Canwest Media

^ Again, you shouldn't criticize others when "adult" members of your own family can't even express themselves in a coherent manner 98% of the time.

Stay on topic.

^ Just pointing out the obvious.

rosencrentz wrote:Way too much anti-semitism being spouted here, although I have seen it, felt it, and lived it! It is a fact of life and "we" have learnt to live with it!
I don't care that "you" are jealous of the 2% of the population that control 8% of the "everything"!
That 8% of everything was earned not given to "us"!
Stop complaining and get off your butts and get to work and earn your own 8% of the "everything"!

Rosen, with all due respect, I do not think it is necessarily anti-semitism in nature to be critical of the Aspers. Most people who criticize the family do so for reasons entirely unrelated to the fact that they are Jews.

For example, Barry Shankerow was the most hated man in Winnipeg for a time in the mid 90's when he announced that he was selling the Winnipeg Jets to the highest bidder, regardless of if the new owners moved the team. I never recall anyone taking shots at him because of his ethnic background.

Don't get me wrong, I agree with what you say about Jews working their butts off to achieve success in the working world. Having friends in the Jewish community, I have seen first hand the pressure the parents put on Jewish kids to go to post-secondary schools. Many end up achieving great success.

However, I disagree with what you say about "getting off your butts and working" considering every ethnic group is different. For example, there are a disproportionate number of Irish-Canadians in the Police force, Italians/Portuguese in the construction industry, Filipinos in the manufacturing sector, etc. It has nothing to do with hard work.

If most people in your inner circle (friends/family) does a specific trade, you are much more likely to end up being in that occupation. It has nothing to do with work ethic. A carpenter is just as intelligent as a lawyer. They just happen to be intelligent in different ways.

LennyJessop wrote:

djh wrote:gom said: why should djhs POV concern me. it doesnt have to. then again why should anyones opinion concern anyone? belittling someones POV is often an attempt to discredit them entirely.

I find that to be a common and repeated tactic of some people who are losing an argument. It's much easier to try and discredit someone, than to actually take the time to counter their argument in a civil manner.

As you are doing and have done repeatedly concerning people of Jewish background? What, if any, were your original "arguments" because all I see coming from you and another poster is the same tired theories regarding Jewish culture and its supposed, very dangerous stranglehold on the rest of non-Jewish society.

miz point, if you could differentiate between a statement that was made to be the abolute truth and one that was made to point out that a term was simply overused and used very loosely you would understand his point.

EdWin wrote:^ Just pointing out the obvious.

Which has nothing to do with this thread......give it a rest or as someone else stated on page two in Serbo-Croat - Yawn, this is old.

djh wrote:miz point, if you could differentiate between a statement that was made to be the abolute truth and one that was made to point out that a term was simply overused and used very loosely you would understand his point.

There is no point or "abolute" truth to be found in his statements other than tired and worn conspiracy theories and cliches meant to taint one particular group of people, many of which DO NOT hold positions of power or have great amounts of wealth.

EdWin wrote:^ Again, you shouldn't criticize others when "adult" members of your own family can't even express themselves in a coherent manner 98% of the time.

You took the words right out of my mouth, Edwin....lol.

Miz point wrote:

EdWin wrote:^ Just pointing out the obvious.

Which has nothing to do with this thread......give it a rest or as someone else stated on page two in Serbo-Croat - Yawn, this is old.

So is your hypocritical judgment on others for their spelling. Anyway, I'm sure many people on here are aware of this, so I'll back down now.

LennyJessop wrote:

djh wrote:gom said: why should djhs POV concern me. it doesnt have to. then again why should anyones opinion concern anyone? belittling someones POV is often an attempt to discredit them entirely.

I find that to be a common and repeated tactic of some people who are losing an argument. It's much easier to try and discredit someone, than to actually take the time to counter their argument in a civil manner.

That a "cloaked" shot at moi?

There has been little belittled in this thread by moi. But every time I ask for something to be substantiated I get nothing but more unsubstantiated claims.

I hardly think I'm "losing" an argument in this thread. Simply because there is no argument.

Do me a favour. Go through my post's for today. Just today. And provide a simple fact to counter any of my posts.

Bet you won't...

Miz point wrote:

As you are doing and have done repeatedly concerning people of Jewish background? What, if any, were your original "arguments" because all I see coming from you and another poster is the same tired theories regarding Jewish culture and its supposed, very dangerous stranglehold on the rest of non-Jewish society.

