Memo to the Toronto Star: Beware of Somalis Bearing Gifts

page: 3
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by Orwells Ghost

Originally posted by ipsedixit
Chuck Berry walks like a duck during performances. Not everything that walks like a duck is a duck.

Lol! Hilarious, can I use this in this?

Only if I can use this...




posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:24 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 

Here is how the Toronto Sun, in your linked story, reported Doug Holyday's response to the situation as it regards the much sought after video.

www.torontosun.com...


Deputy Mayor Doug Holyday said he believes the reporters who say they saw the video.


He believes what, that they saw a video, or that, and that everything they allege about the contents of the video is true?

If it is the latter, I would like to know what the reporters told him that made him so sure. Why isn't Mr. Holyday telling us those details? Would it be that he believes the reporters but his legal advisors have told him to not be such a Pollyanna and to shut the eff up until that video can be examined or until corroborating evidence of some sort that will hold up in court arrives?

That would be my take on it and I think it should have been the Star's take on it.


“It’s the authenticity of that tape that is in question,” he said. “If we could just get the tape and find that out, that would answer an awful lot of questions.”


Thankyou Mr. Holyday.

Mr. Holyday is such a smart man. He believes the reporters, oh yes, but would like to check out their story too. Mr. Holyday has a bright future in Toronto politics. He can sit on the fence, eat his cake and have it too. Whatta guy!
edit on 29-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 
Hey, I'm quite content to suspend our dialogue until such time as the Mayor, the media and the police are in a position to contribute something more substantive. Deal?



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:37 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 

That's fine. No more sparring. I respect you, but both of us still have the right to comment on developments or if we have a fresh idea on the subject, OK?



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Both the media and the government can learn a lot from you guys. Kudos.
edit on 29-5-2013 by Orwells Ghost because: spelling



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
...both of us still have the right to comment on developments or if we have a fresh idea on the subject, OK?
Sure thing...I'm all for new developments.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Moderator note:

So far, this thread has danced a very thin line with respect to the T&C's. Hopefully it can continue to do so in the same manner. If it cannot, it will suffer the same fate as every other thread has which approached this topic.


Fair warning.



posted on May, 29 2013 @ 08:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by masqua
Moderator note:
So far, this thread has danced a very thin line with respect to the T&C's. Hopefully it can continue to do so in the same manner. If it cannot, it will suffer the same fate as every other thread has which approached this topic.
Fair warning.
Ok, without trying to be sassy, where's the problem? This is a very convoluted scenario and I don't see where the T&Cs come into question. Is it the allegation of personal use? That is a pretty large chunk of the story. I am guilty of a fat duck joke, but I have, in my personal conversations, risen above those insults as they are vulgar and not germane to the subject. The duck thing was kinda irresistible, though.

So, clarification, please...we ask for direction from the mods.
edit on 29-5-2013 by JohnnyCanuck because: ...just because, eh?



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:40 AM
link   
I think the moderation has been fair. The point of the thread is the conduct of the Toronto Star particularly and other media outlets in handling unproven allegations against the Mayor of Toronto.

The "maguffin" in the case, to use Alfred Hitchcock's terminology, is a video very few have seen, allegedly showing the consumption of a commodity that is illegal and that may not be mentioned in these forums. The commodity itself is only germane to the issues being discussed because it is illegal. Nothing else about it is really relevant and we have been discussing the topic without reference to the commodity itself.

It is perfectly possible to do so.

My point is that the Star has run amuck in this situation and should stop acting like the tabloid website, gawker. The Star has, in effect acted like one of those "kissing bandit" style strippers who runs topless across a playing field (city politics) disrupting everything until escorted off the field.

It shouldn't be publishing and harping on allegations that it cannot prove and shouldn't be hounding the Mayor to the extent it does.

If and when it ever proves its allegations, the Mayor will have to take his lumps. Until then the Star and other press outlets should stop disrupting the business of City Council.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 11:56 AM
link   
I thought of something a couple of days ago that came to me while I was reading an account of Ford aid, David Price's conversation with former Chief of Staff, Mark Towhey, regarding what procedure to follow if it were possible to locate the famous video.

What came to mind was that in publicizing the existence of this video, gawker.com and most particularly, The Toronto Star, may have unwittingly created a situation in which it will now be impossible for the owner of the video to sell it.

Let's just assume Mr. X were to sell the video to gawker or some other outlet and the video showed the Mayor, as advertised, using an illegal commodity implement to consume an illegal commodity.

