hit counter script

July 28, 2009

Telegraph Journal apologizes in face of potential lawsuit

Today, we learn from the Telegraph Journal:

On Wednesday, July 8, 2009, the Telegraph-Journal published a story about the funeral mass celebrating the life of former Governor-General Romeo LeBlanc that was inaccurate and should not have been published. We pride ourselves in maintaining high standards of journalism and ethical reporting, and regret this was not followed in this case.

The story stated that a senior Roman Catholic priest in New Brunswick had demanded that the Prime Minister’s Office explain what happened to the communion wafer which was handed to Prime Minister Harper during the celebration of communion at the funeral mass. The story also said that during the communion celebration, the Prime Minister “slipped the thin wafer that Catholics call ‘the host’ into his jacket pocket”.

There was no credible support for these statements of fact at the time this article was published, nor is the Telegraph-Journal aware of any credible support for these statements now. Our reporters Rob Linke and Adam Huras, who wrote the story reporting on the funeral, did not include these statements in the version of the story that they wrote. In the editing process, these statements were added without the knowledge of the reporters and without any credible support for them.

The Telegraph-Journal sincerely apologizes to the Prime Minister for the harm that this inaccurate story has caused. We also apologize to reporters Rob Linke and Adam Huras and to our readers for our failure to meet our own standards of responsible journalism and accuracy in reporting.

Here is the original story (portions highlighted in red concern content that has “no credible support” and portions highlighted in orange are therefore not newsworthy and are unsubstantiated gossip and speculation):

A senior New Brunswick Roman Catholic priest is demanding the Prime Minister’s Office explain what happened to the sacramental communion wafer Stephen Harper was given at Roméo LeBlanc’s funeral mass.

During communion at the solemn and dignified service held last Friday in Memramcook for the former governor general, the prime minister slipped the thin wafer that Catholics call “the host” into his jacket pocket.

In Catholic understanding, the host – once consecrated by a priest for the Eucharist – becomes the body and blood of Jesus Christ. It is crucial that the small wafer be consumed when it is received.

Monsignor Brian Henneberry, vicar general and chancellor in the Diocese of Saint John, wants to know whether the prime minister consumed the host and, if not, what happened to it.

If Harper accepted the host but did not consume it, “it’s worse than a faux pas, it’s a scandal from the Catholic point of view,” he said.

Henneberry said a statement from the Prime Minister’s Office is in order.

“If I were the prime minister, I would at least offer an explanation to say no offence was meant, and then (clarifying) what happened to the consecrated host is in order,” he said. “I would hope the Prime Minister’s Office would have enough respect for the Catholic Church and for faith in general to make clear whatever happened.”

On Friday, during the mass, Harper reached out with his right hand and accepted the wafer from a priest.

A television camera lingered long enough to show New Brunswick Lt.-Gov. Herménégilde Chiasson, the next person to receive the host, raise his to his mouth.

But the tape shows that Harper does not consume the wafer before the camera cuts away several seconds later.

If Harper was unclear about what was appropriate during the funeral mass, said Henneberry, it “would say to me it’s time to get new protocol people.”

Harper and his senior spokespersons were en route to Italy on Tuesday for the G8 leaders’ summit.

Harper will spend five days in Italy and on Saturday he has an audience with Pope Benedict.

Requests for comment left with Harper’s media office were not immediately returned on Tuesday.

What Harper did or didn’t do at the ceremony quietly raised questions at the ceremony in Memramcook Friday.

When Harper took the host, “everybody just paused and said, ‘What did he do with it?’”‚” said one official who watched the pool feed with reporters who were not inside St. Thomas Church in Memramcook.

“You could see he was, ‘Uh oh, I don’t know what to do with this.’”‚”

The curiosity among Catholics has not gone unnoticed among Liberal insiders in Ottawa, either.

Henneberry said he has received a call on Harper’s actions from a concerned Catholic, and he doubts that she is the only one puzzled and perturbed.

“She said she was very upset,” he said, adding he had not seen the footage.

“She said, ‘All weekend long it has been bothering me and I know I can’t do something about it, but someone should.’

“She can’t be the only one in this country that is thinking that.”

Harper’s religious affiliation raises a separate but related question about his accepting the host: As a Protestant, should he have politely declined it?

The fact it was a national event that was televised live likely complicated the situation for everyone – the priests and Harper, Henneberry said.

“If the prime minister is not a Catholic, he should not have been receiving communion and if he comes up it places the priest in an awkward position, especially at a national funeral because everyone is watching,” he said.

But Rev. Arthur Bourgeois, who delivered the homily, did not have a problem with the prime minister accepting the host.

“Usually, to partake in holy communion in the Catholic Church, you have to be a member of it, but if you’re not, exceptionally sometimes at major occasions (it is different),” Bourgeois said.

“If you are up there and giving holy communion you are not going to stop and asked everyone if they are Catholic or if they are not Catholic.

“You say the Lord provides.”

Monsignor André Richard, who is Bishop of the Diocese of Moncton, gave Harper communion but said he didn’t see what Harper did with the host.

“I didn’t see anything wrong there “¦ because I was busy doing something else.”

Bourgeois said it is acceptable to decline the host by simply folding one’s hands, which signals the priest to bless the person.

Rev. James Weisgerber, president of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops and archbishop of Winnipeg, said if Harper was not given good advice before the ceremony about what to do, it is a regrettable oversight.

“I would feel very sorry for the prime minister if he wasn’t informed about what the procedure is,” Weisgerber said. “I would find it terrible if we put him in an embarrassing situation.

“My concern is at a funeral of that level everyone knows what the protocol is.”

Harper could have simply consumed the host shortly after he was off-camera; or he could have hesitated because he expected a priest would soon invite everyone to consume the host once everyone present had received it, as occurs in some Protestant churches.