Who have I attacked of Jewish background, besides the Aspers? I even reference a book by a Jewish author to help my argument about Canwest being slanted in some regards, especially when it comes to Middle Eastern affairs.

lenny jessops statement was not supposed to be the absolute truth but he was making a point.

grumpy old man wrote:

LennyJessop wrote:

djh wrote:gom said: why should djhs POV concern me. it doesnt have to. then again why should anyones opinion concern anyone? belittling someones POV is often an attempt to discredit them entirely.

I find that to be a common and repeated tactic of some people who are losing an argument. It's much easier to try and discredit someone, than to actually take the time to counter their argument in a civil manner.

That a "cloaked" shot at moi?

There has been little belittled in this thread by moi. But every time I ask for something to be substantiated I get nothing but more unsubstantiated claims.

I hardly think I'm "losing" an argument in this thread. Simply because there is no argument.

Do me a favour. Go through my post's for today. Just today. And provide a simple fact to counter any of my posts.

Bet you won't...

Why would you assume I was referring to you? Relax....

Please stay on topic.

Anyway, I am still waiting for additional sources to be trotted out to bolster - what was the argument again? - the positions by LJ and djh.....contentious or not, by all means share with us actual, cited examples because thus far all you have provided is a Newman snippet and a author bio and the names of other publications - and just that, names and nothing else.

EdWin wrote:

Miz point wrote:

EdWin wrote:^ Just pointing out the obvious.

Which has nothing to do with this thread......give it a rest or as someone else stated on page two in Serbo-Croat - Yawn, this is old.

So is your hypocritical judgment on others for their spelling. Anyway, I'm sure many people on here are aware of this, so I'll back down now.

haha...I had assumed that particular forum member was swearing in a language that I could not comprehend. Good on her, for taking the high road again!

djh wrote:i could write an essay on this subject but this is not the place to write it. i gave examples, marc edges book, losangeles jewish times, moment. discussing the realities of media ownership is NOT antisemitism. using taxpayers money to build shrines to pierre trudeau is NOT work. building stadiums, canwest baseball park, david aspers football debacle, is NOT work. running a country which recieves billions upon billions in foreign aid monthly is NOT work. calling me an antisemite does not make reality vanish. nor will it instill fear in me, which it is intended to do!

What shrine to Pierre Trudeau?

What has it to do with this thread?

Miz point wrote:

EdWin wrote:^ Just pointing out the obvious.

Which has nothing to do with this thread......give it a rest or as someone else stated on page two in Serbo-Croat - Yawn, this is old.

Kind of ironic, since you were the one to bring up djh "bad grammar" skills.

LennyJessop wrote:

Miz point wrote:

EdWin wrote:^ Just pointing out the obvious.

Which has nothing to do with this thread......give it a rest or as someone else stated on page two in Serbo-Croat - Yawn, this is old.

Kind of ironic, since you were the one to bring up djh "bad grammar" skills.

I said nothing regarding syntax. I am still waiting however for the provision of a cohesive argument and more sources, contentious or not.

LennyJessop wrote:

djh wrote:there were two attempts by paliament to regulate percentages of media ownership. one in 1970 and another in 2007. i am not aware of the exact details of the events or their reasons for failure.perhaps someone else with better computer skills can verify this for me, like in the past.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Media_ownership_in_Canada

Between 1990 and 2005 there were a number of media corporate mergers and takeovers in Canada. For example, in 1990, 17.3% of daily newspapers were independently owned; wheras in 2005, 1% were. These changes, among others, caused the Senate Standing Committee on Transport and Communications to launch a study of Canadian news media in March 2003. (This topic had been examined twice in the past, by the Davey Commission (1970) and the Kent Commission (1981), both of which produced recommendations that were never implemented in any meaningful way.)^[1][2]

The Senate Committee’s final report, released in June 2006, expressed concern about the effects of the current levels of news media ownership in Canada. Specifically, the Committee discussed their concerns regarding the following trends: the potential of media ownership concentration to limit news diversity and reduce news quality; the Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission]] (CRTC) and Competition Bureau’s ineffectiveness at stopping media ownership concentration; the lack of federal funding for the CBC and the broadcaster’s uncertain mandate and role; diminishing employment standards for journalists (including less job security, less journalistic freedom, and new contractual threats to intellectual property); a lack of Canadian training and research institutes; and difficulties with the federal government’s support for print media and the absence of funding for the internet-based news media.^[3][4]

