Lord Black is coming back

Discussion in 'Politics & Diplomacy' started by spider, May 2, 2012.

  1. spider

    spider Senior Member

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 2008
    Messages:
    1,214
    Likes Received:
    1
    Conrad Black, you know, Lord Whatshisface, who decided that the Canadian citizenship he so publicly scorned in order to don a splendid bathrobe in a foreign legislature was maybe an asset he shouldn't have discarded so readily but the Government has allowed him to enter Canada on a special dispensation. How about that?

    Conrad Black is a very clever and intelligent man whose writings I devour with great pleasure. That is not enough for me to excuse the insult he visited on me and every other Canadian when he dismissed the passport of our nation in order to further his ambitious vanity.

    Canada has many very wealthy citizens who have chosen to share their wealth with their fellow citizens. Our Hospitals, Universities and the Arts are generously endowed by their contributions. Conrad Black is not among their number.

    If Conrad has so little regard for this country I have no problem reciprocating in kind.
     
    #1

  2. gristle

    gristle Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2009
    Messages:
    2,314
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have my doubts that Black "scorned" his Canadian citizenship. I think it was more a case of him feeling that he was being forced to renounce it due to the government trying to block his peerage. As for his entry back into Canada on a temporary basis, there is nothing illegal about it. Others have been granted similar entry, so should Black's notoriety bar him from this? To my mind, I never felt insulted by Black's choice to do what he did. It was his choice - as it is for any Canadian.

    Concerning what Black may or may not have contributed in terms of charity, if he contributed (and he likely has), does that "buy" his way back into the country?

    In the end, I find it interesting that all but two charges against him were dropped - with one of those charges being based on a law that is considered to be on shaky ground in the U.S. Is the guy pompous at times? Yes. Is that criminal? No. He's done his time according to the law, lost much of the status he pursued and had his fortune drained.

    So far as I'm concerned, the guy should set himself up as a biographer/historian. He seems to have a real passion and skill at that. That kind of work can be done regardless of where he ends up living. I for one would not be comfortable if barring him entry back into Canada was based on vengeance rather than law or reason.
     
    #2
  3. Frank Godfrey

    Frank Godfrey Active Member

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2009
    Messages:
    343
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, this has the flavour of farce to me. The man has withstood the pillory, and as implied above, may even have emerged the better for it all. And still colourful after it all. Dual citizenship is allowed in this country. So Conrad, pledge your Canadian allegiance, and come on down .
     
    #3
  4. Urban Shocker

    Urban Shocker Doyenne

    Joined:
    Apr 23, 2007
    Messages:
    8,465
    Likes Received:
    0
    Clearly, the expression, "Once you go, Black, you never go back" doesn't apply to him.
     
    #4
  5. kEiThZ

    kEiThZ Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jul 31, 2008
    Messages:
    6,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    Honestly, I don't blame him for what he did, given the treatment that he got from Jean Chretien, bringing up the Nickel Resolution to specifically get his peerage denied. You have to wonder if Chretien would have done so, had Black been a card carrying Liberal, whose paper didn't criticize Chretien.

    The guy has been feted like a villain to be sure. But at the end of the day, he is born here. He is Canadian. And I for one, would not deny a fellow Canadian his entitlement to citizenship based on a disagreement of political views.

    What is truly odd, as one column, I recently read, put forward, was that the media turned on him, despite the fact that he had actually saved quite a few papers, and created quite a few jobs for writers. And he always had time for brilliant writers and reporters. The guy may have been pompous, but he clearly had a soft spot for those he considered brilliant. Odd schadenfreud to be sure.

    Even the way he's portrayed. Rich? Sure. But he's not some uber-billionaire as some portray. Actually, the guy is barely part of the real elite. It's just that he was so ostentatious about his wealth. And pompous. But should that be persecutable? His supposed crimes scarcely deserved the penalty he got....especially when you consider how few of those who caused the 2008 financial crisis went to prison. I have to wonder about the sanity of US proscecutors who zelously pursued Black over a few million but have never done anything about men who defrauded millions of folks of hundreds of billions of dollars.
     
    Last edited: May 12, 2012
    #5

Share This Page