His own faith tradition certainly does things differently, says an evangelical Christian journalist who specializes in religion and politics.

Lloyd Mackey’s 2005 book The Pilgrimage of Stephen Harper traces Harper’s political and faith journey.

Given his church background, Harper might not have known exactly what was expected of him as a Protestant at a Roman Catholic mass, Mackey suggested.

“I don’t think by himself as a Protestant adherent he’d be aware of the nuances,” said Mackey, who added there would be people in his inner circle who should have advised him.

For a number of years, in Calgary and in Ottawa, Harper has worshipped at churches within the Christian and Missionary Alliance, said Mackey.

Communion in Alliance churches is typically held once a month.

It would involve the seated congregation passing along wafers and, in small individual glasses, unfermented grape juice.

Harper grew up in a background with United Church of Canada and Presbyterian influences, but he was something of a skeptic until he was a young adult.

Mackey’s book says Harper’s journey to a committed personal faith was influenced by fellow politician Preston Manning, among others, and came after reading much-admired Christian apologists C.S. Lewis and Malcolm Muggeridge.

LeBlanc, 81, died in late June. He had been the country’s first Acadian and Maritime governor general, and before that, a senator, MP and press secretary to two prime ministers.

That’s quite an edit!

I’ve learned from a source close to one of the journalists that at least one of them may have gone so far as to seek advice and consider a lawsuit against the newspaper if the paper did not retract the story and absolve (no pun intended) the journalists of fabricating a significant portion the article.

Printing such a false hit piece can get a journalist frozen out of any future access to the PMO under the current administration. It’s a rare sight to see journalists defend their integrity against their senior management in the newsroom, however, in this case it may have been a matter of professional self-preservation.

What motivation was there behind torquing over three quarters of the story? Did somebody in Ottawa (or Toronto) pick up the phone and push a more interesting story to the editors instead?

Some observers will remember that “Wafergate” led CBC’s flagship newscast The National rather than the story about the Prime Minister’s participation in the G8 conference. UPDATE: Errr… this observer didn’t seem to remember correctly. My friends from CBC (yes, I shockingly still do have a couple of them — and they’ve been better to me than I have to them lately, but I digress) inform me that I am mistaken by the order of their reports (they did G8 and did “Wafergate” later in the broadcast). I also mistakenly made this reference on the Charles Adler show. I ironically acknowledge this and regret these errors.

This entry was authored by Stephen Taylor at 10:37 AM | Tweet this | Add a comment
| Feedback | #
  • Patsplace
    For some people, lying and cheating is a part of how you do business. It would appear, judging by the "Way to Go Guys" stuff that I'm hearing about taking a funeral for a respected Canadian politician and turning it into some kind of concocted story, totally based on lies, harming the Paper, the Reporters, the Publisher and Editor, the Catholic Church, not to mention forming in peoples minds a view of the Prime Minister as some kind of strange duck and an insult to Catholicism, is just fine in the minds of the slime that inhabit the lower reaches of Canadian Society.

    This takes the terror of no funding for the Liberals, a lessening chance to get back in a position to steal enough to finance the corruption, to new lows.

    And the useful idiots keep on going "Yup, Yup", not for a minute understanding that they support a corrupt and dying organization.
  • terry1
    As long as you believe the cons/reformatories have the sacred to alone produce dirty ads and untruths then there is no point in discussing this with you.

    I said the Irivings probably received a phone call about an upcoming shipyard and then they acted on the newspaper report.
  • Patsplace
    Bottom line is that when you lay down with dogs you get up with fleas, and they're dirty!!

    What you probably think happened is not what did happen. Reality is what is, not what you think it should be.
  • terry1
    patsplace, I don't want my country to get fleas and that's why I want Harpo gone.

    look in the mirror and repeat your last two sentences.
  • ontariotaxpayer
    wow...you are amazing....how much does that medication really cost?? Come on you can tell us...we are all friends here... :)
  • terry1
    My medicines still get covered by medicare something that wulsd change if Harpo ever got a majority. I'm not worried about that though.
  • paulsstuff
    Still struggling with incorrect facts I see Terry. First, neither the PM nor federal government has any role in medicines you recieve under medicare. That's strictly done by the provinces, and varies by age, co-pay, etc.

    Two. I guess you missed the previous memos about the Liberal party and Irving family:

    "Last Updated: Wednesday, October 29, 2003 | 4:30 PM ET
    CBC News
    Minister of Human Resources Development Jane Stewart is the latest cabinet minister to admit to vacationing at the Irving-owned salmon lodge in New Brunswick, CBC News has learned.
    Stewart told CBC Radio she and her family accepted the invitation when she was Minister of Revenue. She said she was invited by her friend, Paul Zed, a member of Parliament at the time and a son-in-law of the Irvings.

    The minister said the federal ethics counselor told her she did nothing wrong by accepting the invitation.



    Jane Stewart

    Four Liberal cabinet ministers have come under fire by Opposition MPs for either taking free flights on Irving corporate jets or making visits to the New Brunswick fishing lodge owned by the family.


    •FROM OCT. 27, 2003: Liberal minister pays for his Irving vacation

    Stewart said she was doing some work in New Brunswick when Zed invited her family to join his at the Irving-owned fishing camp. He arranged and provided the flights.



    Irving Lodge

    "And this invitation presented itself through Paul Zed, we accepted it as friends and families and had a good opportunity to spend some time privately together," Stewart said.

    Stewart said it was a one-night stay and that there were no discussions with anyone from the Irving corporations. Stewart says she recently provided the details to the federal ethics counselor.


    She said politicians can't be expected to reject invitations from friends.

    "There's nothing wrong with that, and anyone who suggests otherwise is just wrong."


