g_bambino Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 Now that it appears the video doesn't exist they are all looking like fools. "Doesn't exist" is not the same thing as "didn't exist" and isn't the same as "gone". As far as we now know, the video is "gone" from those who were trying to sell it; but does that mean its gone to someone else, that other copies don't exist, that, if deleted, it can't be recovered forensically, etc.? It's difficult to tell how one could judge the media fools even if the video doesn't now exist; three professional people, two disassociated from the other, and one who couldn't even be accused of harbouring an agenda against Ford, verified that it did, at one point, at least, exist. Quote
g_bambino Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 Why wouldn't it follow that he would know how to make a fake video... That would only be an assumption, which would have to go along with the other assumption that this student was talented enough and had enough unsupervised access to the kind of equipment required, and had all the right pre-existing footage of Ford and a Ford sound-alike and got several other people to act well enough in a set constructed around the to-be-implanted Ford all in order to make a fake video of such good quality it convinced three people, two of which watched it three times, that Ford was smoking crack and making disparaging comments about an individual and individuals. Pretty damn implausible. Quote
Black Dog Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 Why wouldn't it follow that he would know how to make a fake video. Well unless he was a poor student. There you go, no proof of anything at all, poof - gone - it was fun while it lasted. Again: three eyewitness saw the video. That's a type of evidence. Certainly more evidence than you've presented for your fake video theory. Now maybe Ford can get on with running the city and more surpluses. Thanks for the laugh. Wonder when the Star will apologize for the error in their reporting of Ford supposedly asking for emails to be deleted - maybe they should be charged with criminal mischief. Reporting something a source told them that later turned out to be untrue is a criminal matter how? Quote
scribblet Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 I'm still waiting for you to show me one example--even a Hollywood-produced one--of a person convincingly doing things he never did and saying things he never said. Your refusal to do so suggests that you know it's impossible but don't care because you like being able to make the argument. No idea what you are banging on about... methinks thou dost protest too much. Quote Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province
scribblet Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 ...Reporting something a source told them that later turned out to be untrue is a criminal matter how? All we know is that they saw 'something' in the back seat of a car presented by drug dealers. No verification of authenticity at all, or on much of their reporting lately. Criminal mischief sounds reasonable, but it isn't going to happen of course. They've gone ahead and published stories without verifying them and always of course, anonymous sources. At some point they have to show hard evidence but from now on I think people will want a whole lot more than what they've been given. If they (Star) weren't so rabid and overt when trying to bring down Ford, they would be more credible. Quote Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province
Black Dog Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 All we know is that they saw 'something' in the back seat of a car presented by drug dealers. No verification of authenticity at all, or on much of their reporting lately. And how would you propose they went about verifying this given the holders of the footage weren't willing to part with it? So to you, they are scum for reporting what they saw without verifying the tape (not that they needed too: they specified that the tape could no be verified) and they'd be scum if they paid for the footage. I guess in your book, the responsible thing would have been to sit on the story. Oh wait: they did! Criminal mischief sounds reasonable, but it isn't going to happen of course. Again: on what basis? Show me what criminal Code provision you think would apply. They've gone ahead and published stories without verifying them and always of course, anonymous sources. And? If they (Star) weren't so rabid and overt when trying to bring down Ford, they would be more credible. Right, so what about the other media involved in this? The Globe reported Doug's alleged hash empire, the Sun reported the allegations that Ford's chief of staff was fired for telling the mayor to go to rehab. Are they in on it too? Quote
g_bambino Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 No verification of authenticity at all... This keeps getting repeated, but never is a clarification offered as to what exactly constitutes "authenticity" other than actually viewing the video itself with a rational mind. Quote