What happens next? What do the police do?

They investigate. They want corroboration. They want to find the owner of the video. They want to make a case in court. The Star wants them to make a case in court.

How do they make a case in court?

They look at the video and try to identify witnesses, witnesses who are consumers and sellers of illegal commodities. Witnesses who certainly have an interest in making sure that video will never come to light. Witnesses who might do the very worst sort of crime to avoid becoming involved with the legal system, for numerous reasons.

I can't blame gawker.com for this situation. They are a bunch of gawkers, taking malicious delight in the misfortunes of others. I blame The Toronto Star a newspaper that, ever since Rob Ford became Mayor, has been on an infantile crusade against him.

Dollars to donuts, that video is gone.
edit on 30-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:46 PM
link   
"Gone where Ippy?"

"Who knows, but I'll give you the worst possible scenario. The video, assuming it exists and shows what it is advertised to show, has fallen into the hands of some organized crime group."

Those folks are very different from some boneheaded illegal commodity pedlar. They won't try to sell the video. They are much too intelligent for that. They will have other uses for it.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 01:57 PM
link   

Originally posted by ipsedixit
I blame The Toronto Star a newspaper that, ever since Rob Ford became Mayor, has been on an infantile crusade against him.
Two more Ford staffers have quit, in protest, I'm sure, of the Toronto Star's treatment of Ford. HuffPo



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 02:24 PM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 

Could be. I'm inclined to agree.

This is politics. The Star wants to hound someone out of office and they are succeeding in hounding people out of office. People who work for Ford don't want to be tarred with the same brush he is being tarred with.

The Star has created the climate in which business is being done at City Hall by trumpeting allegations. They are painting the Ford brothers as criminals and have put the fear of "alleged guilt by association" into Ford's staff, would be my assessment of the situation.

edit on 30-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 04:36 PM
link   
A Fantasy Worst Case Scenario Involving the "gawker" Video

This video will not be produced. The contacts who lead to the video will dummy up. There will be no more access to them.

Why?

They will be scared stiff.

The "video affair" will die down and things will stabilize at City Hall. The Mayor will breathe a sigh of relief and things will get back to normal.

Weeks or months down the road, there will be a communication to Mr. Ford's office. It will be from a known substantial financial backer of Mr. Ford. It will be a request for a private, personal meeting with Mr. Ford. Considering the stature of the person making the request, it will be granted.

At this meeting, this person will express personal outrage for the way Mr. Ford has been treated by the Toronto Star and other media. This person will congratulate Mr. Ford for his personal courage and fortitude in facing down the allegations against him.

Mr. Ford will express gratitude for the support.

This person will go on to say that at the time of the video affair, he was so worried for Mr. Ford that he made some discrete inquiries through "friends of friends", on Mr. Ford's behalf, to see if these video extortionists could be found and if perhaps a video, if it existed, could be retrieved on Mr. Ford's behalf.

Mr. Ford will look at this person in silence.

The person will say that he is happy to report that his inquiries bore fruit. He will then produce a cellphone memory card out of his pocket and hand it to Mr. Ford. He will say that the video will never be seen again.

Mr. Ford will be in shock looking at the memory card in his hand.

The visitor will rise and extend his hand to Mr. Ford and apologize for taking up his time with a small matter.

He will say that he continues to support Mr. Ford in every way and that he doesn't want anything from him.

Mr. Ford will be astonished and relieved. He will see the visitor out with friendly formalities.

The visitor will have said that he doesn't want anything from Mr. Ford but that won't be true. He will want lots of things from him, for the rest of Mr. Ford's life.

edit on 30-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)
edit on 30-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 04:48 PM
link   
reply to post by ipsedixit
 
I am surprised. You seem to be acknowledging that the tape could exist and it could be a liability to Ford even if it is not revealed to the public. Is it not better that the Star brought this forward when they did, than it be an unknown quantity that exerts influence upon Ford without the public having an inkling?

Ford will step down or be ousted. Bet you a beer.



posted on May, 30 2013 @ 05:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by JohnnyCanuck
reply to post by ipsedixit
 
I am surprised. You seem to be acknowledging that the tape could exist and it could be a liability to Ford even if it is not revealed to the public.


It could exist. It could be an accurate record of things Mr. Ford would rather have kept secret. It could exist but be a fraud or hoax. I think it is likely, considering more than one reporter was involved, that a video exists and is either a true record of events or a fraudulent representation of events which did not take place.