    •FROM OCT. 27, 2003: PM defends ministers who accepted Irving hospitality

    Prime Minister Jean Chrétien defended his cabinet ministers, saying there's nothing wrong with them accepting hospitality from the Irving family"

    By the way Terry, Chretien was wrong. All those free flights on private Irving jets as well as stays at the fishing lodge were in violation of ethics rules, as they were valued more than $200, and should have been declared. Once this finally hit the news, the Liberal MP's caught all paid the Irvings $1000 to cover the cost. It was later revealed they did not pay gst for the flights or fishing lodge, another boo-boo.
  • terry1
    paulsstuff...I've seen your garbage on other sites and it hasn't improved here. The Irvings are bisexual when it comes to grants.....I guess you missed the memo.
  • paulsstuff
    Try arguing the facts Terry?Parnel. You were wrong about the medicines and wrong about the Irvings. You do know Jane Stewart is married to one, right? Strong ties between the Irvings and other notable Liberals? Read Stephen Maher's article in the paper today basically quoting Kinsella's conspiracy theories?

    Provide some factual info on Irving ties to the Conservative Party, not the rumor and innuendo you copy and paste from the Prince of Dumbness blog Kinsella. I await your response.
  • terry1
    the irvings are like the Demarais family who are mostly Liberal but make friends on both sides of the spectrum. Demarais son is married to Chretien's daughter and Mulroney was jsut at his Malabaie retreat. The Irvings do the same thing and play the same game.

    I like the way you frame Kinsella.....he really gets under reformatory skins and I note that he has basically challenged any tory to sue him over wafergate. He's a bull, a proven winner and not a BS'er. His war room will make Harpo lose his cool and get stupid, as he usually does, in the election because that's easy for WK to do. Parnel?? what's that?
  • paulsstuff
    Funny Terry, when a Conservative threatens lawsuit you cry libel chill, yet you boast of Kinsella suing people. Thing is Terry it's easier for Kinsella to sue than the average person as he is a lawyer, and has the ability to get legal counsel rather freely.

    As for Parnel, that's the name you post under on Kinsella's blog. Surely you aren't that stupid to now try and act like you don't know what I'm talking about. By clicking on your user name on Kinsella's blog, it allows people to see comments you have left on other blogs as well. You yourself referenced a comment you left here as Terry1 on Kinsella's blog when signed in as Parnel.

    See folks, Terry/Parnel has multiple personalities, and seems to have trouble remembering them. Should I call you Maria as well Terry/Parnel? You left a comment on Delacourt's Toronto Star blog with that name.

    The wonders of the internet.
  • paulsstuff
    And just in case you are still too dim-witted to figure it out, you left this comment on Kinsella's blog:

    "WK, I just stuck your reponse in the Taylor blog. He and his nut bars were gloating until your blog came out and he then pushed his down by inserting an interview with Stock Day at the top of the blog. Typical reformatory BS."

    Clicking on user Parnel links to the comment left here by you, under the name Terry1. Still wanna keep acting stupid?
  • terry1
    Im less dimwitted than you imagine. I've also seen your poorly written stuff elsewhere. And tell me what is wrong with that.

    My point was well made in WK's blog. He liked it a lot.
  • paulsstuff
    Gee Terry. You've gone from pretending you never heard the name Parnel, to now admitting it's your user name on WK's blog. My stuff is poorly written? Sorry bud, my comments are always researched sand factual, whereas yours are either WK copy and paste or something along the line of kindegarten rants, your flea comment above being a perfect example. And I love this comment: "Im less dimwitted than you imagine". So you admit you are dim-witted, just not as severe as I alluded too. Brilliant.

    And by the way, you need to do some research on the Irving family and their political links. Try starting with the $100,000 dollar donation to Paul Martin's leadership campaign.

    And remember Terry1/Parnel/Maria, google is your friend.
  • terry1
    Paulstuff, I've see you name around on the net also.
    My apologies, I meant to say I'm less dimwitted than you and the stuff you purport to report as facts. They are your version of the truth and just like all reformatories you wouldn't know the realtruth if it hit you in the lower cranial region. WK is also very quick to point that out to the idiots who try and usurp him as are other Lib bloggers.

    The Irvings, as stated, play both sides of the political coin,and both parties court them regularly. I know they are conservatives as a fact and if you're so good at reeearch you'll find the missing link. lets see how much of a hot shot you really are.

    Maria?? sorry that one's definitely not me. Your research failed again.
  • paulsstuff
    Sorry Terry/Parnel, but even the Hill Times disagrees with you:

    "The busy port city of Saint John is home to Irving Oil, and the Irving family has long been aligned with the Liberal Party. The incumbent Liberal MP, Paul Zed, also has a more personal connection to the vastly wealthy and powerful Irvings though his ex-wife, Judith Irving, granddaughter of K.C. Irving"

    And your man-crush on Kinsella is getting a little worrisome. Perhaps you might want to up the dosage on those meds you insist the federal government pays for, which was also factually wrong.
  • terry1
    Sorry paulstuff, there's other more interesting stuff about how the family play politics.
    http://www.dominionpaper.ca/weblog/2004/09/work...
    "How does Irving get away with this you may ask? Well there are 2 main reasons
    for this. First one is, they buy off politicians. I suspect the first Politician they bought off was Elsie Wayne. For those readers who don't know her, she is an old hag, ultra conservative bigoted homophobe. Luckily for us she is out of politics unfortunately, until she is dead and buried, she will still have alot of influence on things. Many top liberals have been bought Off also, many of you may recall the scandal of liberal cabinet ministers Taking free trips on the Irving jet to vacation at the Irving private resort.
    .....................

