

Meanwhile, M Bernier told a presser yesterday that he has filed a complaint with Elections Canada. "This is the kind of dirty politics that fuels Canadians' cynicism about politics," he said. True, but a fat lot of good this is going to do him, coming as it does, just two days before the polls are set to open.

Ed. here. Walt has decided that it's imperative he be in Canada for Monday's federal election. Later today he will be setting up our Canadian Affairs Desk (CAD) in Agent 78's family room. Cable and telephone lines are being run in. TVs have been rented. Computers have been hooked up. An expedition to the LCBO has been organized. Popcorn is being made. Walt will be back on Tuesday... or maybe Wednesday... DV.

Evidence-based questions about wisdom of alt-energy projects

The debate over alleged global warming, alleged climate change and "green energy" rages on. The good citizens of Port Wein (just down the road from Fort Mudge) are having a town hall tonight to argue for or against the visual pollution of their unspoiled countryside by a grove of wind turbines proposed for Ole Man Sedgwick's back 40. Neighbours are worried not only about the appearance of these monster machines -- like something from War of the Worlds -- but also about the incessant low hum of the turbines, the risks of radiation, EMP (whatever that is), yada yada yada.

Local gliberals will be on hand at tonight's meeting to remind those standing astride the path of progress that the purpose of installing all these infernal machines is to generate energy in the form of electricity, thus forcing the military-industrial complex to leave the oil and coal in the ground and thus defeat President Trump and put power back in the hands of the righteous and politically correct.

They're right. It's all about power, with a capital "P". In this case, it's electric power. But is having more electric power -- more electricity -- a good thing for this troubled world? Walt submits herewith a letter written to the Editor of the Toronto Globe on "The Dangers of Electricity".

Two concurrent circumstances are occurring, the increase and use of electricity as a power and the violence and number of our storms. It may be contended that the action of man could not affect the atmosphere of the earth; but it may be remembered that the clearing away of our forests reduced our Canadian winters in Ontario from four months in old times to two months now. The press of today tells us the Egyptian Sphinx that is some 6000 years old is now rapidly decaying, owing to alterations in the climate of Egypt, due to the irrigation works of recent years. The firing of cannon has in war times increased the rainfall. Thus experience proves that the action of man can affect the air, and the question is asked; Is electricity taken from the air and collected by the machinery used or is it an element existing in the air and turned into electricity by friction?

If taken from the air, it follows the tendency should be to produce less violence and longer periods of calmness in the atmosphere by its absence. If it is added to the air, naturally our storms or wind and rain and changes in temperature will be greater and more violent. Electricity seems to be what life is to man, the cause of motion, and is life to what has been considered by man inanimate matter. There, has anyone considered what may result if we continue making machinery for its manufacture, utilizing all power, natural and artificial, creating vested rights which later on may be found to be a source of danger to the many? The attention of the Legislature should be drawn to this by the press, and our men of science should collect facts and inform us as to the future consequences of unlimited production of electricity and using it as power.

In his letter, dated 16 August 1902, "Civis", of Hamilton ON, makes some good points. Nearly 115 years later we are still talking about shorter, warm winters (global warming?), air pollution (the Sphinx is still crumbling), and the increasing violence and number of our storms (Katrina, Sandy, and assorted "Snowmageddons"). The culprit could well be all that damn electricity we keep generating. Walt thinks the question needs further study.

Further reading: This wondrous letter was taken from Shocked and Appalled: A Century of Letters to the The Globe and Mail, edited by Jack Kapica (Lester and Orpen Dennys, 1985).

Happy birthday, Comrade Bob!

Further to "Mugabe's corpse could win next Zimbabwe election, widow-to-be says" (WWW 18/2/17), Walt hopes that Brian Gable, the Globe and Mail's estimable editorial cartoonist, will not mind our reposting of this graphic representation of this weekend's birthday celebrations for Comrade Robert Gabriel Mugabe, President for Life and Beyond.

Aesop's fable: The Grasshopper and the Ant - politically correct version

Canada's self-styled "national newspaper", the Globe and Mail, is one of the chief practitioners of political correctness, second only (in that country) to the CBC. Recently, however, they ran an editorial -- "The threat of political correctness, real and imagined" -- commenting on an Angus Reid survey which revealed that the overwhelming majority of Canadians polled think political correctness has gone too far.

The irony of the oh-so-PC Groan & Wail questioning its goodself was not lost on the majority of those who commented. (Gotta give the Globcredit for at least allowing comments.) Someone who posts under the pseudonym "ForsterBarry" put up this rather lengthy piece, which Walt thinks deserves to be reposted in full. It's the PC version of Aesop's fable of The Grasshopper and the Ant.

