reply to post by ipsedixit
If I were the Star, before shelling out a large amount of money for a movie purporting to show one thing, I would endeavour to make absolutely sure I
wasn't purchasing a movie about something else entirely.
The Star might well be walking into a trap.
The Star was never willing to cough up the money for the video. It was the Gawker that wants the video. The Star sent two reporters to watch the
video, who researched Ford and family, who spent time reviewing pictures of them, to offer only their opinion on whether or not the video was true
based on them being able to identify the mayor.
On the other hand, the Gawker, (A US pub) is interested in the video because it's juicy, and if they have it, they get to launch an international
scandal to new heights.
The Star, got their story.
They don't need the video, only the implications that the video contains. And they were able to get that without the purchase. I think they did make
an offer originally for 40,000... But once the Somalis saw that, they raised the bar to 100,000. Once the story got press, they raised it to 200,000
and now they can't be found.
The Somalis were being opportunist. Unrealistic one's at that. They should have sold the video at 40,000 which was the original offer. By biding their
time, and letting the Star get what it wanted (A story, whether or not it was confirmed) they have not only eliminated probabilities of them getting
money for it, they put giant targets on their back from anyone loyal to the mayor.
Given their disappearance, there is the possibility that someone from the mayor's camp got to them already. Maybe for hush money, or many loyal police
officers grabbed them and they are awaiting on criminal charges for one thing or the other.
In any case, the Star, while they are obvious in their contempt for the mayor, they are not the one's to blame for the entire incident.
1. The Star only days before were trying to smear the major for sticking magnets on cars outside of a town hall meeting. They didn't fabricate the
current story or create it from the backdrop. They merely jumped on the chance and were opportunistic like the Somalis. It seems they ever had much
intent to pay out cash for the video. And they sure as hell aren't clever enough to concoct this whole drama up by themselves.
2. The Gawker were the only one's who showed any actual willingness to buy the video. But were doing so by raising funds publicly.
The only one's to blame here are the Somalis and the Mayor himself. Whether or not what was in that video is true, the picture posted looks like him,
with a matching piece from the Mayor's sweatwear wardrobe, and he's been known to speak to anyone in the neighbourhood who wants to speak with him.
There's a recorded entrapment call from previous years still available online.
Whether or not the Somalis were to sell it to an open bidder, or back to the Mayor's camp it seems they would be guilty of criminal action in either
respect. Obvious blackmail or extortion in the one aspect. The papers have mentioned a number of criminal charges in the other aspect.
Why do we judge so harshly on people's personal behaviour... On closed door comments... On what we know people are like when they aren't on the
Personally, I don't care about the Mayor in any fashion when it comes to his personal life, shouldn't a mayor's record only be relevant by his actions
In any case... Seems this story is far from over. And if you look at the Globe and Mail, you will see that the Ford family is persona non grata when
it comes to the media outlets right now.
edit on 25-5-2013 by boncho because: (no reason given)
edit on 25-5-2013 by boncho
because: (no reason given)