The new naziism

[cakadu]

The latest garbage Ezra published is derogatory to Colleen Klein and has not only the premier in a snit but the Metis nations as well.

Hopefully Ezra is enjoying his new found place in the centre of media attention.

Censorship is one thing but choosing to print garbage is another, and is where journalism can and is sinking to an all time low.

[cakadu]

Hmmm, didn't Andy Warhol mention something about 15 minutes?

This latest bit over Colleen Klein is hiding behind he journalistic "sources" and has absolutely no place being published.

There is also the age old adage about what goes around comes around.

[silverback]

Tell me why the blame is being placed on the publication and not on the person making the comments? It was not an editorial written by someone, it was an article reporting what was said. Newspapers and magazines who are reporting news or happenings around the world are doing just that - reporting. How many news and radio shows today reported what was printed about Mrs. Klein?? Should they be lynched too? If not, why not?? They are just repeating what was printed in another magazine!

It's too bad life isn't all sunshine and roses with people always being nice to each other. Sometimes things are said that aren't nice. Let's grow up and concentrate on things that really matter, like getting rid of all these old bitching cows!!

[cowman]

Every paper usually has a slant? If you don't agree with what they say...then don't buy it?
Want to read a paper that is very biased? Try the Calgary Herald, Edmonton Journal, or the Red Deer Advocate! Want to go the other way? Try the National Post!
The Western Standard and the old Alberta report before it give a biased slant. This helps offset the liberal drivel in just about every other publication available in Canada!
Years ago there was a little underground paper that used to float around called the Georgia Straight? Now they were definitely an example of "freedom of the press" as they printed the most outrageous things! I think the old Frank magazine would be another example?
Who decides what is acceptable for us to read? If an editor/publisher wants to put it out there, do we need big brother deciding what we should or should not read?
You can find all kinds of blogs that broadcast just about everything under the sun. Should we be censoring those too?
I see now some Muslim group is taking the Western Standard to the human rights court? Absolutely incredible!

[ivbinconned]

Ric Dolphins writing about Mrs Klien in the Western Standard I have only heard about on the radio and it sounds like it reflects bad on the Standard and Dolphin...don't have my copy yet but look forward to getting it and deciding for myself!

Here is another artical that demonstrates the double standards practiced by the media and is defended by the liberals among us. Shameful.







JEFF JACOBY

The flames of hate in Alabama
By Jeff Jacoby, Globe Columnist | February 15, 2006

SUPPOSE THAT in 2005 unknown hoodlums had firebombed 10 gay bookstores and bars in San Francisco, reducing several of them to smoking rubble. It takes no effort to imagine the alarm that would have spread through the Bay Area's gay community or the manhunt that would have been launched to find the attackers. The blasts would have been described everywhere as ''hate crimes," editorial pages would have thundered with condemnation, and public officials would have vowed to crack down on crimes against gays with unprecedented severity.

Suppose that vandals last month had attacked 10 Detroit-area mosques and halal restaurants, leaving behind shattered windows, wrecked furniture, and walls defaced with graffiti. The violence would be national front-page news. On blogs and talk radio, the horrifying outbreak of anti-Muslim bigotry would be Topic No. 1. Bills would be introduced in Congress to increase the penalties for violent ''hate crimes" -- no one would hesitate to call them by that term -- and millions of Americans would rally in solidarity with Detroit's Islamic community.

Fortunately, those sickening scenarios are only hypothetical. Here is one that is not:

In the past two weeks, 10 Baptist churches have been burned in rural Alabama. Five churches in Bibb County -- Ashby Baptist, Rehobeth Baptist, Antioch Baptist, Old Union Baptist, and Pleasant Sabine -- were torched between midnight and 3 a.m. on Feb. 3. Four days later, arsonists destroyed or badly damaged Morning Star Missionary Baptist Church in Greene County, Dancy First Baptist Church in Pickens County, and two churches in Sumter County, Galilee Baptist and Spring Valley Baptist. On Saturday, Beaverton Freewill Baptist Church in northwest Alabama became the 10th house of worship to go up in flames.

Ten arson attacks against 10 churches -- all of them Baptist, all in small Alabama towns, all in the space of eight days: If anything is a hate crime, obviously this is.