The ant works hard in the withering heat and the rain all summer long, building his house and laying up supplies for the winter. The grasshopper thinks the ant is a fool and laughs and dances and plays the summer away. Come winter, the shivering grasshopper calls a press conference and demands to know why the ant should be allowed to be warm and well fed while he is cold and starving.

CBS, NBC, PBS, CNN, and ABC show up to provide pictures of the shivering grasshopper next to a video of the ant in his comfortable home with a table filled with food. America is stunned by the sharp contrast. How can this be, that in a country of such wealth, this poor grasshopper is allowed to suffer so?

Kermit the Frog appears as support on Oprah with the grasshopper and everybody cries when they sing "It's Not Easy Being Green". ACORN stages a demonstration in front of the ant's house where the news stations film the SEIU group singing "We shall overcome". Then Rev. Jeremiah Wright has the group kneel down to pray for the grasshopper, while he damns the ants. President Obama condemns the ant and blames President Bush 43, President Bush 41, President Reagan, Christopher Columbus, and the Pope for the grasshopper's plight.

Nancy Pelosi and Harry Reid exclaim in an interview with Larry King that the ant has gotten rich off the back of the Grasshopper, and both call for an immediate tax hike on the ant to make him pay his fair share. Finally, the EEOC drafts The Economic Equity & Anti-Grasshopper Act, retroactive to the beginning of the summer.

The ant is fined for failing to hire a proportionate number of green bugs and, having nothing left to pay his retroactive taxes, his home is confiscated by the Government Green Czar and given to the grasshopper. The story ends as we see the grasshopper and his freeloading friends finishing up the last bits of the ant's food, while the government house he is in -- which you may recall just happens to be the ant's old house -- crumbles around them because the grasshopper doesn't maintain it. The ant has disappeared in the snow, never to be seen again.

The grasshopper is found dead in a drug-related incident, and the house, now abandoned, is taken over by a gang of spiders who terrorize the ramshackle, once prosperous and peaceful, neighbourhood. The entire nation collapses, taking down the rest of the free world with it.

Where's Walt(o) now? Notes from Ed.

Ed. here. Walt has left me to shovel out our cabin in the pines while he is at an undisclosed location in the Great No-longer-white North. Tomorrow night he and Poor Len Canayen and two of Walt's trusted agents will sit in the middle of a large room, surrounded by TVs and computers, tracking and discussing the returns from the Canadian federal election. Many a good time will be had by all. Or not, as the case may be.

Walt has predicted the result of said election. He thinks Trudeaumania II will produce a Liberal minority. (Lifetime pct .976.) The Liberal minority, he says, will have been elected by the visible minorities of Canada's three big metropolitan areas: Vancouver, Montréal and, above all, Toronto.

The Canadian press -- not to be confused with Canadian Press -- labour under the delusion that their endorsements matter. The Toronto Star endorsed Justin Trudeau's Liberals. No surprise there, the Red Star being so liberal, so PC as to make any other endorsement impossible. La Presse, of Montréal, also chooses le Parti Libéral, for reasons which make sense in that city.

The oddest endorsement of this election -- perhaps of this century, so far -- comes from the good grey Globe and Mail. The Glob's editor, David Walmsley, is an Ulsterman, who could hardly be expected to plump for either M Trudeau or Mr Mulcair, both Cafeteria Catholics. But he couldn't bring himself to stand up for the dictatorial Steve Harper, so penned a leader calling on Canadians to vote for the Conservatives, on condition that Mr. Harpoon resign immediately after winning!

No, dear reader, Ed. kids you not. See "Globe and Mail mocked on Twitter after endorsing Tories but not Harper". Mr. Walmsley evidently thinks it possible to suck and blow at the same time. Best Tweet: "I endorse the Globe but not the Mail." Poor Len's comment: "It's like calling the Montréal Canadiens to win the Stanley Cup, providing they trade Carey Price for Jonathan Bernier." (Canuck readers will doubtless understand that one.)

Speaking of les Glorieux, with last night's victory over Detroit, they have now won the first six games of the new season, the best start in the history of the club. Sadly, the very fine game was once again not available to Francophone (= French-speaking) fans residing west of Québec who don't subscribe to Robbers ridiculously expensive NHL Centre Ice package.

