|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Bulsajo

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 11:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
Semi-interesting viewpoint from Kirk Lapointe (yes, yes, I know- it's a loathesome 'Sun' source):
Quote: |
That Newman kept these tapes in the vault for a decade before unfurling them suggests he really did hope to reconcile a falling-out with Mulroney about documents he'd been promised to complete a broader, presumably less unflattering account of his leadership. The fact that Newman could have released the tapes sooner, when they'd have done much more damage, suggests a real loyalty to the man he befriended as a political boy.
The question, in each case, is loyalty to the audience. This is at the heart of why I didn't fully enjoy the experience of The Secret Mulroney Tapes. With such incendiary material, didn't we deserve the unvarnished truth sooner? I felt I should have been reading this book in 1995, not 2005.
Which is not to detract from its qualities.
Those of us somewhat in the know recognize in the book the voice of a PM we learned to duck. Profane. Tantrum-ridden. Cruelly funny. Insecurities masked as arrogance. Fears masked as rage. You wouldn't want to negotiate with someone like that.
Give Newman full credit for building a friendship that yielded great candour. |
Full article:
http://www.canada.com/vancouver/vancouversun/news/books/story.html?id=a5ff7e0a-9ba4-4c89-8765-7ba305faad1e
Quote: |
Give Newman full credit for building a friendship that yielded great candour. |
Of course there is a flip-side viewpoint to this which is not nearly so kind... |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Manner of Speaking

Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Mon Sep 19, 2005 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
That Newman kept these tapes in the vault for a decade before unfurling them suggests he really did hope to reconcile a falling-out with Mulroney about documents he'd been promised to complete a broader, presumably less unflattering account of his leadership. The fact that Newman could have released the tapes sooner, when they'd have done much more damage, suggests a real loyalty to the man he befriended as a political boy. |
Oh come on. You're kidding, right? How much did Newman pay the spin doctor to write that?
If he "wanted to be loyal to a man he befriended as a political boy", why did he record the tapes in the first place? Better yet, if he wanted to show his loyalty, why didn't he toss the tapes a long time ago?
This reminds me of Belinda Stronach's claim that she crossed the House "because she was concerned about separatism and did it for the good of the country". If she did it for the good of the country, why did she make getting a Cabinet post a condition of signing on with the Liberals? Why didn't she just do it because, as she claimed, "it was the right thing to do?"
Newman stands to make a big pile of money from publishing these tapes...if he was "showing his friendship" by waiting until now to publish them, then why couldn't he show his friendship by just destroying them? Or by giving the originals and all copies to Mulroney?
It's because Newman is just as much of a political W H O R E as Stronach.
Pardon for coming across so strong, Bulsajo...it's not you I'm going after, it's the BS in the article. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Moldy Rutabaga

Joined: 01 Jul 2003 Location: Ansan, Korea
|
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 3:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
Seems like an unlikely source, the Sun.. usually they're a little centre-right to be supporting Newman like this.
>Give Newman full credit for building a friendship that yielded great candour.
I give him no credit. As MOR said, come on. Betraying your friend for a book sale is friendship? Lying about taping a conversation is candor? Waiting a decade until public interest has returned is a moral virtue?
Ken:> |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Bulsajo

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Tue Sep 20, 2005 4:02 am Post subject: |
|
|
Manner of Speaking wrote: |
Pardon for coming across so strong, Bulsajo...it's not you I'm going after, it's the BS in the article. |
Not at all, that's why I posted it, it took quite a different tack from most others I had come across.
And I agree 100% about Stronach as well.
I started to read an excerpt of Newman's book and couldn't finish- he was going for 4 paragraphs about how he received a phonecall from the PM. It was painful reading. Still, I'll see if I can't dig it up.
Here:
Quote: |
The phone rang at an awkward moment, which turned embarrassing when my wife walked into our living room and declared, "It's the prime minister. He wants to speak to you."
Her announcement was met with jeers from our neighbours, gathered for a pre-Christmas tipple in 1986 at our seaside house, cantilevered over a cliff, facing Haro Strait on Canada's extreme western edge.
Across the water I could spot the shores of San Juan Island and the American flag being whipped by the winter wind.
"Why would 'Lyin' Brian' be phoning you?" asked Ross, our immediate neighbour.
"Maybe he wants advice on when to quit. I can tell him: Yesterday!"
Frank, the retired English gentleman who helped with our garden, and several others chimed in, making it very clear that none of these hardy and practical west coasters believed for a minute that anyone in Cordova Bay, the tiny village nestled into a notch on the coast of Vancouver Island where we lived, would be likely to receive a call from a prime minister -- even Brian Mulroney, whose reputation ranked just below that of the harbour seals that fouled local fish nets.
I picked up the phone in the kitchen to hear that resonant, rain-barrel voice of his ask, "Where are you, Peter?"
This was his standard opening ploy. While the PMO switchboard could always locate me, he never knew if I was in a suitable place for one of his rants about "those myopic, incestuous bastards" in the Ottawa press gallery, or the latest perfidy by "that asshole" Pierre Trudeau.
"I'm at home," I replied, "entertaining the neighbours . . ." |
http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/1126711078069_122120278?s_name=&no_ads= |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
RachaelRoo

