Should the CBC Show “Those” Pictures?

I just came across a bit that says some of the Harper Party MPs are speaking out about the CBC decision to not show the Charlie Hebdo pictures that are supposed to be the reason for the extremist attack on the Charlie Hebdo offices on Wednesday.

Maybe they just don’t get it.  These pictures are offensive to some people.  There are a few that find them so offensive that it pushes them off their axis so far as to fire bomb buildings and kill people.

There are two things at play here.  Freedom of Expression and Freedom of the Press.  Freedom of expression allows me to write my blog and think that there are some Class A Idiots running around Ottawa who say “Yea” when Steve Harper says “Yea” and “Nay” when Steve Harper says “Nay”.

Freedom of the Press means that the news people should pursue and tell the news that they think is relevant to people without interference from elected people.  They answer to their editors, not you and not Steve Harper.

I totally agree with the stance that the CBC has taken.  The story is about the horrid killing of the 10 people inside the office of Charlie Hebdo and the 2 police officer assigned to protect them, not that they publish what a lot of people would consider trash. 

If pictures weren’t worth putting on the air last week, are they worth putting up today?

Maybe we should ask why the CBC isn’t showing the pictures from that magazine that caused an anti Semitism law suit?  Or how about showing the pictures that generated lawsuits from other religions? 

The CBC also decided not to show the one attacker walking up and killing the wounded police officer in cold blood after the attack on the office.  That too is an important part of the story.  Or do mere words suffice there?

We recently had the Magnotta trial here in Canada.  Should the CBC have shown the images and videos from that?  Do we need to see the cut up victim to show people that Magnotta should be in prison for a very long time?

The bottom line is that if you don’t like the CBC coverage of the story, watch another channel.  I don’t give a damn that “taxpayer money” helps fund the CBC.  The news is supposed to be impartial, the standards are set by the editorial staff at the CBC.  If enough people change the channel, CBC News will change its policy.

And if you think that it is so all fired important that your constituents see these pictures, maybe you should post them on your own damn site.  The party pays for it, and it won’t cost me a dime.  At least it had better not.

If you’re really interested in freedom of expression and freedom of the press, maybe you should be speaking out about other things….

How about the 7 year sentence of Mohamed Fahmy and two of his fellow Al Jazeera correspondents for covering the Muslim Brotherhood protests in Egypt?

How about the 10 year 1,000 lashes sentence for Raif Badawi for “insulting” Islam in his blog?

How about making all candidates show up for All Candidate Debates at election time?  At least the ones on your team…

And how about having Ministers stand and answer questions in Debate, in Oral Question Period, and live press gatherings instead of reciting PMO approved talking points?

Je ne suis pas Charlie Hebdo, mais il est mon frère.

C’est tout, Salute!

BC

Stephen Harper, Give me back my Country!

How have I come to be in this strange place? The world is changing and it is happening in strange ways.

Countries that for decades and longer were Dictatorships of all different stripes are becoming Democracies in different ways and the Democratic Nations seem to becoming less Democratic by the day.

In Canada we have always appeared to have an open Government. Whether one agreed with the Governing Party or not there was always communication, conversation, and debate. When the Parties comprising the House of Commons met there was rhetoric and rancor but it was Political. It stayed in the House.

The Press was also a part of this, back when they were for the most part independent they were free to ask questions of Ministers and Parliamentary Secretaries and their Opposition counterparts, but that seems to have disappeared too.

Now when the Government wishes to announce something it seems to just be a press release or a Photo Op far from the House of Commons, far from the questions of the Opposition and neatly packaged for the Press so they don’t even need to ask a question. Not that they get much chance of that. Between their Corporate Bosses who want the Harper Party shown in the best light possible and the Harper Party’s unwillingness to speak outside of their talking points there isn’t much to report.

Here’s the speech, here’s the Press Kit, don’t ask nasty questions or you won’t be invited to the next “Press Conference”.

The actions within the House of Commons are beyond belief. Have we had one piece of legislation moved in the House of Commons under the current regime that hasn’t had the invocation of “limit debate” tossed in? How many times are we hearing of the Harper Party wanting Committee Meetings moved in camera? Should I even mention the Marionette Theatre part deux formerly called the Senate?

Amazingly even the members of the Harper Party are starting to ask questions. The announcement of (possible?) changes to OAS caught most of them flat footed. It wasn’t even raised in Caucus? His own members knew nothing before Lord Stephen announced it in Davos? This doesn’t sound like the Canada I was born into.

No it sounds more and more like the Government from another place where the Party Leadership decided what to propose, informed the Caucus who would support it without question and it was passed into law by their House with no debate.

But the Soviets only had One Party so the debate was usually pretty brief.

Is that a nasty comparison? You bet your boots, but it fits far too well to be ignored.

The fact that some of the Party Faithful are wondering out loud about Lord Stephen and the Harper Party gives me hope that some of these folks remember their Conservative roots. Or at least their constituents have.

Joe Clark was not evil, nor was Robert Stanfield or John Diefenbaker. I may not agree with their given visions for the Country but to my knowledge they did not attack any groups with Canada, they sought to govern Canada and represent all Canadians for the betterment of Canada.

These people earned the right to be called “Right Honourable”. The members of the Stephen Harper Party have not.

I, for one, would like MY Canada back.

I want to be able to refer to the elected leader of my country as “the Right Honourable Prime Minister” and I am unable to do that as long as Lord Stephen and the Harper Party Regime are in power.

I miss my Country.