The game was telecast, in English, on Hockey Night in Canada on the CBC, with the Toronto game relegated to CITY. But the TVA coverage, which should have been on "Le forfait en français", was not. Channels 423 and 424 were dark, once again. See "Canada's team MIA from 'Hockey Night in Canada'" (WWW 11/10/15). If you're a Bell customer and subscribe to the "NHL French package", complain!

That's it from this corner of the woods. Walt will return on Tuesday, or possibly Wednesday depending on how long it takes him to dry out.

G&M readers comment on "Caitlyn Jenner is a woman..."

Last Sunday, in "What's wrong with this picture?", I gave you my take on the Bruce/Caitlyn Jenner non-story, said take being: if an aging queer having a sex-change op and becoming the ugliest ever Vanity Fair cover "girl" is the most important issue Americans have to think about, God save the USA!

The following day, I realized I hadn't really answered my own question, as expressed in the headline, so posted "Answer to 'What's wrong with this picture?'", in which I said that changing or attempting to change your gender from whichever one God created you is wrong. Period.

In the latter post, I mentioned I referred to "op-ed pieces with titles like 'Caitlyn Jenner is a woman and deserves to be described as such' (posted by the Groan and Wail's Pubic Editor)." Let me make a couple of corrections. The newspaper in question is actually the Globe and Mail, and the piece was by the G&M's Public Editor. Must have been a Freudian slip...

The gist of "Caitlyn Jenner is a woman and should be described as such" is evident from the headline. Sylvia Stead, the Pubic Editor in question, tells G&M readers [Sid and Doris Bonkers. Ed.] in no uncertain terms that it's politically incorrect to refer to Jenner's operation, or her rather unwomanly appearance or anything else which would suggest that "she" had ever been anything other than a woman, yada yada yada.

To my surprise, the paper allowed comments on Ms Stead's masterpiece of homofascism. Here are three of them. Click here to read the rest.

AnnoyedTory: The last time I looked the Charter says Freedom of speech, not dictatorial demands. Bruce Jenner is Bruce Jenner whatever he thinks he is now he is still Bruce Jenner. I am tired of all you ultra left wing people telling me what I can and cannot say. Just because someone says one thing or does something does not mean we all have to agree with it. That is what freedom of speech is all about. There is no hatred here just belief and opinion which we are all entitled to.

David J C Cooper1: Whatever Jenner is is not on my "to do"list. The media likes sparkly things that make loud noises. That hardly seems like any kind of compass, moral or otherwise.

maree: How can you tell us, in effect, to fight against gender stereotypes (as you do elsewhere in this publication) when the media is agog over a practice that glorifies and seeks to legalizes gender stereotypes, and shames and blames those who refuse to take part in the mass hysteria to sanction a practise that fetishizes the elements of women's oppression? Make up your mind.

Where to read the news online FREE

Walt's nomination for Worst Invention of the 21st Century (so far) is the paywall. Newspapers desperate to inflate flaccid revenue streams think paywalls are wonderful, but (let us hope) the wish may be father to the thought.

We shall see. Making people pay to read crap online is still highly experimental, as the lamestream print media juggle different models of pricing and content. The San Francisco Chronicle has abandoned its test, but I am unaware of any other major market newspaper that you can read online without paying after a handful of free articles each month.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that readership of online papers goes waaaaay down after they are cloistered behind a firewall. Canada's Globe and Mail has tacitly admitted as much, and now advises would-be readers, when they reach the "free limit" that there's still plenty of stuff to read without paying. Unfortunately the "stuff" is really fluff -- lifestyle, the arts, and similar dreck that fills up space in the print edition. Nobody reads it in print and methinks no-one reads it online either -- not even for free!

It is also reported that the New York Times is building a fairly large online subscriber base. So is The Economist -- the only one Walt pays for -- but it's hard to tell in their case because you get access to the online edition as part of a package with your subscription to the print version.

Can it be that we must rely on TV "news" to find out what's going on in the world? Where can we go to read the news online without being nickel-and-dimed to death? Walt has four recommendations for you, presented in alphabetical order.

ASSOCIATED PRESS - Hey, where do you think the US (and many other countries') newspapers get their stuff from? Cut out the middleman! Best source (IMHO) for US news. Since they serve media outlets from left to right, there's not much political commentary.

BBC - That would stand for "British Broadcasting Corporation", if you're from another planet and didn't know. The website is the Internet version of the BBC World Service. Comprehensive and balanced coverage of news from everywhere, plus sports (too much soccer) and entertainment and other fluff. Best source for news from the UK. Many weird foreign language versions, including Kyrgyz, Nepali and Pashto. Where else could you find that?!