Is it not better that the Star brought this forward when they did, than it be an unknown quantity that exerts influence upon Ford without the public having an inkling?


If the "video" is a fraud, Mr. Ford could hardly have been expected to respond any differently than he did, which was basically to deny the existence of a video showing him consuming an illegal commodity. If he truly did not consume an illegal commodity, then logically, to him, there could be no such video in existence.

The Star has made much of this video without producing the video. I think that is where they went wrong.

Publishing an allegation made by gawker.com is one thing. Corroborating gawker's story is another thing. Dredging up the Ford family's past is still another thing. Finding the Mayor guilty on "historical" evidence and betting odds is going too far in my opinion. Creating a media circus is also going too far.

The Mayor denied the allegations. He is innocent until proven guilty. Where's the beef?

The police are looking into the situation. Let's get down to business at City hall.

"Unknown quantities" are constantly attempting to exert influence on politicians. The Star knew about the video allegations some time ago. They did not publish, but you can be sure they were watching. The Star only published because gawker did, but the current media frenzy in Toronto has been led by the Star.


Ford will step down or be ousted. Bet you a beer.


In my fantasy worst case scenario, above, he motors on. In the best case scenario, no video or fraudulent video, he motors on. I think he will weather this storm and will be re-elected to a second term.

When Miller left office an Ipsos-Reid poll said that 8 out of 10 Torontonians wanted him gone. I think that if Ford plays his cards close to right (admittedly a tall order), he is still electable.

The Star's antipathy to Ford goes back to the time he was elected. In the scheme of things in Toronto, I believe it was the Star's appointed job to overturn Ford's applecart. They failed to do so. They have been trying to make up for it ever since. Even now, they think they have Ford on the ropes. They are reverting to form and prominently disparaging an entity they call "Ford Nation". They are beginning to pick up on the tactic they used during the last election campaign, when they called Ford's campaign the "angry man campaign", as if it only appealed to marginalized crackpots.

The Star is way out of line. If they take that approach during the next election when they oppose Ford again and try to elect another "snuggerbugger" from Toronto's left-lib establishment, they are going to get their second bloody nose.

Torontonians have a perception that City Hall finances are in need of a more controlling hand. They want the fat cut out. They don't want more taxes if they can be avoided. They are not enemies of the car.

Yes, they want a green city. Yes they want a pedestrian and cyclist friendly city, but this is the big city. It has to work for everyone, particularly for commerce. It is not a national park.
edit on 30-5-2013 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 10:30 AM
link   
Here's the latest:

www.citynews.ca...

My favourite part is this:

'He also said Tuesday he’s not sure what “gone” actually means when it comes to the alleged video.

It might have been “handed over to Ford or his allies,” he wrote. “It might mean that the Toronto Police Department has seized it and plans to use it as evidence in a criminal investigation. It might mean that it has been transferred to the custody of Somali community leaders for safekeeping.”

“It might be a lie. The intermediary doesn’t know. Neither do I.”
'

Notice how the possibility that the tape doesn't exist isn't mentioned. It seems Rob Ford's guilt is a forgone conclusion. Not to mention the part about "The Somali Community Leaders", which is one hell of a euphemism for crack dealing street gang banger.
edit on 5-6-2013 by Orwells Ghost because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2013 @ 04:16 PM
link   
reply to post by Orwells Ghost
 
This ain't over...I can wait.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 01:32 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 

I think you are right about it not being over, but only because the Star is going to dig around among Mayor Ford's high school friends to see how many he still parties with and how many have had bumps with the law.

I don't think the video, whatever it contains, is going to surface, for reasons I alluded to earlier, but the Star seems to be determined to carry on covering the Mayor's private life in an attempt to sabotage him, particularly when it comes to running for re-election.

The Mayor is not a genteel, suave personality. The people who voted for him know that. They don't care. In fact it is almost a testimony to the Mayor's good intentions and the benign nature of his administration that he is hopelessly inept at dissimulation.

I haven't seen anything yet that would cause me to change my vote in the next election.



posted on Jun, 7 2013 @ 05:44 AM
link   
Not sure if you've caught this interesting development in the Star/Ford saga, but police activity in and around the house where the supposed video was supposedly made has me wondering what's going on here.

Especially the bit about 'gunshots'. One down, two to go kinda thing?





top topics
 
5
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join