Also see more recent post, Northern Exposure...
Captain Ed continues to use his Canadian source to obtain banned information. Clearly he doesn't understand that this information is only suitable for those attending in person.
In the latest update from CQB, Captain outlines connections between Chretien, Adscam, and current cabinet officials under Paul Martin. Here's his close:
So links have emerged in Brault’s testimony to many of the people that Martin kept on as ministers or Parliamentary secretaries – even though Martin assured Canadians that he had thoroughly questioned all of his ministers and ensured that none of them had any involvement in the Adscam controversy.Now, I thought that this would bring down the government and destroy the Liberal party. However, I'm not so sure, based on the milquetoast responses to the ban by the Canadian bloggers. Plenty of bloggers in Canada are talking about the matter obliquely, but none have the courage to tell Gomery that his publication ban is useless in the internet age. If you want something secret in order to not tamper the jury pool of a future trial, close the doors and only allow counsel in.
If Brault’s testimony holds up, the reputations of Chrétien, Gagliano, and their teams will be shredded. But it looks like the reputations of Paul Martin’s Ministers, MPs, and organizers are going to be pretty tattered by the end of this as well.
The Canadian bloggers seem to think that their tiny, 100-hit blogs will be hunted down by the Federales and they'll be fined or imprisoned. Well, that's ridiculous. Gomery even alluded to the fact that he was stretching when he said his ban included non-news-media websites.
The expression "publication ban" as it is used in this decision, should be taken to have the meaning those words have been given in subsection 486(4.9) of the Criminal Code, which states that "no person shall publish in any way (...) any evidence taken, information given or submissions made at a hearing", in this case, a hearing of the Commission. In my interpretation of this disposition, "broadcast" includes a posting on the Internet.Colby Cosh (a Canadian journalist and blogger) provides interesting commentary about the publication ban (including the above tidbit) and pleads US bloggers to make the ban impotent by publicizing the story, since the efficacy of a publication ban must be considered before rights can be infringed upon. This would in effect free him and other Canadians up to discuss the information. (sigh)
Members of ARC visited several Canadian blogs today and attempted to post comments with the same material that CQB posted on April 2nd. Within minutes, the blog owners had removed the content, for fear of being hit by their government. Now, this just shows the complaceny that arrives with a little bit of socialism, as you cede power over to the government. You begin to fear the government more than you respect your rights.
From a technological standpoint, there are several issues... I posted this link to google on their comments... is that an infringement of the ban? What about google's cache of the canadian blog's page which contains links to Captains Quarters? Is that considered an infringement? What if I posted the Brault testimony in comments to a completely unrelated post from months ago? Could that blogger be faulted? We then linked to blog pages with links to pages with links to the information. (Isn't this ridiculous?) Would the blogger be held responsible for a link 4x removed from the offending US blogsite?
These are all valid questions (with simple answers). Yet, there seems to be this timidity up north which is extremely disappointing. See the comments from Bound By Gravity for examples of differing attitudes about government and its relationship to the citizen. It's not difficult to pick out the Canadians and the Yanks...
By the way, what difference does it make if Canadians seek out Captains Quarter's Blog from their home computer and get the information or whether they visit a Canadian blog and get the information? Heck, it'd be better if they got the ACTUAL TESTIMONY from reporters that were in the room instead of hearsay and secondhand info... I'm sure that any Canadian blogger charged with infringing the ban would be given plenty of stats regarding Canadian traffic to US sites for this topic. God knows that a lot of my traffic today has been from north of the border. I can only imagine what CQB has gotten today...
If this were to happen here in the US, I'd break the ban and wait for the black&white to pull up and wrestle me for the keyboard. This is the kind of situation where you end up in front of the highest court in the land with your name going into the law books (or in prison with your new best friend, Tiny, who btw won you in the last game of hearts). But, seriously... the likelihood of that, given the idiocy of this situation, is non-existent.
Note to Canadian readers - b l o g s w a r m
if thousands of you are discussing the issue, they'd have to go after each and every one of you. The information is already public in Canada, so what's the use in going after some citizen who simply recognizes reality?
Michelle Malkin, The Politicker, and (of course) the guys over at WizBang are discussing as well...
Angry in the Great White North echoes my sentiment that this story, while damaging, won't bring about a sea change in Canadian politics. Although I chalk it up to timidity in expecting more from their government, he sees that the Yankee connection (US bloggers pushing the story) won't settle well with the kind folks up north.
***UPDATE - 4/5 (and more info from 4/5 here***
More Canadian timidity here from the Meatriarchy... *Homer voice* ummm, meeeeat */Homer Voice*... (or perhaps they have their tongue planted firmly in cheek? Oh, wait.. no links to the offensive material, so it can't be that.)
It looks like the AG is going to decide whether to prosecute the canadian bloggers. Their timidity is going to kill them. Talk about trying to get the toothpaste back in the tube... what idiocy!
Perhaps the title of this post should be "Operation Canadian Bacon" instead...
ARC: St Wendeler