CBCnews - What the BBC is to the UK, the Canadian Broadcorping Castration is to Canada. Very good news website, not quite so "foreign" to American readers. About the only place Canucks can find lots of stories from and about the Great Not-so-white North.

Reuters - The other big source for the lamestream papers. Strong on business and finance. Click on the drop-down menu beside the "Reuters" logo at the top, and you'll find 15 (count `em, 15!) regional editions, including sites for Canada and China.

So there you go. You can unbookmark whichever print rags you've been cursing. These four news websites are all ye need.

A reading guide to the lamestream newspapers

Regular readers of WWW will know that Walt is... or was... a regular reader of the Globe and Mail, [aka the Groan and Wail. Ed.] which claims to be "Canada's national newspaper". This was so because the Mop and Pail, not being American, usually has a more balanced, middle-of-the-road view of American politics plus international news and analysis. In this respect it is much like the Economist, which is the one medium Walt really trusts. As a plus, the Mope and Flail has Canadian news and some good columnists, like Margaret Wente.

Which is too bad, because the Glom and Maul today inaugurated a paywall. By so doing, editor John Stackhouse evidently intends to stem the tide of red ink which threatens to engulf the publication. Like a Canadian King Canute. Good luck to him. It'll be a frosty Friday in Hades before Walt parts with 20 Canuckbucks [How much is that in real money? Ed.] to read the G&M's daily paean of praise for Steve Harpoon and leftie drivel from the likes of Gerry Caplan.

Hundreds of assiduous readers have posted comments to the same effect on the Globe's website. Among them, I found the following, which I first saw years ago but didn't keep on file.

A Guide to Your Reading

1. The Wall Street Journal is read by the people who run the country.

2. The New York Times is read by people who think they run the country.

3. The Washington Post is read by people who think they should run the country.

4. USA Today is read by people who think they ought to run the country but don't really understand the Washington Post. They do, however like the smog statistics shown in pie charts.

5. The Los Angeles Times is read by people who wouldn't mind running the country, if they could spare the time, and if they didn't have to leave L.A. to do it.

6. The Boston Globe is read by people whose parents used to run the country.

7. The New York Daily News is read by people who aren't too sure who's running the country, and don't really care as long as they can get a seat on the train.

8. The New York Post is read by people who don't care who's running the country either, as long as they do something really scandalous, preferably while intoxicated.

And for the Canucks...

9. The Globe & Mail is read by people who aren't sure there is a country, or that anyone is running it; but whoever it is, they agree with all that they stand for. There are occasional exceptions if the leaders are handicapped, minority, feminist, atheist dwarves, who also happen to be illegal aliens from any country or galaxy as long as they are Conservatives and Harper-Card-Carrying types.

So... which newspaper do you read?

Faster deportation of foreign criminals gets unlikely endorsement

Canada has two self-proclaimed English-language "national newspapers". One is the National Post, founded by Conrad Black, formerly Lord Black of Cross Harbour. The Daily Tubby -- as the paper is still called in his honour -- is markedly conservative, in emulation of Britain's Daily Torygraph [Telegraph, surely. Ed.] which Mr. Black also owned at one time.

The doyen of Canada's lamestream media, however, is the good grey Globe and Mail, often referred to in Walt's World. Its predecessor, the Globe, was founded in 1844 by Scottish immigrant George Brown, one of the Fathers of Confederation. Brown was a small-l liberal, and began the paper as an organ for his Reform Party. In the 19th century it spoke for progressive thinkers, choosing for its motto: "The subject who is truly loyal to the Chief Magistrate will neither advise nor submit to arbitrary measures." The quotation is carried on the Globe's editorial page to this day.

In the 20th century, the Globe somehow lost its modern, progressive bearings, and became the champion of conservatism -- politically, economically and culturally -- the voice of the establishment.

Yet the Globe couldn't hold back the tide of liberalism that rolled over Canada -- or at least Toronto -- in the hippy-dippy 60s. Historian David Hayes says its editorials in this period "took a benign view of hippies and homosexuals; championed most aspects of the welfare state; opposed, after some deliberation, the Vietnam War; and supported legalizing marijuana." It was a 1967 Globe and Mail editorial that coined the phrase "The State has no place in the bedrooms of the nation," in defence of legalization of homosexuality. The line was later picked up by Pierre Trudeau and became one of the future Prime Minister's most-quoted slogans.

To this day, the Groan and Wail is the undisputed champion of the chattering classes and the Volvo liberals -- the rich Rosedale socialites who delight in helping the poor and downtrodden of every country except Canada, and -- in Canada -- every bullied, "disadvantaged" and "at risk" minority they can touch with a bargepole.