    You see they play both sides equally. Mulroney was frequently in their company and having down business with the family for over 20 years I know how they vote. I don't think amateur sleuths like you trying to be a pro are going to sway my personal knowledge of how they operate and how they actually vote....which is with their wallets in mind.
  • paulsstuff
    Again Parnel/Terry1/Maria, you show your ignorance, quoting from a blog rather than factual outlets. The Irving family actually supported the Liberal opponent of Elsie Wayne, a guy by the name of, wait for it, Paul Zed. The Irvings were quite vocal in their criticism and dislike for Wayne:

    "The president of Irving Shipbuilding says Saint John MP Elsie Wayne needs to get her facts straight. James D. Irving says Wayne's remarks Monday on CBC Radio are absolute junk.
    Irving calls it a cheap political shot for Wayne to say the owners of Saint John Shipbuilding are not working hard enough for a national shipbuilding policy."
  • feyenoord
    Its too bad that the Liberals have resorted to trying to cause religious sectarian division in Canada by fabricating a false story when the Prime Minister is showing respect towards a former Governor General.
    This is the low of lows. Where are the apologies?Which Liberal fed Irving?
  • Patsplace
    And now CTV is having Bob Fife announce that it was the Liberal Party of Canada that gave the lie to the paper because of connections in this area and they printed it. Next on the hit parade is which Liberals were involved and what's to be done about them.
  • terry1
    Patsplace, that report makes no real sense as the Irvings are known for their conservative leanings Paul Zed notwithstanding. If it was I'm glad they did it. Its time for some paybacks to the Tory slime we been submitted to. Maybe they will now understand two can play the same game.

    However, I do believe Warren Kinsella hit the nail on the head in terms of the apology being made ahead of a shipbuilding subsidy program which would benefit the Irvings immensely. Harper is still a liar and never consumed that host in church.
  • Kingston
    Terry1, I think it is time you provided some factual basis for your claims that there was pressure applied to the Irving family and Irving shipbuilding to retract the story in the TJ. Oh by the way, "my god WK said so on his blog does not constitute proof" despite what you think his picture over your homemade shrine in your basement might of whispered to you. I will also caution you that if I was Stephen Harper and you continually called me a liar over this fabricated story, you would of received a letter from my lawyers by this point, just because they are politicians does not mean they have given up their legal rights Terry1.
  • terry1
    Kingston, I have provided the same factual basis that the PM did when he said he ate the host.

    I say Harpo is a liar one more time.
  • 20/20
    Gotcha journalism eats its own young.
  • Beer and Popcorn
    The Liberal main stream media can't hide from its lies - their poltical coverage seems to be in the busines of manufacturing scandals and lies.

    From Krista Erikson on the CBC writing questions for Liberal MP Paulo Rodriquez, to James Travers and his daily war on conservatism in the Star, to smiling Robert Fife and Jane Taber on CTV's Question period.

    Day after day, hour after hour, slamming their agenda of social engineering and Liberal agenda down the throats of Canadians while relentlessly slamming the PM and government.

    Welcome to Trudeau's Canada.
  • terry1
    the reformatories get their dirt dsihing skills from the likes of Carl Rove. paybacks are hell and you can't stand it when the phony tories take one on the chin. Brave up B&P there will be many more hits to take.
  • ontariotaxpayer
    air must be a little thin where you live....this proves you need to be in Toronto to feed that Liberal ego all that yummy Liberal O2...... :)
  • terry1
    ontariotaxpayer...the reformatory air here in QC is very thin but its got lots of fresh Lib breezes.
  • ontariotaxpayer
    Liberal or Bloc? More Bloc I think. If it was More Liberal there would be no Bloc.
  • terry1
    Hey Stephen, nice try at attempting to bury this story with a Stock Day interview but here's some real facts for you courtesy of WK:

    FIVE REASONS WHY THE TELEGRAPH JOURNAL JUST MADE A BIG, BIG MISTAKE

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Tuesday, July 28, 2009, 01:45 PM
    1. They've kicked the story, big time. People are talking about it, again, all over. Wafergate had been dead for a month; now it's back, on steroids.

    2. Journalists - who aren't exactly in a pro-owner mood, these days, and understandably so - are pissed off. What do they see? Two respected colleagues getting kicked to the curb. What do they see? The faint outlines of a link between the shipbuilding announcement and, hours later, the mincing, shit-eating apology. The media will protect their own - and they will ensure not even a tin fishing trawler is built anytime soon by you-know-who.

    3. The Opposition - and, ironically enough, the Harper thugees - now can't go along with a penny being spent in that ship yard, even if they wanted to, because the whole file is tainted and/or too damned politically hot. In an era of minority governments, hot files = dead files. This one's dead. Good work, media magnates!

    4. The apology is fundamentally false. The Roman Catholic establishment were upset that (a) Harper took communion when he should not have done so, and (b) speedily deposited the relevant host in a place other than his mouth. That's a fact, and it's a documented fact - see for yourself. Apologies, when warranted, are the right thing to do; when forced, they're not.

    5. The geniuses at the T-J and PMO (Kory, come back!) have now persuaded thousands of people to again seek out the YouTube footage to see for themselves. And what they see there, with their own eyes, is what the Telegraph Journal originally reported: a Prime Minister taking a host (when he should not have done so), and tucking it in his pocket or a booklet (which is even worse).

    Dumb, dumb, dumb. Good thing these guys aren't running the country or anything.
  • hjasonhickman
    "The apology is fundamentally false. The Roman Catholic establishment were upset that (a) Harper took communion when he should not have done so, and (b) speedily deposited the relevant host in a place other than his mouth. That's a fact, and it's a documented fact - see for yourself. Apologies, when warranted, are the right thing to do; when forced, they're not."