The report provided 40 recommendations and 10 suggestions (for areas outside of federal government jurisdiction), including legislation amendments that would trigger automatic reviews of a proposed media merger if certain thresholds are reached, and CRTC regulation revisions to ensure that access to the broadcasting system is encouraged and that a diversity of news and information programming is available through these services.^[5][6]

What is the purpose of this post? If posted in defence of djh's claim that the Canadian government has made an attempt at controlling the "problem" of concentrated ownership of the media by a certain ethnic minority it fails.

If it is intended to demonstrate that ownership of the media in general was being concentrated by too few then it is as it should be.

The government always get's involved when any business threatens to be overtaken and become a monopoly. That is what should happen.

Can you be more specific?

grumpy old man wrote:

djh wrote:i could write an essay on this subject but this is not the place to write it. i gave examples, marc edges book, losangeles jewish times, moment. discussing the realities of media ownership is NOT antisemitism. using taxpayers money to build shrines to pierre trudeau is NOT work. building stadiums, canwest baseball park, david aspers football debacle, is NOT work. running a country which recieves billions upon billions in foreign aid monthly is NOT work. calling me an antisemite does not make reality vanish. nor will it instill fear in me, which it is intended to do!

What shrine to Pierre Trudeau?

What has it to do with this thread?

Well to be fair, the Aspers have been known to have strong ties to the Liberal Party, especially when the Liberal Party were in power from 1993-2006.

LennyJessop wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:

LennyJessop wrote:

djh wrote:gom said: why should djhs POV concern me. it doesnt have to. then again why should anyones opinion concern anyone? belittling someones POV is often an attempt to discredit them entirely.

I find that to be a common and repeated tactic of some people who are losing an argument. It's much easier to try and discredit someone, than to actually take the time to counter their argument in a civil manner.

That a "cloaked" shot at moi?

There has been little belittled in this thread by moi. But every time I ask for something to be substantiated I get nothing but more unsubstantiated claims.

I hardly think I'm "losing" an argument in this thread. Simply because there is no argument.

Do me a favour. Go through my post's for today. Just today. And provide a simple fact to counter any of my posts.

Bet you won't...

Why would you assume I was referring to you? Relax....

I assumed you were referring to moi because your quote referred to moi. If you were not referring to moi I withdraw my implication.

But... My request stands: Go through my post's for today. Just today. And provide a simple fact to counter any of my posts.

the shrine to pierre trudeau i was referring to was the CMHR. its connected to this thread by its relation to the asper family. in the artists illustrations of the main foyer of the CMHR. there is a gigantic portrait of PET. his relationship to human rights is unclear to me at this time. i know there is another thread to the CMHR, so i wont bring it up here again.

LennyJessop wrote:

EdWin wrote:

Miz point wrote:

EdWin wrote:^ Just pointing out the obvious.

Which has nothing to do with this thread......give it a rest or as someone else stated on page two in Serbo-Croat - Yawn, this is old.

So is your hypocritical judgment on others for their spelling. Anyway, I'm sure many people on here are aware of this, so I'll back down now.

haha...I had assumed that particular forum member was swearing in a language that I could not comprehend. Good on her, for taking the high road again!

Yes, good on her for finally acknowledging the FACT that of course I would know what language that was because I worked in that region and had to understand it rather well.....HVALA.

Now go out and frame an argument please instead of engaging in conjecture.

LennyJessop wrote:

grumpy old man wrote:

djh wrote:i could write an essay on this subject but this is not the place to write it. i gave examples, marc edges book, losangeles jewish times, moment. discussing the realities of media ownership is NOT antisemitism. using taxpayers money to build shrines to pierre trudeau is NOT work. building stadiums, canwest baseball park, david aspers football debacle, is NOT work. running a country which recieves billions upon billions in foreign aid monthly is NOT work. calling me an antisemite does not make reality vanish. nor will it instill fear in me, which it is intended to do!

What shrine to Pierre Trudeau?

What has it to do with this thread?

Well to be fair, the Aspers have been known to have strong ties to the Liberal Party, especially when the Liberal Party were in power from 1993-2006.

And so do the Richardsons.....hmmmm.....can we find a WASP conspiracy now?