[That's quite enough introduction. Get on with it! Ed.]

OK... all of this is to say that Walt was not surprised when the Mop and Flail (thank you, Richard J. Needham) somehow couldn't find enough space last week to devote even one column inch to the Canadian government's proposed Faster Removal of Foreign Criminals Act. Walt told you about it on June 20th, but from 444 Front Street West came nary a word.

One reason for the profound silence could be that the Globe, to its credit, has a lively and only lightly moderated comments section following most articles -- except those that its politically correct editorial board deems unfit for the common people to discuss, such as black crime or bogus refugees. It could be that the editors didn't want to run the FRFCA story at all because they knew they'd get about 1000 comments approving the legislation for every one advocating more hugging of hoodies.

Walt is pleased to say that the Globe's editors have at last weighed in on the subject. After considerable thought -- and sticking its collective finger out the window to see which way the wind was blowing -- the G&M has pronounced itself in favour of the new law. "Kenney is right to speed up deportations", today's editorial says!

I wanted to reprint the entire editorial, but Ed. tells me we're out of space. Click here to read it. And note the concluding sentence: The tiny share of immigrants and refugees who lack citizenship and are convicted of serious crimes on Canadian soil forfeit their right to be here.

Couldn't agree more. But what if not just Canada, but the USA, UK, France, Germany etc. took such measures? Where would all the gangstas, drug dealers, pimps and honour killers go? Back to the third world -- that's where!

Ron Paul: "Mr. Authentic"

The Globe and Mail's Affan Chowdhry calls Ron Paul the "Mr. Authentic" in the race for the Republican leadership. Here's his analysis of Mr. Paul's chances.

Texas Congressman Ron Paul is a super-long shot to win the GOP nomination to take on Barack Obama, but every time he takes the stage during TV debates he expresses a candour and authenticity that endears him to audiences.

Mr. Paul’s libertarian ideas are unconventional: a dramatic downsizing and virtual elimination of the role of Washington D.C., including getting rid of the Federal Reserve, all income tax, and closing U.S. bases overseas and bringing all military personnel back to the country.

Mr. Paul has consistently won the support of independent voters and under-30s. They were key to his strong second place finish in the New Hampshire primary on January 10th behind winner Mitt Romney.

A Wall Street Journal and NBC News poll released Thursday evening shows Mr. Paul with 12 per cent support nationally among registered Republicans.

Mr. Paul is not expected to do well in the Florida primary on January 31st, but he maintains that he will continue campaigning so long as he continues to draw crowds and his ideas gain some traction.

Click here to read the entire article.

Paulphobia rampant in lamestream media

Konrad Yakabuski is the Globe and Mail's man in Washington. He writes reasonably perceptive columns on American politics. But he has one blind spot. He cannot bring himself to acknowledge the existence, let alone the popularity of Republican presidential hopeful Ron Paul.

His column today is headed "Where's the love for Mitt Romney?", and goes on at some little length about the possibility of Mormon Mitt being the Republican version of Hellery Clinton -- "the 'inevitable' party nominee who blows it all in the end".

About two-thirds of the way through the piece, Yakabuski cites a poll just published in the Des Moines Register which "shows Mr. Gingrich surging to 25 per cent in the Hawkeye State, leaving Mr. Romney 9 percentage points lower and in third place."

So who do you suppose finished second in the Register poll? You can read to the end of Yakabuski's column -- then read it again -- and you will not find the answer. But when you look at the article in the Register, you'll find it is none other than -- gasp, shock, horror -- Ron Paul!

As you know, Walt is no believer in conspiracy theories, but really... Why is it that pundits in the lamestream media refuse to acknowledge the very existence of Mr. Paul? Are they so afraid of him, and what he represents? It seems that the media have collectively decided that the best way to nobble Mr. Paul is to refuse outright to mention him. Not even his name shall appear in papers like the New York Times or its pale northern imitation.

The liberal media should bear in mind the famous dictum of St. Ignatius Loyola: Just because you've silenced a man doesn't mean you've converted him. Let's see if they can remain silent when the results of the primaries start coming in.

Who are we kidding about the Afghan war?

Walt is amazed that, all of a sudden, it has become politically acceptable to call the war in/on Afghanistan a waste of time, money and 1000s of lives. Even the lamestream media are starting to stray from the government line, now that said line -- that we're there to bring peace, democracy and civilization to the barbaric hordes -- has been proven to be a big black crock of shit.