    Over @ Macleans, one of the commentators referred to a CP story that said the Archbishop who was presiding (if that's the right word. Officiating?) at the state funeral said that the PM wasn't wrong to accept the Host:

    The Roman Catholic archbishop who administered communion has said the prime minister did nothing wrong by consuming it, even though he is a Protestant.

    Assuming that's the case, I'm not sure what "Roman Catholic establishment" we're talking about here. And while I've no doubt as to how devout Warren Kinsella is, I'm going to go with an Archbishop over him when it comes to what's right & wrong in the RC Church in this case.
  • ontariotaxpayer
    All those garbage fumes in Toronto getting to you terry? You sure sound like a Liberal Party of Toronto disciple....all bow down to count iggy and his sooth sayer warren kinsella......amen
  • terry1
    ontariotaxpayer.....sorry don't live in the big smoke. so you need another excuse.
  • ontariotaxpayer
    It is called a metaphore....I was not saying you lived in Toronto....I was saying you sure sound like a LPT disciple... seeing how you brought it up...perhaps you should relocate to be with more like minded individuals...cheers
  • terry1
    ontariotaxpayer............maybe you should move to TO and get properly educated in good liberal doctrine..
  • ontariotaxpayer
    nawww...born and raised there...got the heck out as soon as I could....too damn Liberal for me!
  • northbaytrapper
    Terry1:

    Wow, you sure showed us. Your arguments carry about as much weight as a mosquito fart. It's good to see that you can think for yourself though, and formulate your own thoughts. Cutting and pasting is so much easier than thinking and typing so don't worry, we won't think any less of you.

    Terry1 = sheep
  • terry1
    northbaytrapper... unlike yours people notice mine. they are powerful and potent
  • northbaytrapper
    rofl

    Forgive me. I didn't mean to cross paths with one who is both powerful and potent!

    You actually believe that people who read this are impressed by you, or are influenced by you? The reason people respond to you is because there is no other game....it's like fishing for pickeral, seeing that there is no action, so you settle for jigging sunfish and perch. It's not nearly as satisfying, but it makes the afternoon go by.
  • JDot
    Why don't you just give a link to special K. LMAO, wow 3 hours and the spin has already changed. Sorry no Canadian is looking for the Youtube vid. But word is out the MSM lies...

    Please, pretty please run with this, it makes me grin from ear to ear. Also thanks for noting that any journalist who runs with this amature spin is in the tank for the libs.

    Just a side note, Is Iggy's OLO this weak? Man, it is 2009 dude, not 1999. LMFAO, you Libs give reaching a whole different meaning.
  • terry1
    jdot, WK is well known and I didn't wan to oveload his very popular blog...popular becuae it contains the truth!!!

    Your reformatories have no meaning which is why the party should be turfed from our national agenda.
  • Kingston
    Terry1 what do you do stalk Warren, Do you have a shrine to the guy in your basement or something, try something unique and come up with your own points to argue and debate.
  • paulsstuff
    Hey Terry, why don't you go by the name Parnel here as you do on WK's blog?

    And it's still wonderful to see you can copy and paste from others blogs. Let me know when you have an original thought of your own.
  • ontariotaxpayer
    Of course the CBC would lead with it, considering it is the bastion of the left wing element in this country. If Count Iggy had done something like that it would have been reported as how progressive he is to take part in the quaint rituals of the religious zealots...

    It is time the CBC was reeled in, disbanded and sold off to other networks.
  • LG
    What a layer of slime has covered Canada with the disgusting compact between the media and the LPC. I am completely in favor of dismantling the CBC. I also suggest we begin to consider more deeply the environmental impact of newspaper media in particular. The true environmental costs of advertising in newspapers needs to be imposed.

    I have not purchased a newspaper in years because of this "arrangement". CBC and CTV are off the air in my house. In particular, my children are encouraged to seek information from sources OTHER than television news, or heaven forbid, a 'news' paper. And I would not dream of spending a single dime on advertising in any of those places.

    PMSH has been damaged by this wilful untruth, consequently, I encourage him to sue these slimebags into the 17th century. Enough of this crap in this country that is decorated wall to wall with self-righteous, hypocritical weasels.
  • terry1
    LG, it must be hell to get paybacks for all the attack ads and their partial truths and in some cases full out lies. We have not heard HARPO SPECIFICALLY STATE HE PUT THAT HOST IN HIS MOUTH AND THERE IS VIDEO EVIDENCE HE HE DIDN'T AT THE TIME HE RECEIVED IT.

    It must also be hell living in your house which seems to be back in the 19th century.
  • Name
    A rapier thrusting retort if ever I have seen one! Seems I touched a nerve - and one of the self-righteous, hypocritical weasels to which I referred snapped to and coughed up a boring tit-for-tat typical LPC-robotic response.

    I'm tired of the utter and thorough corruption that the LPC brand has come to represent. It's exposed as a money-vacuum wrapped up in feel-good, money-for-free, everyone's-a-victim-of-something, buy-Quebec-votes-for-a-majority-at-any-cost bit of tinsel.

    So phony is the LPC that it now has to import leaders from, *gasp*, the United States of America.
  • terry1
    Noname....and the gutless reformatories used which US based party's tactics in their negative campaigning. you are full of it when it comes to labeling corruption and blackmail. That Irving apology is simply a reaction to a threat from the PMO and it will be exposed.
  • Gabby in QC
    "... in some cases full out lies."
    Examples? With links?

    http://www.catholicregister.org/content/view/32...
    "Harper indicated he made a decision when entering public life that out of respect for the Catholic Church’s teachings on Communion he would not go forward to seek it, but if offered he would not refuse it — in a Catholic church or any other Christian denomination."

    And from the same reporter's blog: "I think it's what they call Astro-turfing--- an attempt to make an issue look like a grassroots response, but it's as fake as Astroturf and orchestrated by political operatives."

