And Yet, He Seems So Guilty
What a difference American fraud charges make to the measure of a man, eh? I mean, really. I always thought of Conrad Black as a rich brat offspring who went on to bilk elderly widows and grocery store employees out of millions, but now that he's been charged with the standard white collar crime of fraud - by Americans, no less - he's credited with having built an empire to the benefit of all Canadians.
Oh - and being the nicest guy in person you'd ever want to meet. Nevermind how nasty he seems to lower orders like me - my betters tell me every day in the newspapers that I'm wrong about him, that I'd really like him if I met him.
Well, maybe I'll send him a letter some day:
"Dear Mr. Lord Sir Black of Crossharbour,
How is the food in prison?"
All this sympathy comes courtesy our very own Canadian media. Now, I could understand it if we didn't already know what a thoroughly nasty character Conrad Black actually is - but, as I said above - I mean, really. My guess is he's guilty as charged and will be convicted - and should be convicted. It appears to me like he defrauded shareholders. Sorry - but it does. That he labelled the rest of us working stiffs as shirkers, doesn't really enter into my opinion of the man, now. Although I always find it particularly egregious when people who inherited wealth have the temerity to rub our noses in the fact that the rest of us didn't. Whether it's done consciously or not - it's hardly sporting.
But I've been reading the trial coverage - all of it Canadian - and I am astounded by the absolute drivel most columnists are getting away with - and drivel is putting it generously. The coverage of Himself is so unbelievably boot-licking and toadyish, the coverage of His Wife so adoring and fawning, in spite of her columns which would seem to indicate she is one of the most horrible people ever to have lived, and now that the jury has been selected, so condescending and patronizing of the people who must sit in judgement of the crimes with which He is charged - that it is... sad.
I mean, c'mon - I've been reading Barbara Amiel for years. No one even comes close to her remorseless and conscienceless misanthropy. So she's standing by her man. So what? Of course she is. He's rich and powerful and the poster boy for Neo-Con "values" everywhere. She wants him to beat this rap so she can carry on carrying on in the manner to which she became accustomed when they were living large, however questionably. I don't blame her for that - I blame her for pretty much every opinion she's ever spewed forth. And I'd hardly call her The Good Wife. I saw the shoe room in "Citizen Black". I don't even know what you'd call that kind of greed, but I think her hubby is about to pay the price.
And Him. Starting with Upper Canada College, what we know of the man would indicate to me, anyway, that the guy on the street corner had better think twice before asking Conrad Black if he could spare a dime. He might end up with his pockets turned out, instead. So why all the sympathy for a guy who would probably have the entire NDP thrown in prison if he could pull the right strings behind the scenes - or even upfront - to get it done.
Oh.
I get it.
Oh my.
How could I have missed that one. Well, that explains everything, doesn't it. Wow. What a media we have in this country, eh? Ask a simple question in good faith, and there is the answer staring me in the face. All this fawning coverage of his Lordship, the fear of so many columnists that he'll be convicted and made to do the time for his crimes, that he'll be proven a crook, the Neo-Con poster boy - a crook.
Gosh, I wonder. If the media in this country could talk American prosecutors into dropping the charges against their beloved Neo-Con poster boy - would it?
Of course it would.
The Canadian media is showing its true colours, where its true sympathies reside. Contrast the National Post's coverage of The Black/Amiel Duo (and personally - I think she's guilty as not charged - I really do) with its coverage of Svend Robinson, for instance.
He pocketed a ring at an auction sale, in case you live under a rock. Now, without even going into the charges now, what we know of Conrad Black, at the very least, is that he doesn't give a rat's ass about anybody who gets in the way of his desire for money and power and influence.
Call me un-Canadian, but I don't admire people like that and I don't feel sorry for them when they get caught. They're supposed to get caught, aren't they? Or do we have one law for the rich and one law for everybody else? How come nobody in the media felt sorry for Svend Robinson?
Okay. Bad example.
But you know what I mean. Somebody cheats on welfare and Mike Harris goes after her with the full weight of the state, she eventually kills herself, and there's not even a, "Gee... that was probably a little excessive" from the same media that is boohooing over Conrad Black possibly going down for A LOT of fraud.
Interesting that, eh? The media speaking for and defending a figure best know for representing the views and interests of the establishment, the establishment on the right, that is. It can't even pretend not to, it's that desperate. We are seeing it now. Nevermind Bush and Iraq and all that really truly awful dispiriting evidence of corruption and lies, our Canadian media of the right is defending Conrad Black.
Personally, I'm surprised it took this long for the law to catch up with him - but such is the unfairness of life. The rich are different than you and I.
And so is the Canadian media, apparently.