A couple of days ago, Walt passed on Lawrence Martin's review of Murray Brewster's new book, The Savage War. Today Jeffrey Simpson (Martin's stablemate at the Moan and Wail) joins the chorus with "The timeless intractability of Afghanistan". He begins: Whom are we kidding in Afghanistan? Ourselves, it would appear.

Well, not really. As Walt has said before (ahem!), we are not kidding ourselves. We are being kidded by the governments of the USA, the UK, and Canada. And the lamestream media -- led by the likes of the Globe and Mail, the Times (New York) and the other Times -- have been abetting the ongoing and thoroughly vile deception. Until this week. Told ya so!

Dispelling the PC bullshit about Britain's rioting underclass

We are now being inundated by wave after wave of gliberal analysis of the causes of the riots that swept the UK last week. The problem is that British society is "broken". The "social contract" has been breached. And guess who's responsible? Certainly not those rampaging through the streets! Heavens no! They're victims, dontcha know...

That's bullshit, as most of us know but few of us have the courage to say. As I wrote earlier this morning, the truth is that the rioters are underclass scum -- black gangstas and chavs behaving like black gangstas because it's "cool". In an earlier post I called them hoodlums and hooligans, for that's what they are.

I'm pleasantly surprised to find the lamestream and resolutely politically correct Globe and Mail agreeing with me. [Or you could say you find yourself in agreement with the Glob! Ed.] Here's the lead paragraph from their editorial, "No excuses for British hooligans":

There is an emerging analysis that while on the one hand there is “no excuse” for the wave of rioting, looting and wanton violence that swept London and other British cities last week, on the other hand there really is an excuse: social exclusion and systemic discrimination. Accordingly, the hoodlums are really victims, their violence and mayhem only a plaintive cry for help. They are not depraved but deprived. It is a ludicrous suggestion, one that flies in the face of two decades worth of massive expenditures in poverty-stricken areas designed to improve the opportunities, particularly, of inner city youth.

Putting it another way, British taxpayers have spent billions of pounds doing what the liberals tell us is "the progressive thing", "the right thing", namely doling out money to the "disadvantaged" and hoping they'll stay in their place, not cause any more trouble...and vote for the government of the day. So how's that working out? Film at seven!

There is a lesson in that for governments on the western side of the Atlantic. Even now, we keep hearing cries from the guilt-ridden (because they're white) dogooders that we should spend even more money "helping the disadvantaged". Build them special schools, we're told. Bring your peanut butter and mac & cheese to the food bank. Give them better housing and don't worry about collecting the rent.

I'm reminded of the song "Gee, Officer Krupke", from West Side Story....
Dear kindly social workers
They say go earn some dough
Like be a soda jerker
Which means like be a schmo
It's not I'm anti-social
I'm only anti-work!
Gloryosky, that's why I'm a jerk...

Jerks, hoodlums, hooligans... that's what they are. And it's not the rest of us who made them that way! The rest of us work to provide ourselves with the necessities of life. And if there's money left over for a TV, we go and buy it; we don't break into the Source!

How about we shut up about "social exclusion" and "systemic discrimination". Instead, let's try applying a little old-fashioned discipline, to make these poor "disadvantaged" youths shape up or face real consequences.

What are we doing in Libya?

That's the $64 question this week. People keep asking, and other people keep answering. And it's like asking someone for the time. Every minute you get a different answer.

In today's Globe and Mail, Margaret Wente poses a plethora of good questions, such as:

• What is our objective?
• Are we fighting to protect the Libyan population from the government, or are we fighting for régime change?
• What if air strikes don’t knock out the bad guys and they keep on killing people anyway?
• What national interest do we have in this war?
• Who takes the lead role when the US steps down?
• Who says Libya’s rebels are the good guys?
• What happens if (as seems likely) there are no good guys?

Making himself clear, as always, Obama says this war is “a chance to align our values with our interests.” For others, it's a risky decision to insert ourselves into a tribal society we don’t understand. Haven’t we done enough of that already?

As General David Petraeus said of Afghanistan, “Tell me how this ends.”

Footnote: Whatever happened to The Sixty-four Dollar Question? I can't seem to find it on my radio any more.

Conversing about immigration

The Globe and Mail -- Canada's answer to the New York Times -- thinks Canadians should have a "conversation" about matters of importance for the future of the country. The Glob's politically correct editorial staff made up a list of the Top Ten Topics. Immigration did not appear on the list. Neither did racism or culture clash or anything which wasn't 100% politically correct.