    Accusations coming from a supposedly devout Catholic political operative, who supports gay marriage and abortion, and from his little valet, who has time and again denounced people of faith ... the idiocy continues.
  • terry1
    I've repeated the lies many times over and am not going to waste my time supporting your drivel.

    The idiocy continues because this PM cannot leave things alone and keeps exposing his overdone ego. The idiocy is the PM and his office. Please show us how he respected the Catholic religion and please show us when and how he took that host in his mouth. Even he will not come out and say he did. The lunacy is there along with the ego.

    And, of course you miss the real story. An Irving newspaper apology and a potential shipyard susbsidy announcement all on the same day. Dirty politics at play from this dirty PM.
  • Gabby in QC
    "I've repeated the lies many times over ..."

    Yep, you're right, for once. You've repeated lies. That is absolutely what you have been doing. Thank you for admitting it. :-D

    "Please show us how he respected the Catholic religion ..."
    Of course, you are a shining example of someone respecting people's religion, correct?
    You are in a position to determine who shows respect and how that respect is shown, right?
    Go, read back some of your own vile statements regarding people of faith, and now you are the staunch defender of the Catholic Church?
    It is to laugh!

    And your idiocy continues.
  • terry1
    Yur idicoy continues as you keep trying to change the page. harpo lied and Kinsella has challenged him openly. lets see if Mr. dirty politics Harpo has the cojones to take on someone who won't back down.

    Nice try changing the subject. Harpo is a liar and that's the debate.
  • Gabby in QC
    "Yur idicoy ..." :-D

    Oh, oh, your anger is showing. Toxic Troll, time to take a valium.
  • JDot
    Frankly I am just happy the newspaper corrected the story the way it did(frontpage). I could pile on, but saying sorry is alot harder then smearing someone.

    I encourage all media to follow this example. B/c we all know the original story is pretty much par for the course, in the MSM. Smearing PM Harper and the CPC is a common theme from the MSM.

    I really don't care how long it took, or whatever, the paper F'd up, then corrected it. And not on the back page at the bottom in very small print.

    Now what is even more interesting is watching the IG's, inner circle attack the Irving family over this correction. Things that make you go Hmmmmmm...
  • jad
    Sorry Gabby, you're wrng on this one. Obama has still not apologized for his comments. Yes, he suggested they all get to gether for a beer, but if you can find me a quote where he apologizes for his initial statements saying the Cambridge police "acted stupidly", I'd be happy to read it. The fact that he has been unable to say he spoke out of turn without full possession of the facts is causing an adverse reaction in the States.
  • 20/20
    Obama said, regarding his "stupidity" comment: 'I could have calibrated my words better." That's an apology in my book.
  • Gabby in QC
    Jad, there may be other reports expressing what you're looking for, but I found this one for now:
    http://www.chicagotribune.com/videobeta/watch/?...

    Although Obama did not say the words "I apologize" he did express regret in using the word "stupidly" when commenting on the story, since it added to the controversy, rather than "illuminated" it.

    To my mind, the very fact that Obama said in his original comment, when he first used the word "stupidly" that he was biased towards Professor Gates as a friend of his, it was an admission his comment should not be considered as some presidential edict or the like.

    The controversy continues because the talking heads, both sides of which have an axe to grind, are keeping the controversy alive - and let's not forget that black/white racism is still an issue in the US, despite improvements.

    And in case you're wondering about my own motives on Obama, no, I'm not black. I add that simply as full disclosure, not to hint at anything.

    In a previous comment (here ? thread ?) I said there is no need for the apologies often extracted from public officials. With the stream of such apologies demanded from all "injured" quarters, apologies have lost value, and are as common as ants at a picnic. And as useful.

    My intent in using Obama as an example for the PMO to follow was simply to illustrate that he and his staff should not let the MSM drive the issues unchallenged.

    In the case of the host, there was much speculation, accusation, consternation, condemnation, castigation ... some of which could have been avoided if the PM himself or his communications staff had stated unequivocally that it was absurd to suggest the PM would have put the host in his pocket. If the MSM continued to flog what should have been a dead horse, well, it speaks to the floggers, IMO.
  • jad
    sorry Gabby, I just don't buy it. This was originally part of a staged press conference, and the President's comment simply exacerbated the situation, besides being completely unnecessary.

    "his comment should not be considered as some presidential edict or the like."

    Sorry, when you are the president you don't have the luxury of deciding which comment is presidential and which is not.

    "And in case you're wondering about my own motives on Obama, no, I'm not black. I add that simply as full disclosure, not to hint at anything."

    WTF. Whether YOU are black or not is a lot less relevant than the President's skin tone. He needs to remember he is the President of ALL Americans, including white Cambridge policement, and not just President of black America. The fact that you felt it necessary to make this comment simply demonstrates how charged this whole situation has become because of the President's intervention.

    And according to CNN, he "has STILL not apologised".



    "
  • Gabby in QC
    Jad00, with all due respect, calm down ...
    "And according to CNN, he "has STILL not apologised".

    I'm sorry to have to point this out, but in a thread where the credibility of the MSM is the topic at hand, to quote back to me that because CNN said something, it must be so, well, sorry but it makes no sense at all.

    "Whether YOU are black or not is a lot less relevant than the President's skin tone."
    It's too bad you took that the wrong way. I thought my adding "... simply as full disclosure, not to hint at anything" was by way of an explanation, in case my motivation in regards to Obama's response to the Gates controversy was questioned.

    Look, we perceive the Obama apology, regret, whatever you wish to call it, differently, OK? I put out the Obama handling of the event as an example of how a prickly situation detracting from his current message, health care, was handled - properly, IMO. You believe differently, and that’s your prerogative. Surely we can disagree on this, a related but not the main issue: The Telegraph-Journal torqued the story. Why?

