If you follow the news, you’ve likely seen some coverage of Conrad Black’s latest efforts to make friends and influence the British media during his (self-)promotional book tour. Quite a show, indeed.
I don’t know if ‘admiration’ is the right word, but you have to give the guy credit for how brazenly he seems to postulate that it’s not just an attempt, but that history is re-written; his pitch is two-fold: 1) He’s not a “criminal” (because had his actions been considered in light of the laws of some other country, he never would have been charged); and 2) He was “completely vindicated” by the U.S. Supreme Court. (This latter point does indeed take some skating, but Conrad is, with words, probably on par with Bobby Orr for sheer elusiveness).
Our friend Conrad is a “criminal” by the simplest, and only, definition there is: He was convicted of two offences by a duly-constituted court of the U.S.of A., a country of which Conrad was an unabashed fan, until recently. If indeed Conrad was “vindicated completely” by the Supreme Court, there’s one tiny blemish on the logic: Why was he sent back to prison to serve the balance of his sentence?
Conrad Black is perhaps one of the true wonders of the world in his steadfast refusal to acknowledge the world has any other order than the one he imposes. It’s good (or unfortunate, depending on your views on the man) that he has a ready group of ‘enablers’ who glowingly endorse his factual hallucinations.
The foremost of these is the crew at the National Post, a newspaper that Conrad (thankfully) founded but (equally thankfully) no longer owns or manages. Despite the latter fact, they seem willing to provide Conrad with an open bully pulpit to spout his personal vitriol about his “enemies”, spin endless circumlocutions about how badly he’s been treated and continue his campaign for turning Black into White. Shame on them.