This is more than passing strange, considering that immigration, bogus refugee claims, black crime, and the stubborn refusal of south Asians to adapt to Canadian society are the topics one overhears being discussed anywhere real Canucks gather. Anywhere outside of Starbucks and the drawing rooms of Rosedale, that is.

The Tory government of "Call me Steve" Harper, showing that it is only half-deaf to the wishes of ordinary Canadians, has introduced Bill C-49, which would curb human trafficking -- the smuggling into the country of illegal aliens.

The socialist NDP and leftish Bloc Québecois have announced that they will oppose the bill. So, in the current minority parliament, the bill's fate rests in the hands of the opposition Liberals.

The Liberals, led [after a fashion. Ed.] by Count Michael Ignatieff, hold a large number of seats in the Toronto and Vancouver areas, including some which are East Indian ghettos. The voters there are Sikh, Sikh, Sikh.

On the other hand, the Glibs are never going to return to their position as Canada's Natural Governing Party unless they can win back a goodly number of white bread ridings in TROC -- The Rest Of Canada outside the hotbeds of multicult. They are in danger of losing their grip even on Toronto's suburbs, as witness this week's by-election in the largely Italian-Canadian riding of Vaughan.

So if you're Count Iggula, what do you do? Pander to the racists or pander to the vizmins? Count on Mikey to make the wrong decision. Yep, he announced a couple of days ago -- apparently without consulting his caucus -- that his party will also oppose the government's bill.

Just another demonstration of how out of touch Iggy and the puppeteers who pull his strings are with the thoughts and feelings of the majority of Canadians.

That's not just Walt's opinion. Click here to read Michael Den Tandt's column in the Sun/QMI papers today. Here's the main point:

"Earth to Liberals: You are offside with most Canadians, including Liberal Canadians, on this issue.

"Ending the abuse of our immigration and refugee system is not contrary to the interests of immigrant communities, or of refugees. The opposite is true.

"If the abuse continues, as we have seen in Europe, the popular pressure against immigration will only grow."

Once a refugee, always a refugee?

Interesting ruling today from the Supreme Court of Canada on the rights of refugees. At issue was the question of whether, once you've been officially declared to be a refugee, you can lose that status.

We all know (because the lamestream media tells us) that gypsies -- oops, sorry, "Roma" -- are the most persecuted people in the world. Why only recently France has decided to expel 1000s of them. Something to do with dirt, crime and abuse of welfare systems, some say.

But that's France. In Canada, gypsies are welcome, as long as they know enough English or French to holler "refugee" or "réfugié" when they get off the boat. Or out of the first-class section of the airplane.

Take the cases of Joszef and Joszefne Nemeth, who came to Canada in 2001 from Hungary, and Tiberiu Gavrila, who arrived in 2004 from Romania. [Does that mean "land of the Roma"? Must check. Ed.]

It's worth noting that by the time these "refugees" had arrived, they couldn't claim to be fleeing the godless Communists, because the Communist dictatorships of both countries had fallen in the wake of the breakup of the Soviet Union. So they said they were at risk of persecution because they were Roma. And of course the Canadians bought it. To deny their refugee claim would have made the Canadian government seem racist, eh.

Somewhat later, the Hungarian government sought extradition of Mr. and Mrs. Nemeth to face a charge of fraud. At about the same time, Romanian asked that Mr. Gavrila be sent back to serve time on a conviction for, errr, fraud.

Agent 3, who studied the subject, tells me that the general principle of international law is that refugees cannot be sent back to countries where they were persecuted. But there are exceptions, one such being cases of serious, non-political crime. Like, errr, fraud.

The Québec Superior Court thought both cases fell within the exception, and authorized the extradition of all three "refugees". The Canadian Minister of Justice, Rob Nicholson, ordered the removals, saying the people involved had not shown they were at risk of persecution if they were sent back.

But the Nemeths and Mr. Gavrila appealed, assisted no doubt by lawyers paid for by Canadian taxpayers. Their cases were heard together at the Supreme Court of Canada in Ottawa. Their grounds for appeal were that they couldn't be extradited unless their refugee status was formally revoked, which it wasn't.

The Supreme Court quashed the extraditions. Why? Because the Minister of Justice hadn't followed the right procedure and applied the correct test. The onus wasn't on the refugees to show that they were at risk, the court said. Rather the onus is on the government to show that they are not.

The court accepted that Minister Nicholson looked at the situation in Hungary and Romania at the time the extradition was sought. Both countries have joined the European Union and come under its human rights rules and conventions. So the minister thought there was little chance of persecution.