    BTW, why are you signing as "jad00" here, whereas at Akin's blog you signed as "jad" [by jad on Mon 27 Jul 2009 10:24 AM EDT] and at BLY you also usually sign as "jad" [jad said:
    July 25th, 2009 at 11:00 am] without the double 0.

    Unless you're pulling a "twit" caper like the one who was impersonating "wilson" over at Hunter's and elsewhere?

    If you are indeed the same "jad" as always, receive my abject apologies for thinking you may not be (s)he. That should satisfy your need of an apology - but then, I'm not Obama :-D

    OTOH, if you're an impersonator, well, picture me shrugging my shoulders at the sheer stupidity of such stunts.
  • jad
    I had a problem logging in as jad and got impatient and just added the 00. No great conspiracy here !

    On Obama, by all means lets agree to disagree. I generally agree with your opinions, which are always well expressed, so was really stunned that you seemed to be so far adrift on this, so I'm sorry if I came across too strongly.

    On Wafergate, this is one of the most disgusting stunts pulled by the media, with or without "pressure" from any other party as is being rumoured. It's great that they apologized, but I'm not sure why it took 20 days. In any case, if the editor and publisher have been let go (though how can you let a publisher go ?), then surely this should have been reported as part of the item. It is after all news, and certainly more deserving of being reported than the whole Wafergate incident.
  • Gabby in QC
    "No great conspiracy here !"
    Glad to hear.

    "It is after all news, and certainly more deserving of being reported than the whole Wafergate incident."
    Agreed. There was nothing on Global News w/Kevin Newman at 5:30 locally, nothing on Rad-Can at 6:00 pm, and heard something about it on Newsworld between 7:00 and 8:00 pm, although I was not paying close attention.

    Let's see what they say on the National at CBC and CTV.
  • hollinm
    Canadians have suspected for a long time that the media is biased. This flap over the waver and the subsequent apology simply confirms those suspicions. The media is no longer content to report factual, accurate information to the public so that they can make up their own minds. No wonder Prime Minister Harper has no use for the media. The editors of this paper who were responsible for inserting political bias into the news report should be removed. They have hurt the credibility of the reporters and maligned the reputation of the newspaper. All of this pales in comparison to the ridicule the PM of this country endured at the hands of a media who is consumed with pack like journalism. So sad, so sad that this is what journalism has become in the 21st century. The PM was right when he said it frankly is a low moment in journalism whoever is responsible for this. It is a terrible story.
  • Ron_in_Ottawa
    Every major paper, the CBC, CTV, Global etc all hyped this because it was an easy hit on Harper, requiring not effort. It is unlikely any of them will be so honest as to offer a public retraction. The very least they can do is examine the source of this big "lie" and freeze that person out of their operations. This is a prime example of the oft claimed anti-Conservative bias in the media. None of them bothered to check facts - they saw the opportunity to make Harper look bad and ran with it. This is Canadian journalism at its worst.
  • hollinm
    Absolutely true! As I said in my comments Ottawa is consumed with gotcha journalism and act in a pack mentality particularly when it is against Conservatives. This whole issue was nonsense but CTV ran with it all day adding tidbits as the day went by (who said what). It was a disgusting exhibition of yellow journalism. However, we will not see any coverage of the newspapers, either CBC or CTV, apology because that does not fit into the media's political agenda.
  • iowavette
    With the public so hungry for real news, what would possess reporters and editors to invent a narrative this bizarre? The good PM is getting the "Bush" treatment. God bless him, and God help him.
  • PeterLT
    If there was any doubts about the impartiality of the media I think those have been dispelled now. The reporters and their management should just take out membership in the Liberal Party and remove any doubt of who they really work for. Or maybe they can get a job at the CBC?
  • Gabby in QC
    Stephen, sorry, but the choice of orange for the "gossip and speculation" part was an unhappy one. It is unreadable on my iMac. Not dark enough.

    On the story:
    1. Was Monsignor Henneberry accurately quoted or not? Is he ready to retract, or has he done so already? Or was he misquoted, as David Akin himself was misquoted by one of his colleagues? http://davidakin.blogware.com/blog/_archives/20...
    2. If the two reporters did not include the story about the host in their report, who put it in?
    3. Following up on #2, if the two reporters did not include that "information" why was it included?
    4. Why the time lag in correcting the "statement of facts"?
    5. And finally, who owns this newspaper?

    President Obama's recent apology about his comment re: the Cambridge police in the matter of Professor Gates is a learning moment for our PM and his communications staff.
    Immediately after the Cambridge police demanded an apology, President Obama got on the air and apologized, trying to reconcile all sides. Although the talking heads are still yakking about it, I'm sure most Americans got a better explanation straight from the horse's mouth - Obama himself on national TV.

    In contrast, the PM's communications staff, rather than reacting immediately to the story, let it fester and spread beyond The Telegraph-Journal's fiction, until the PM himself set the record straight during one of the pressers at the G8. Since the PM's pressers are seldom broadcast in full on the three national networks, many Canadians probably did not get to hear the PM himself on the story. By that time, the story had gone global, and the PM's denial was viewed cynically as mere spin.

    To hopefully prevent such cynicism, I have often suggested, here and on other blogs, that a website should be put up with the express purpose of immediately setting the record straight on what the PM and members of his government have reportedly said and done. The PM's communications staff should not wait until reporters looking for a 10-second sound bite ask hurried questions in a scrum.
  • Gabby in QC
    Prime example of why I'd never make a good Twitterer (?). :-D
  • JDot
    LMAO, Gabby your posts are most def, not for Twitter. Great posts as always tho...

    I don't agree with the Obama comparison with reagrds to 'Wafergate". The PM communication team denied this "Wafergate" story right from the start. So I don't really think that holds up well.

