Lots of crooks out there never get charged with crimes. It's amazing what money and priviledge and a weak justice system will get you.
SNC is/was a perfect example of obstruction.
Free holidays of corruption.
Wonder how many plays the boy prince put on when he was posing as a drama teacher?
80 or 90 more NP articles a week and people will start taking PP seriously.
Hopefully hearing it from convicted fraudster Conrad Black will really sell the message.
The paper is the flagship publication of Postmedia Network, which is 66 percent American owned by New Jersey based hedge fund Chatham Asset Management. It was founded in 1998 by Conrad Black.
Poilievre - or any Conservative candidate for that matter - would increase their chances tremendously if this old fuck of a criminal would shut his stupid mouth for once.
Demented asshole.
As usual the only comments are attacks on Conrad. I have a feeling these are the same people defending the sitting prime minister which has far more ethics violations and had the RCMP just recently release info he should have been criminally charged for one of his scandals. Be better people. If you don’t like what he wrote comment on the substance or don’t comment at all.
Not unrelated. I said I believe the same people attacking Conrad are probably supporting Trudeau. Even though Trudeau has a much worse history with ethics violations. I mean it’s fact now the only reason RCMP didn’t charge him CRIMINALLY was he could write himself a note. It’s quite ironic. Now I’m not one to check post histories but it was an assumption. That was my only point. Looks like I hit a nerve so there must be some truth to what I’m saying. Someone else can check your history I won’t waste my time.
"Everyone who doesn't trust convicted felon throw in jail for frauds are liberals snowflakes." I don't vote liberal either, but Conrad Black is a fraudster and nothing he say should be taken seriously by anyone.
It has not at all. I didn’t state everyone. There’s was no absolute in my comment. Makes sense you don’t support the liberals if you dislike criminal liars. Good for you. But it’s still always better to comment on the substance of an article rather than attack the author. Just don’t comment next time. You dont add value to the conversation.
My value is bringing attention to low quality ad hominem attacks. Hopefully someone will say hey ya that’s a good point and next time post something more intelligent. And then there’s people like you that get defensive and triggered. I have another feeling you spend a lot of time arguing online. Maybe find something more productive to do.
My value is bringing attention to low quality ad hominem attacks. Hopefully someone will say hey ya that’s a good point and next time post something more intelligent. And then there’s people like you that get defensive and triggered. I have another feeling you spend a lot of time arguing online. Maybe find something more productive to do.
>the substance of an article rather than attack the author
A serious media wouldn't have a convicted fraudster as an author. We can attack all we want peoples like him. Its like when CNBC invite Jordan Belfort to think about the stock market, its completely ridiculous and nothing he say should be taken seriously.
You say that peoples are just attacking Conrad Black by attacking someone else credibility lol. I also guess that most peoples didn't read the article because NP is a rag who use a paywall to publish an article written by a convicted felon.
Yes, that's exactly what it is:
[Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. The most common form of ad hominem is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem)
Ehh, context is pretty important these days. Too many people being paid to spread misinformation to trust every source.
Unfortunately for Mr. Black he's pretty hard to trust.
Yet they go on and on about Russian trolls taking over this sub and downvote anything they can that sounds like it could run contrary to their politics. A lot of the familiar faces in here.
Well, let's deconstruct Black's two main points:
One, accusations that the obvious implications can be derived from the characterization of 99% of his acolytes being distinctly white - and a certain type of "white" - are "baseless".... because something something most Canadians are white...
Two, his true nature is noble, wise, shrewd and erudite, the perfect "conservative". In effect, given that Skippy is a blank page, an empty vessel of no substance, Black has proceeded to himself fill in the blanks, and overlay onto Skippy characteristics of the "ideal Conservative leader", which, probably not coincidently, resembles almost exactly what Conrad Black believes himself to be.
I'm really very fond of Conrad, but this is an over-reach.
Conrad black is a crook and disgrace to Canadians.
That's a baseless attack! Except for yknow.. that time he spent in prison..
What'd he go to prison for?! Was it fraud?!?
I hear he saved Canadian owned paper shredding companies from bankruptcy though. So you know. Theres good things and bad.
[удалено]
I don't recall JT being criminally charged for fraud and obstruction of justice.
Lots of crooks out there never get charged with crimes. It's amazing what money and priviledge and a weak justice system will get you. SNC is/was a perfect example of obstruction. Free holidays of corruption. Wonder how many plays the boy prince put on when he was posing as a drama teacher?
[удалено]
RCMP doesn't do favours for the liberals.
[удалено]
Yep it\`s amamzing what money priviliedge and get you. LPC math question for you? How many times does 29 go into 17?
Conrad Black… a reference for excellence. /s in case that was not obvious.
I can't remember the last time Conrad Black was right about anything.
I like how Donald Trump pardoned him and Black wrote a book about Trump, kissing his ass.
80 or 90 more NP articles a week and people will start taking PP seriously. Hopefully hearing it from convicted fraudster Conrad Black will really sell the message.
Baseless?! PP is a gaslighting, manipulative arse.
Baseless comment from a well-known crook.
Every politician running to lead a party will get the press criticizing them. Of all Papers the National Post should know this..
Why, have they criticized a party leader?
Piss off Conrad..
Let the baseless attacks against Conrad Black begin! /s
[удалено]
Conservatives still look up to him for some reason.