Joined: 15 Jul 2005 Location: Anywhere but Ulsan!
|
Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2005 9:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Manner of Speaking"]
Quote: |
?
This reminds me of Belinda Stronach's claim that she crossed the House "because she was concerned about separatism and did it for the good of the country". If she did it for the good of the country, why did she make getting a Cabinet post a condition of signing on with the Liberals? Why didn't she just do it because, as she claimed, "it was the right thing to do?"
It's because Newman is just as much of a political W H O R E as Stronach.
. |
I will not tolerate any Belinda bashing! I remember watching the Conservative policy convention on CPAC - she stood up when her allotted 30 seconds arrived and began making a point about how the Conservative party should adopt a favourable attitude towards gay marriage in order to become a mainstream party. A fair point she was entitled to make, whether you agree or not. She was booed down within the first few seconds to the point where she could not continue. If they didn't want to adopt her stance - fine. But to shout her down at a POLICY CONVENTION so that she couldn't even speak is ridiculous. I think that is when she might have begun to realize that she had been fighting for the wrong side all along.
She took the cabinet post because it was the smart move and because she could.
I know I'm going to get ripped apart for this, but:
why the F is it that when a woman makes a pragmatic move she is torn apart? This is politics, and rich or not, beautiful and blond or not, she was elected by less than 1% in her riding and was always a very left leaning Conservative.
She would have been an idiot not to negotiate a cabinet post in a minority governnment situation where the Liberals faced a vote of confidence which they were going to lose by one vote.
I respect that woman. And I've never voted Liberal or Conservative in my entire life. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Bulsajo

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2005 12:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
RachaelRoo wrote: |
why the F is it that when a woman makes a pragmatic move she is torn apart? |
So, you view it as a gender issue?
I don't.
I know I would feel the same way about her actions were she a man. Granted the vocabulary used for some of the insults would be different, but the scorn and ridicule would have the same intensity.
If it helps I'm pretty certain Manner of Speaking- if asked- would produce a sworn affadavit that the word *beep* was used in a gender-neutral, non-misogynist way. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
canuckistan Mod Team


Joined: 17 Jun 2003 Location: Training future GS competitors.....
|
Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2005 3:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Buls, did you read Newman's rebuttal to the brou ha ha over his book in the National Post the other day?
He sais that he actually left out the "really frank" parts of his interviews with Mulroo in his book (!)
I have no sympathy for Brian. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Manner of Speaking

Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Wed Sep 21, 2005 3:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="RachaelRoo"]
Manner of Speaking wrote: |
Quote: |
This reminds me of Belinda Stronach's claim that she crossed the House "because she was concerned about separatism and did it for the good of the country". If she did it for the good of the country, why did she make getting a Cabinet post a condition of signing on with the Liberals? Why didn't she just do it because, as she claimed, "it was the right thing to do?"
It's because Newman is just as much of a political W H O R E as Stronach.  |
...She took the cabinet post because it was the smart move and because she could... |
She took the cabinet post to advance her career. Period. She did it regardless of how it would affect the Conservatives in her riding who worked to get her elected, and she LIED to her constituents when she claimed that she only did it "for the good of the country".
Quote: |
I know I'm going to get ripped apart for this, but:
why the F is it that when a woman makes a pragmatic move she is torn apart? This is politics, and rich or not, beautiful and blond or not, she was elected by less than 1% in her riding and was always a very left leaning Conservative. |
You're the one whose so concerned about her gender, not me. She's proven herself to be a political W H O R E as far as I'm concerned, and so has Peter Newman. She screwed over the party that got her into politics in the first place. What has her gender got to do with it? Where did you see me say anything that was LESS critical of Newman than of Stronach? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Bulsajo

Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Thu Sep 22, 2005 8:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
canuckistan wrote: |
Buls, did you read Newman's rebuttal to the brou ha ha over his book in the National Post the other day?
He sais that he actually left out the "really frank" parts of his interviews with Mulroo in his book (!)
I have no sympathy for Brian. |
No I missed that. I am pleased that the outcome of publishing this book appears to be bad for both them personally. (Although for Newman it is financially and professionally a jackpot). |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
igotthisguitar

Joined: 08 Apr 2003 Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
Posted: Sun Oct 02, 2005 4:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sleazy CTV Television backs "Slimy Crook" Brian Mulroney
26 Sep 2005
(Maybe one of the reasons Sleazy CTV Television backs "Slimy Crook" Brian Mulroney is because "Son of a Slime-Bag" Ben Muilroney works for CTV?!)
Revelations of Brian Mulroney's slimy character recently surfaced in the Newman's "The Secret Mulroney Tapes". These were recordings made by reporter Newman of Mulroney when he was P.M. Along with his shameless self-praise Mulroney was filled with festering rancor at any and all of his supposed enemies especially in Parliament and in the Canadian media.
Strangely CTV Television in reporting on the new Mulroney book brought on a spin doctor to do damage control for the disgraced former P.M. saying Mulroney made great contributions to Canada by bringing in the the Free Trade Deal and the Goods and Services Tax! Where was CTV getting its confirmation that these two Mulroney initiatives were successful? The Free Trade Deal may have helped and made rich producers even wealthier but it drove hundreds of thousands of Canadian jobs south to the U.S. and Mexico. At the time the NAFTA Free Trade was initiated it decimitated the job market in large Canadian manufacturing centers and provinces like Ontario.
As far as the GST tax pulling in a lot of money to the federal coffers, well it probably did but what were those $Billions used for? It certainly wasn't used to fund health care for Canadians and as a matter of fact after the implementation of the GST health care for Canadians ( especially under John Chretien and Paul Martin ) was rolled back and heavily restricted. What other programs for helping Canadians did Free Trade or the GST provide? Who knows but what we do know is that producers of raw materials in Canada got richer as hundreds of thousands of Canadian jobs went south.
Also we know that that the Federal coffers were overflowing from loot from the GST and Unemployment Insurance but who got any benefits out of those $Billions except maybe the big Canadian banks and companies who were allowed by their friends in Parliament to hold onto and use those $Billions to incease thier already massive wealth.
As far as sanitizing Brian Mulroney's sleazy, crooked political record,CTV and the rest of Canada's Right Wing media will have to do a lot more hard work because Mulroney's crimes are well recorded not only in the new Newman text but also in such books as: "On the Take - Crime, Corruption and Greed in the Mulroney Years" (still available on Amazon.ca) Why Brian Mulroney is not in federal prison for his numerous and egregious crimes is really only a testament to all the high placed people in government who wer as corrupt and "on the take" as he was! k.hawley
p.s.Brian Mulroney who loved praise and adulation "had" himself awarded the "Order of Canada" but this was after he had decimated the Progressive Conservative Party and gotten booted out of office! This was obviously pay-back from his big shot pals in govt. whose palms he greased.The question remains though and that is "Who would want to be in any club with the likes of Brian Mulroney?
Another question no one in the media or govt. is asking is "Where is the Justice in Canada" when a sleazy crook like Brian Mulroney can,when he was Prime Minister, corrupt and subvert the Canadian Govt.,like manipulating the Senate and the RCMP, quashing legal suits against him and intimidating and villifying witnesses plus giving favours like govt. contracts to his pals and getting huge kickbacks for them etc.etc. all for his own greedy purposes. If Mulroney can get away with and have immunity for his many heinous crimes why shouldn't evereybody do the same as him and forget about morality and law and order?
http://bc.indymedia.org/newswire/display/5442/index.php |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
igotthisguitar