Fletch 27 Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 Given the Star's track record of lying.. (The destruction of Docs by Ford), I do NOT see it that much of a grasp or a stretch of the imagination that the Star reporters simply again LIED about seeing a video.. Your already suggesting that they actually did.. and your taking the word of a lying tabloid/paper?? Being an adult, I base my understanding and opinion on FACTS.. not hearsay... And how would you propose they went about verifying this given the holders of the footage weren't willing to part with it? So to you, they are scum for reporting what they saw without verifying the tape (not that they needed too: they specified that the tape could no be verified) and they'd be scum if they paid for the footage. I guess in your book, the responsible thing would have been to sit on the story. Oh wait: they did! Again: on what basis? Show me what criminal Code provision you think would apply. And? Right, so what about the other media involved in this? The Globe reported Doug's alleged hash empire, the Sun reported the allegations that Ford's chief of staff was fired for telling the mayor to go to rehab. Are they in on it too? Quote
BubberMiley Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 Your already suggesting that they actually did.. and your taking the word of a lying tabloid/paper?? Being an adult, I base my understanding and opinion on FACTS.. not hearsay...It's also a fact that Ford's trusted inner circle deserted him. How do you reconcile that? Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
g_bambino Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 Given the Star's track record of lying.. (The destruction of Docs by Ford)... The Star did not say documents had been destroyed by Ford. Quote
Fletch 27 Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 Inner circle? Seems like people quit.. People quit all the time.. And who sais that its a "trusted" inner circle? Ahh right... the Star.. I don't see any need to "reconcile that" in the LEAST! It's also a fact that Ford's trusted inner circle deserted him. How do you reconcile that? Quote
Fletch 27 Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 No? " TORONTO – A Toronto city official says the mayor’s office didn’t ask municipal staff to destroy any documents — the latest allegation to surface in the ongoing crack cocaine scandal surrounding Mayor Rob Ford. A report published in the Toronto Star said that telephone and email records belonging to three former aides were ordered deleted. The report did not specify where the alleged order came from." The Star did not say documents had been destroyed by Ford. Quote
Black Dog Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 No? " TORONTO – A Toronto city official says the mayor’s office didn’t ask municipal staff to destroy any documents — the latest allegation to surface in the ongoing crack cocaine scandal surrounding Mayor Rob Ford. A report published in the Toronto Star said that telephone and email records belonging to three former aides were ordered deleted. The report did not specify where the alleged order came from." The newspaper cited anonymous sources, and said one of the people it spoke to expressed concerns that evidence related to the drug controversy could be wiped out. Are you claiming no such sources exist? What is your evidence? Quote
Fletch 27 Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 (edited) Seems anyone can claim anything they want and you eat it up! So yes, im claiming NO source exists.. And I shall remain "anonymous" as well,, so "trust me" These allegations were just recently proven "incorrect" as you may have read in all of the other papers.. Other than the Star.. These recent instances where the Star has lied or published incorrect information simply lends itself to the Star's very own credibility or complete lack there of Are you claiming no such sources exist? What is your evidence? Edited June 5, 2013 by Fletch 27 Quote
Black Dog Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 Seems anyone can claim anything they want and you eat it up! So yes, im claiming NO source exists.. And I shall remain "anonymous" as well,, so "trust me" Well no. Newspapers can't simply make stuff up or claim to have sources when none exist. These allegations were just recently proven "incorrect" as you may have read in all of the other papers.. Other than the Star.. So what? These recent instances where the Star has lied or published incorrect information simply lends itself to the Star's very own credibility or complete lack there of If that's the case, what does Ford's track record of dissembling and outright lying say about him? Quote
Sandy MacNab Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 Given the Star's track record of lying.. (The destruction of Docs by Ford), I do NOT see it that much of a grasp or a stretch of the imagination that the Star reporters simply again LIED about seeing a video.. Your already suggesting that they actually did.. and your taking the word of a lying tabloid/paper?? Being an adult, I base my understanding and opinion on FACTS.. not hearsay... Having read Star "journalists" from time-to-time, I view their attack on Ford to be malevolent; a lynching. Typical politically correct bullying and harrassment aimed to punish him for beating their candidate in the election. If this isn't actionable nothing is. Are the judges lefties down their? Quote