    A better comparison is the Gaffe re:Iggy's, er, non G-8 comments. which the PM, right away corrected and said sorry.

    Funny thing is, Obama used PM Harper language on the "stupid" comment. And frankly I don't think Obama should have said sorry on that comment. I don't really know but whatever, great post as always Gabby, always love reading your posts..

    When are you going to start your own blog, I think the time has come.. :)
  • Gabby in QC
    Thanks, JDot ;-)
    Re: comparison to Obama, please see my reply to Jad if you're interested.

    My own blog? Posting comments already eats up a lot of my time, so I'd never get anything else done if I were to start one.
  • calgaryjunkie
    Fox News: We report. You decide.

    The Telegraph Journal: We fabricate. You sort it out.
  • skipper
    The Irving family owns this newspaper and Pual Zed is the ex son-in-law of one of the Irvings...
  • fernstalbert
    The Prime Minister has integrity. The same cannot be said of the MSM and their political masters. PM Harper forcefully denied this spurious accusation. Shame on the editors and owners of this publication. The retraction only came after the threat of litigation. Instead of reporting the news, the editor went for the cheap thrill of Church and Conservative bashing.
  • terry1
    As I recall it the PM has never stated he put the host in his mouth. He possibly has correctly stated he didn't put it in his pocket.
  • Omanator
    jAgain Terry is full of the brown stuff. The Priminister very clearly stated, when ever offered
    Communion in a church ceremony he will consume it.
  • terry1
    Omanator go look at the video on Warren's blog and then tell me who is full of the brown stuff. Its you and your reformatory wags. read WK's response below.
  • lauriercluboccassionalwaitress
    terry1 sees everything in Liberal red despite any semblance of reason. Corbell in the Calgary Herald explained that the wafer is consumed by protestants, normally after everyone in the church has received the host. Later juice is provided. She suggested that given the differences in the two churches PM Harper may have noticed everyone ingesting them right away in the catholic service, then he also son did the same according to the priest running the service. terry1 try to understand the gravity of attempting to corrupt our Canadian media. Objectivity starts by trying to put yourself in the other shoes for a moment. But you must have two left feet.
  • terry1
    lauriercluboccassionalwaitress ....pretty lame excuse for your leader's intolerable actions.
  • lauriercluboccassionalwaitress
    Pretty lame excuse for your intolerable partisan zealotry. Grow up and find some purpose.
  • terry1
    lauriercluboccassionalwaitress....I think you're really a dishwasher out of work.
  • hollinm
    Its none of you damn business what he did with the host. Get stuffed.
  • terry1
    Mervin, It is my business and its now the Country's as well to see how Harpo lied once more. Your ability to accept anything that protects the lying PM shows your weak back bone and partisan blindness.
  • hollinm
    Of course in your mind it has to be a lie. Despite the fact the Priest who
    gave the communion said he ate the host the people with tinfoil hats like
    you still think the PM lied. By the way the PM never said he took the host
    or what he did with it. So he did not lie. Do you honestly believe Canadians
    pay attention to this type of shit? It is crazy and you really need to think
    of something more serious to criticize the PM on. Iggy will be eating a lot
    of his previous statements big time in the not too distant future.

    Its interesting I see how of the Libs defending Iggy but simply criticize
    Harper. That speaks in volumes what Libs think of the carpetbagger.
  • terry1, you're right, but possibly because the PMO didn't stoop to dignifying the story.

    Of course, the priest that gave him the host confirmed early on that Mr. Harper did in fact consume the host. That should have been enough.
  • Richard
    fortunately we have a PM who's more interested in bringing the country out of the recession than reporting to you and your ilk regarding a private moment between him an his God.
  • David
    Stunning.

    As I stated a while back Kinsella looks like a fool running with this. He was not alone.There was a chance for a graceful exit with this story early on. Some chose not to take it.
  • terry1
    David, he does does he....you should read his response below. let's see if Harpo has the cojones to sue him. I'm taking bets he has no cojones.
  • terry1
    kinsella showed a video that does not show him putting the host in hsi mouth. You won't nail him on this.
  • Omanator
    As per usual the movie cuts off before he puts it in his mouth.
  • David
    WAFERGATE: THE VIDEO THE REFORMATORIES DON'T WANT YOU TO SEE

    HARPER'S WEEK FROM HELL CONTINUES

    KINSELLA ON KINSELLA: BULLSHIT

    IT'S GOING TO BE AN INTERESTING AUDIENCE WITH THE POPE, STEVE

    There may be more. It is not a question of nailing him with anything. It is just about his character. Dominc Leblanc suggested it be dropped. He didn't.
  • bluetech
    Skating much terry?The media fabricated... its that simple.
  • terry1
    No skating here bluetech..........I say Harpo is a liar and that he did not take that host. Video proof is there. He can sue Kinsella if he dares becuse WK will not back down. You must also remember that Kinsella is a close family friend of the Leblanc family
  • maryhines
    It was strange - Roberty Fife and CTV Newsnet had the Wafergate story on every 5 minutes.... but now that it is been proven to be a made-up story - Fife was on for 1 minute and Dan did not follow up with any questions.... Get this story off the air as soon as possible - it might show something negative against their liberal party.... If it was something that would bring shame to the PM - have it on every 5 minutes - but when it has been proven to be a negative story against the liberal party - hide it!.... What corruption we have in the media!
  • ontariotaxpayer
    Maryhines you expect integrity from today's lazy media? They would rather re-post other peoples storys instead of having to work and actually verify them.....Fife is the worst...nothing more then a Parliament Hill Gossip girl....lol
  • albertabob
    He has been known as "Fife the Knife" for a long time.
blog comments powered by Disqus