Joined: 08 Apr 2003 Location: South Korea (Permanent Vacation)
|
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 12:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
Mulroney sues Peter C. Newman, alleging misuse of confidential information
COLIN PERKEL
Thu Nov 24,10:58 PM ET
TORONTO (CP) - Brian Mulroney has filed a lawsuit against friend Peter C. Newman, accusing the celebrated Canadian author of turning dozens of private conversations with the former prime minister into "scandalous gossip" in his controversial new book.
In a statement of claim that portrays him as a man deeply betrayed by a longtime confidant, Mulroney argues that Newman violated their agreement by using more than 90 hours of tape-recorded discussions as the basis for his recent best-seller.
"Brian Mulroney and Peter Newman were friends," the statement of claim states.
"So trusting was their relationship that Mr. Mulroney came to regard Newman with the affection and respect normally reserved for an older brother."
The claim for misuse of confidential information, filed this week in Ontario Superior Court, traces a 35-year friendship during which Newman came to be regarded as part of the Mulroney family.
It's a relationship that crashed and burned with the publication two months ago of Newman's book, The Secret Mulroney Tapes: Unguarded Confessions of a Prime Minister.
The statement of claim describes the book as "instant" and alleges Newman embarked on an "artfully planned" publicity campaign after its publication that was "executed with uncommon duplicity."
Instead of using the materials for a serious book on Mulroney's political career, Newman imparted the information "like scandalous gossip in the nature of a 'confession,"' the claim says.
In an interview Thursday, Mulroney spokesman Luc Lavoie said the "carefully drafted" statement of claim speaks for itself, although he denied suggesting that Mulroney originally never intended to sue his estranged friend.
"I don't know that he ever said that he wouldn't sue," said Lavoie. "I don't think it was ever brought up."
Mulroney lawyer Ken Prehogan refused to comment on the statement of claim, while a spokesperson for lawyer Michael Levine, who represents Newman, said the author was out of the country and refused to discuss his defence tactics.
Statements of claim contain allegations that have not been proven in court. No statement of defence has yet been filed.
When the book was published, Mulroney blamed himself for having been so open.
"'I was reckless in talking with Peter C. Newman,"' Mulroney said at the time through spokesman Lavoie.
"'This was my mistake and I'm going to have to live with it."'
http://news.yahoo.com/s/cpress/20051125/ca_pr_on_na/mulroney_sues_newman;_ylt=AuBQHeLZWRGvQ8jX716nvv9iyL4F;_ylu=X3oDMTA3OWI1ZGNqBHNlYwM3Mzc- |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Manner of Speaking

Joined: 09 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Fri Nov 25, 2005 2:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
...and in the remaining portion of the article, the Canadian Press said:
Quote: |
For his part, Newman has previously denied Mulroney's accusations that he betrayed an old friend. The lawsuit is based on Mulroney's claim that Newman promised in 1985 to write a "definitive biography" of the controversial former Conservative prime minister in exchange for unparalleled access. Newman abandoned the project almost a decade later after Mulroney refused to release personal notes on the grounds that more time was needed to assess his legacy.
At that point, Newman was obliged to turn over all the confidential material he had gathered, the statement of claim argues. Instead, he wrote the book and also proffered the profanity-laden tapes for a CBC-TV documentary.
The suit makes no direct claim for damages; instead, Mulroney wants any profits Newman makes from the book or from the special access he was granted to go to two hospitals in Toronto and Montreal. Mulroney also wants all the material, including Newman's tapes, turned over to the National Archives of Canada. "The National Archives by definition will make them available to everybody," Lavoie said.
For Newman, it's the second time in little more than a week that he's been hit by a lawsuit from a prominent Canadian figure who also happened to be an old friend. Last week, a process server delivered the author and journalist a statement of claim that accused him of libelling disgraced newspaper magnate Conrad Black in his 2004 memoir Here Be Dragons.
http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1132831234972&call_pageid=968332188774&col=968350116467
|
As much as I dislike Mulroney, Newman is no saint either. I think Mulroney's lawsuit is a great idea. The money could/should go to some deserving hospitals, rather than line the pockets of some opportunistic bottom feeder whose been around too long. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|