Or is it? ''We're looking to make sure this is not a hate crime and that we do everything that we need to do," FBI Special Agent Charles Regantold reporters in Birmingham. Make sure this is not a hate crime? If 10 Brooklyn synagogues went up in flames in a little over a week, wouldn't investigators start from the assumption that the arson was motivated by hatred of Jews? If 10 Cuban-American shops and restaurants in Miami were deliberately burned to the ground, wouldn't the obvious presumption be that anti-Cuban animus was involved?

Apparently Baptist churches are different.

''I don't see any evidence that these fires are hate crimes," Mark Potok, a director of the left-wing Southern Poverty Law Center, told the Los Angeles Times. ''Anti-Christian crimes are exceedingly rare in the South."

But are anti-Christian crimes really that rare? Or are they simply less interesting to the left, which prefers to cast Christians as victimizers, not victims?

A search of the SPLC's website, for example, turns up no references to Jay Scott Ballinger, a self-described Satan worshiper deeply hostile to Christianity, who was sentenced to life in prison for burning 26 churches between 1994 and 1999. Yet if those weren't ''hate crimes," what were they?

Running through the coverage of the latest church burnings is an almost palpable yearning to cast the story in racial terms. ''Federal investigators are looking for two white men for questioning in connection with a string of church fires in central Alabama," began a National Public Radio story on Friday. ''Race may be a factor." In fact, race seems not to be a factor at all -- five of the churches had mostly white congregations, five were largely black. To a media ever ready to expose racism in American culture, the arsonists' lack of regard for skin color must be maddening.

In 1996, a spate of fires in the South was wildly and falsely trumpeted in the media as an eruption of racism. ''We are facing an epidemic of terror," said Deval Patrick, the Clinton administration's assistant attorney general for civil rights. But as it turned out, there was no racist conspiracy. More than a third of the arsonists arrested were black, and more than half the churches burned were white. So perhaps it is progress of a sort that, this time around, the media are keeping in check the urge to cry ''Racism!"

But real progress will come only when we abandon the whole misguided notion of ''hate crimes," which deems certain crimes more deserving of outrage and punishment not because of what the criminal did, but because of the group to which the victim belonged. The burning of a church is a hateful act regardless of the congregants' skin color. That some people bend over backward not to say so is a disgrace.

[blackjack]

...that last post says it all...

[blackjack]

good journalism never quotes un named sources. Why anyone who is a prominent PC would give an interview to a journalist and say anything derogatory about the premiers wife is beyond me. I wonder if the 'prominent PC' is going to show up at the PC convention the end of March and take credit for their remarks !!!!!

[wilagro]

Would this 'prominent PCer' mentioned happen to have been in the government at one time and tangled with Ralph's wife? Maybe some lingering resentment? Will we ever know?

Stay tuned for "As the Cookie Crumbles".

[wilagro]

Who knows ? If that in fact did happen it certainly is a pretty gutless way to settle differences by giving an interview and trashing someone's heritage !!

[cowman]

I bet it was Rod Love!

[cowman]

I highly doubt it !! In fact, I don't think anyone said it, it was just a gimic to make headlines !

[Horse]

I havnt read said article but I have read much said about the natives of our country and very little was kind so why should Mrs Klien be set on a pedistal and off limits think of all the things said about other leaders and thier familys . If she cant stand the heat get out of the kitchen.

[Horse]

Horse the article wasn't about Colleen or natives either. It was supposedly quoting a PC party member who is alleged to have said the following which is not verbatim:

'Colleen is the one responsible for Ralph staying in power, because after he leaves she will be just another Indian'
These comments are what people find offensive. There was no need to make reference to first nations people or Colleen'e metis heritage in the article.

I am sure that she is partially responsible for Ralph staying on as leader, and the main reason is that she is doing some significant charity work ( eg; crystal meth initiative) and it is a given that she can get more done as the wife of the premier than just an ordinary citizen.

[cakadu]

Things sometimes have a way of backfiring - even the most calculated risks. The lifeblood of just about any magazine is advertisers, followed closely by subscribers. Push the envelope a little too much and too often and they may just find alternatives.