Speaking for the court, Mr. Justice Cromwell wrote “Change of circumstances in a refugee's country of origin may lead to cessation of refugee protection. In short, protection ceases to apply to persons who, by virtue of a change in circumstances, no longer need it.”

But, he added, the minister must be satisfied that the threat of persecution no longer exists. One wonders what the minister should have done to satisfy himself. Should he have dressed up like a gypsy and gone to Hungary and Romania to see what would happen to him? Should he have taken into account the pro-gypsy propaganda fed to Canadians through the Globe and Mail and the Toronto Star?

Whatever it was Nicholson did, he didn't do enough of it or he didn't do it well enough. The cases of all three "refugees" now go back to him so that he can review his decision.

And what if Mr. Nicholson looks at the files again and stands by his original decision? Well, his decision can still be appealed...again...courtesy of the Trudeau Charter of Rights and the Canadian taxpayer.

"The suspect spoke with a Caribbean accent"

I didn't post anything yesterday because I was in shock. I read a newspaper account of a "home invasion" in a Toronto suburb, in which an Oriental lady was killed and her husband injured. There, at the end of the story, was a description of the three suspects. The colour of the perps wasn't mentioned but the report did say that one of them "spoke with a Caribbean [sic] accent".

"A Caribbean accent!" Cazart! That phrase -- actually "a Jamaican accent" -- used to be set in cold type in the Toronto papers, and routinely appended to stories about convenience store robberies and the like.

Then it became politically incorrect to suggest that crimes were being committed by people of colour...especially the Jamaicans who have been welcomed into Canada since former PM Trudeau opened the floodgates.

At the Globe and Mail, at least, it is still taboo to refer to someone's race in a crime report. Or at least it was, until last night. Following comments by dozens of readers of the online edition, the Glob finally inserted the word "black" into the descriptions.

However, a commentator named "Meatball" had the finally word: "Gee, they were black? What a surprise! I'm shocked, SHOCKED!"

Incredible! "Canada's national newspaper" against multiculturalism!

The good not-so-grey-anymore Globe and Mail, which likes to think of itself as Canada's version of the New York Times, has a lead editorial today entitled "Strike multiculturalism from the national vocabulary".

This is quite unaccountable! For nigh on four decades the Globe has been so politically correct as to make one [meaning Walt. ed.] puke. This is like the Times coming out for Ron or Rand Paul!

Now the question is, whence cometh this Damascene conversion? Is it a trial balloon floated by the Prime Minister's Office, with which the Globe is not entirely unconnected? Or could it come from an even more sinister source? No... There is no more sinister source!

Or could it be that the Globe has taken note of the comments posted by its readers, which run about 8 to 1 against immigration from the third world, multiculturalism and "progressive thinking" in general.

Anyway, good for the Globe for having dared, for whatever reason, to bell the cat. Now let's see who lines up behind them.

The biggest bully of all

Libertarian Gerry Nicholls has a great op-ed piece in some of the smaller Canadian newspapers today. It's the kind of thing you wouldn't see in the Globe and Mail or the Toronto Star, voices of the progressive urban elite. So, in case you missed it, let me quote some thoughts on the government's role in our lives.

The government is a bully.

The government is always pushing us around.

It bosses us with rules and regulations that tell us where we can smoke, what we can eat and what kind of light bulbs we can put in our homes.

It passes ridiculous laws to intimidate gun owners and marijuana smokers.

It forces us to give up nearly half our income in the form of taxes so it can finance things like artificial lakes in downtown Toronto and chauffeur-driven limousines for federal cabinet ministers.

It even tries to control what we can think and say through the so-called Human Rights Commissions.

In short, the government uses coercion to manage just about every aspect of our lives from cradle to grave.

Plus, let's not forget the government also has the power to put people in jail.

Now that's what I call bullying.

And every time the government bullies its citizens, every time it seeks to restrict our behaviour or control our actions, or steal our private property, it also takes away our liberty.

That should scare all of us. Freedom is a precious commodity in this world; it should be protected and preserved.

Strong stuff. I agree with it. In fact, I love it! But am I the only one?

In one of his Globe and Mail columns recently, John Ibbitson said he doubted that there was much support in Canada for a Tea Party, because Canadians are just too moderate, polite and progressive. On the contrary, I think Mr. Nicholls' remarks will resonate with many more Canadians than Mr. Ibbotson has readers.

Gerry Nicholls has written a book, Loyal to the Core: Stephen Harper, Me and the NCC. Click here to find out where to buy it, and read more libertarian common sense. Tell `em Walt sent ya.