BubberMiley Posted June 5, 2013 Report Posted June 5, 2013 You'd think Ford would have asked them to apologize for reporting on the video. I guess he didn't want to push his luck. Quote "I think it's fun watching the waldick get all excited/knickers in a knot over something." -scribblet
WWWTT Posted June 6, 2013 Author Report Posted June 6, 2013 All we know is that they saw 'something' in the back seat of a car presented by drug dealers. No verification of authenticity at all, or on much of their reporting lately. Criminal mischief sounds reasonable, but it isn't going to happen of course. They've gone ahead and published stories without verifying them and always of course, anonymous sources. At some point they have to show hard evidence but from now on I think people will want a whole lot more than what they've been given. If they (Star) weren't so rabid and overt when trying to bring down Ford, they would be more credible. I take it you are referring to the Toronto Star in this quote? What about the Globe and Mail then? http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/in-etobicoke-locals-find-a-clue-to-rob-ford-photo-mystery/article12376492/ WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
WWWTT Posted June 6, 2013 Author Report Posted June 6, 2013 And what about the National Post scribblet? Is the Post also in on this conspiracy theory that you are alleging? http://www.nationalpost.com/m/wp/posted-toronto/blog.html?b=news.nationalpost.com%2F2013%2F05%2F30%2Frob-ford-crack-drama-takes-a-surreal-turn-on-dixon-road WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
WWWTT Posted June 6, 2013 Author Report Posted June 6, 2013 Hi scribblet,your conspiracy theory is getting weaker by the link! http://tgam.ca/Dr10 WWWTT Quote Maple Leaf Web is now worth $720.00! Down over $1,500 in less than one year! Total fail of the moderation on this site! That reminds me, never ask Greg to be a business partner! NEVER!
margrace Posted June 6, 2013 Report Posted June 6, 2013 It has been totally disgusting the way politicians are trying to control and shut the media up. The US experience is a great example of this and we are entitled to hear what is going on even if we do not agree with it. Quote
scribblet Posted June 6, 2013 Report Posted June 6, 2013 Hi scribblet,your conspiracy theory is getting weaker by the link! http://tgam.ca/Dr10 WWWTT Hi WWWTT - is your finger stuck this morning LOL I didn't say there was a conspiracy theory. The Star and Gawker have been had... but never fear, the Star is still on the case, hounding the people who live the house where Ford had his pic. taken. (well, allegedly) - Quote Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province
Keepitsimple Posted June 6, 2013 Report Posted June 6, 2013 Hi WWWTT - is your finger stuck this morning LOL I didn't say there was a conspiracy theory. The Star and Gawker have been had... but never fear, the Star is still on the case, hounding the people who live the house where Ford had his pic. taken. (well, allegedly) - That story in the Star this morning would be funny - if it wasn't such a sad indictment for Journalism at The Star. The story of the "gone" Video clearly signalled that this sad saga was now dormant. Not only did the Star put THAT story at the bottom of Page Two yesterday - but today they follow up with a story that could have been reported three weeks ago....looking for anything, ANYTHING to keep their precious anti-Ford tirade alive. What a shameless excuse for a newspaper. Quote Back to Basics
Black Dog Posted June 6, 2013 Report Posted June 6, 2013 Having read Star "journalists" from time-to-time, I view their attack on Ford to be malevolent; a lynching. Typical politically correct bullying and harrassment aimed to punish him for beating their candidate in the election. If this isn't actionable nothing is. Are the judges lefties down their? I'm sure if there was a case, Ford would be suing right now. He's not. Why is that? BTW: isn't it ironic that the same parties who bleat about Ford and the lack of presumption of innocence are perfectly willing to lambaste the media with even less evidence than the media has employed against the mayor. Quote
scribblet Posted June 6, 2013 Report Posted June 6, 2013 I would think the cost of suing well financed organizations would be prohibitive, I don`t think the Fords are that well heeled. They`ve allready spent a million fighting the last cases, even though they won. A case like this would drag on for years during which time, the lawyers have to be paid. Not to mention the stress it would put the whole family under. Besides, we know the papers cover themselves in legaleeze and alleged this and that... Not only that it would just ensure more unwanted publicity keeping the issue alive. Unless I had zillions, I wouldn`t go through that. Quote Hey Ho - Ontario Liberals Have to Go - Fight Wynne - save our province
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.