Clear Full Forecast

Cherish your rights and freedoms

By Jack deWit

Thursday, May 12, 2005 06:34 PM

-By Jack deWit 

Being a somewhat outspoken person, yours truly was flattered at the request to put in writing my opinions on a bi-weekly basis for this forum. I thought that such positions were reserved for the literary intellectuals of society and those educated graduates from journalism school. It appears that being opinionated can also appeal to some publishers who wish to listen to the voices of average citizens. Therefore, I shall offer my finest endeavor to make this column one of interest.

The intention of this writer is not restricted to any particular subject matter. Attention will be given to events and people that are special in making up our social fabric particularly in the areas in British Columbia that are forgotten by the majority in the lower regions of the province. Newsworthy stories of ife, and its ups and downs, the good and the bad will be examined. Some of my opinions may be controversial; others may give praise where credit is due but seldom recognized. The single characteristic that will remain constant will be to narrate the truth in regards to all the subject matter. There will be no attempt to degrade a reputation, however, the true facts must be relayed to the public at large. 

Internet connection into the home has totally altered the manner we acquire our information. We are no longer restricted to perusing a newspaper that may be one of many possessed by some large conglomerate that also holds many television and radio stations in their portfolio. It appears there is a need to control the media as an industry as opposed to providing a source of information for their subscribers. Do their reporters fall into a trap and write to please their proprietor instead of the reader?

How many voices have disappeared from the airwaves because they became a threat to the media giants and/or their associates? Could these corporations fall out of favour with any of the three levels of government, or of the political parties, if controversies created by their employees sway the public vote in a particular riding? It appears that a few of these voices could have done just that and it cost them their employment. Is this then a form of censorship?

The Charter of Rights and Freedoms explicitly states:

Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:

a) freedom of conscience and religion;
b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;
c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and
d) freedom of association.

Having read this section of the Charter, one can conclude that there is a potential for the abuse of these basic rights in our own back yard. The expression of ones opinion is regulated to some degree in all the media forums except the one used here. However, any slanderous statement made on the internet can still be prosecuted. Thus, we have the creation of a forum format that is just a step ahead of the powers that wish to control what the public will hear. Hopefully, it will go unharmed for some time to come!

Although not a popular method of reading a newspaper, the internet has given us a few very successful sites such as the "American Thinker" and "Captain's Quarters". These two, in particular, were responsible for releasing the destructive testimony from the Gomery Commission and, I think, influenced Judge Gomery in lifting the ban on certain testimony.

It ought to be remembered, should a person want anything bad enough, they will acquire that product one way or the other. This holds true for information as well. The idea that a ban on testimony will prejudice the defense in a future trial is wishful thinking in today's world. As a result these two American websites were overwhelmed with hundreds of thousands of hits prior to Judge Gomery lifting the ban. To withhold the testimony in any trial can be conceived as a cover-up of something that would be damaging to someone if it became public knowledge. Hopefully, these two web sites have an influence on readers resulting in continued success in their endevours.

May this new forum also be so fortunate?


Previous Story - Next Story



Return to Home
NetBistro

Comments

I think the comments are refreshing.
It's a good article Jack.

Progress is always certain when the medium we now use, can expand. Of course there are dangers.

<a href="Why">http://cep1133.blogspot.com/2005/01/blogging-your-way-to-happiness.html">Why all the Blogs?</a>

It was apparent to me that seeing Ben's comments curtailled, and wanting to be directed, was a realization that such ownership has this inherent right over fair and equitable reporting?

The price one pays when media taken over by corporate giants, is a bias view, that ownership would like us to see, and not the freedom of the press?

Ben was always fair in this regard.
The title referred was "Blogging Your Way to Happiness" and can be found in January archive section of blog here.

http://cep1133.blogspot.com/

More info following:

<b>At a Suit's Core: Are Bloggers Reporters, Too?</b><i>By JONATHAN GLATER </i>

<i>A lawsuit filed in California by Apple Computer is drawing the courts into that question: who should be considered a journalist?

The case, which involves company secrets that Apple says were disclosed on several Web sites, is being closely followed in the world of online commentators, but it could have broad implications for journalists working for traditional news organizations as well.</i>

http://www.linuxhomenetworking.com/news/archives/2005/03/at_a_suits_core.html

How would this effect public opinion? Should discretionary thinking still be managed? Of course.

Bringing awareness back to public issues, is important?
Well done Jack. Unfortunatly, the charter is constantly neglected by law enforcement and the judicial system (except when dealing with the criminal element). Most of the statements in the charter are disregarded on a daily basis. How many times have we all been detained arbitrarily? It appears to be written for the criminals rather than the majority of Canadians. Damn--another special interest group!
The charter of rights is not worth the paper its printed on when dealing with Canada Customs and Revenue agency.One just has to take these guys to task in their courts.In my 2 tax courts,two federal courts of appeal and one Supreme court of Canada,After showing of unwillingness to deal in good faith,Fraud,Extortion,Pergery,contempt of court,and bias this case was dissmissed with cost.Which shows to me that the charter does not exist had it I would have had a much better outcome.This above the law agency of the government has a licience to steal from the taxpayers of Canada without accountability for their actions imposed on us.