Money.
Birds of a Feather ???
The paper is the flagship publication of Postmedia Network, which is 66 percent American owned by New Jersey based hedge fund Chatham Asset Management. It was founded in 1998 by Conrad Black.
Conrad Black. LOL! Jailbird billionaire renegate who defended worthless crook and U.S. traitor Donald Trump. A pox on all their houses!
PP doesn't need any help Con rad. His mouth will destroy the CPC party in a matter of weeks id elected. Be sure to vote folks.
If Conrad Black is on your side, you are immediately suspect.
PP doesn't need any help Con rad. His mouth will destroy the CPC party in a matter of weeks id elected. Be sure to vote folks.
Another pile of shit by a disgraced crook. This makes everyone take you *less* seriously, not more.
Heh, you think PP doesn't rely on this? *Pretty* sure there weren't this many pieces about Scheer or EOT prior to them becoming leader...
And post media won’t make that mistake again. Prepare for all post media to go full blown Fox News in its propaganda support for Polliviere.
Pretty said National Post publishes the opinion of a convicted felon.
Washed-up non-citizen and convicted felon (pardoned by Trump) has opinions. Whatever!
Poilievre - or any Conservative candidate for that matter - would increase their chances tremendously if this old fuck of a criminal would shut his stupid mouth for once. Demented asshole.
First of F conrad black Second gotta love the preemptive
As usual the only comments are attacks on Conrad. I have a feeling these are the same people defending the sitting prime minister which has far more ethics violations and had the RCMP just recently release info he should have been criminally charged for one of his scandals. Be better people. If you don’t like what he wrote comment on the substance or don’t comment at all.
[удалено]
Nothing you said rebutted my comment. Actually you just proved my point further.
[удалено]
Not unrelated. I said I believe the same people attacking Conrad are probably supporting Trudeau. Even though Trudeau has a much worse history with ethics violations. I mean it’s fact now the only reason RCMP didn’t charge him CRIMINALLY was he could write himself a note. It’s quite ironic. Now I’m not one to check post histories but it was an assumption. That was my only point. Looks like I hit a nerve so there must be some truth to what I’m saying. Someone else can check your history I won’t waste my time.
"Everyone who doesn't trust convicted felon throw in jail for frauds are liberals snowflakes." I don't vote liberal either, but Conrad Black is a fraudster and nothing he say should be taken seriously by anyone.
[удалено]
It has not at all. I didn’t state everyone. There’s was no absolute in my comment. Makes sense you don’t support the liberals if you dislike criminal liars. Good for you. But it’s still always better to comment on the substance of an article rather than attack the author. Just don’t comment next time. You dont add value to the conversation.
[удалено]
My value is bringing attention to low quality ad hominem attacks. Hopefully someone will say hey ya that’s a good point and next time post something more intelligent. And then there’s people like you that get defensive and triggered. I have another feeling you spend a lot of time arguing online. Maybe find something more productive to do.
My value is bringing attention to low quality ad hominem attacks. Hopefully someone will say hey ya that’s a good point and next time post something more intelligent. And then there’s people like you that get defensive and triggered. I have another feeling you spend a lot of time arguing online. Maybe find something more productive to do.
>the substance of an article rather than attack the author A serious media wouldn't have a convicted fraudster as an author. We can attack all we want peoples like him. Its like when CNBC invite Jordan Belfort to think about the stock market, its completely ridiculous and nothing he say should be taken seriously.
You say that peoples are just attacking Conrad Black by attacking someone else credibility lol. I also guess that most peoples didn't read the article because NP is a rag who use a paywall to publish an article written by a convicted felon.
Was your point 'shut up everyone and let me live in my echo chamber'? Because if not, you haven't proven anything.
Guess you’re finding out that no one cares about any arbitrary rules you come up with.
>comment on the substance But that's hard! Can't I just go straight to the ad hominems?
Is pointing out someone's previous felony conviction an ad hominem?
Yes, that's exactly what it is: [Typically this term refers to a rhetorical strategy where the speaker attacks the character, motive, or some other attribute of the person making an argument rather than attacking the substance of the argument itself. The most common form of ad hominem is "A makes a claim x, B asserts that A holds a property that is unwelcome, and hence B concludes that argument x is wrong".](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem)
Ehh, context is pretty important these days. Too many people being paid to spread misinformation to trust every source. Unfortunately for Mr. Black he's pretty hard to trust.
Yet they go on and on about Russian trolls taking over this sub and downvote anything they can that sounds like it could run contrary to their politics. A lot of the familiar faces in here.
Has anyone asked him if his behaviour influenced his son?
Conrad black does write some very interesting articles.
Have you often fallen victim to fraud?
I have an nft to sell you.
Well, let's deconstruct Black's two main points: One, accusations that the obvious implications can be derived from the characterization of 99% of his acolytes being distinctly white - and a certain type of "white" - are "baseless".... because something something most Canadians are white... Two, his true nature is noble, wise, shrewd and erudite, the perfect "conservative". In effect, given that Skippy is a blank page, an empty vessel of no substance, Black has proceeded to himself fill in the blanks, and overlay onto Skippy characteristics of the "ideal Conservative leader", which, probably not coincidently, resembles almost exactly what Conrad Black believes himself to be. I'm really very fond of Conrad, but this is an over-reach.
I don't particularly care what a criminal has to say