Rob Ford, mayor of Toronto UPDATES

[Signals.Cpl]

Three separate people report seeing a video with a guy that looks and sounds like Ford smoking what appears to be crack.

Key words being looks like and appears... solid evidence so far.

The TPS reportedly heard talk about the video on wiretaps before the story broke.

Yeah once again solid evidence, I hears about the video too, so did all of North America... thats like telling some kid that the easter bunny exists and then once the kid tells his friends the easter bunny is real using that as "evidence".

These strongly suggest that a video exists.

Hardly, three separate people seeing a video is hardly solid evidence seeing as they used words like might, possibly etc... and its not that hard to fool three people that don't know of the guy or are already predisposed to believe anything negative about him.

Now, if you want to debate whether the video was authentic, that's obviously something we can't determine.

All of the "evidence" is not really evidence because you are placing too much emphasis on the word of three people based on what? Do you think that in all of history not one reporter has ever gambled with his/her career to hit a big story? Or no reporter has ever been fooled?

But IMO the possibility that three reporters from two separate news outlets were out and out lying about the existence of a video is an even more fantastical scenario than the video existing.

Why?

Obviously, the video hasn't turned up. But we knew from the get go that it would be dicey.

I knew from the get go that the video did not exist because if it did the newspaper would have been the first to buy it, well before they even printed the story. This was an attempt to overthrow the democratic will of the people with the added goal of ammunition to fight Mayor Ford during the next election...

Here's the other thing people keep forgetting: the reason the notion that Ford might dabble in drugs is far from implausible given his history.

His past actions have little to no bearing on the legitimacy of the video or its existence... if our justice system worked that way anyone who is accused of a crime they previously committed as well with be thrown in jail...

If it was Gregor Robertson or Naheed Nenshi being accused of smoking crack, people would probably be a bit more skeptical. In Ford's case there's a lot of smoke there that has nothing to do with his politics and everything to do with his track record.

So the evidence is that he has done stupid things in the past so he must be guilty of this and therefore the video exists... riiiight...

[BubberMiley]

I think Shady is right in that this is very much a dead horse. Either you believe it or you don't. You can't really argue against another person's gut feeling. If you don't believe the video exists based on everything that has happened, there's nothing I'm going to say that would change your mind. And vice versa.

[Rue]

A couple days ago, I saw on the news that Ford went to Gay Pride event?? Is that true?? If so, he must know he needs to straighten up and fly right and the fed.finance minister did say he did talk to his good friend.

Yes I told him to. I said Black Dog was upset and he should try make an effort to reach out.

He said, well I am not reaching out I may grab something by accident but I will come to one event but I am not going to the

pride parade until Black Dog tells his anti Israel marchers that they don't belong at this parade as its supposed to be inclusive not exclusive

and the notion one uses gay pride to engage in partisan politics clearly designed to slur a people's collective identity choice is oh so

contradictory.

He then said if I want he will march wearing a speedo right in front of this anti Israel group and continually bend over .

I said thanks.

You know this city is full of good people who understand each other and are sensitive to each other.

[Rue]

Yes I told him to. I said Black Dog was upset and he should try make an effort to reach out.

He said, well I am not reaching out I may grab something by accident but I will come to one event but I am not going to the

pride parade until Black Dog tells his anti Israel marchers that they don't belong at this parade as its supposed to be inclusive not exclusive

and the notion one uses gay pride to engage in partisan politics clearly designed to slur a people's collective identity choice is oh so

contradictory.

He then said if I want he will march wearing a speedo right in front of this anti Israel group and continually bend over .

I said thanks.

You know this city is full of good people who understand each other and are sensitive to each other.

He also said Olivia Chow won't win and despite the smear campaign he is at 47% popularity.

Rob Ford is very talkative.

[Black Dog]

Key words being looks like and appears... solid evidence so far.

Key words are "three people saw the video."

Yeah once again solid evidence, I hears about the video too, so did all of North America... thats like telling some kid that the easter bunny exists and then once the kid tells his friends the easter bunny is real using that as "evidence".

Before the story broke?

Hardly, three separate people seeing a video is hardly solid evidence seeing as they used words like might, possibly etc... and its not that hard to fool three people that don't know of the guy or are already predisposed to believe anything negative about him.

We're not discussing the authenticity of the video here. We're talking about whether or not it exists.

All of the "evidence" is not really evidence because you are placing too much emphasis on the word of three people based on what? Do you think that in all of history not one reporter has ever gambled with his/her career to hit a big story? Or no reporter has ever been fooled?

I trust that professional journalists don't invent things of this stature out of whole cloth. You're suggesting a conspiracy between three individuals from two different media outlets in two different countries to fabricate a story.

Why?

See above.

I knew from the get go that the video did not exist because if it did the newspaper would have been the first to buy it, well before they even printed the story. This was an attempt to overthrow the democratic will of the people with the added goal of ammunition to fight Mayor Ford during the next election...

Even though it's policy not to pay for this stuff?

His past actions have little to no bearing on the legitimacy of the video or its existence... if our justice system worked that way anyone who is accused of a crime they previously committed as well with be thrown in jail...

Yes, I'm sure you always give equal consideration and the benefit of the doubt to ex-cons accused of crimes.

So the evidence is that he has done stupid things in the past so he must be guilty of this and therefore the video exists... riiiight...

No, it simply gives the story an air of plausibility.

[BubberMiley]

I have to post this because I know Gosthacked will be absolutely amazed.

You won't believe this, but Obama didn't really sing the Daft Punk song. And look at those dance moves they digitally inserted! So Real! This must be made by those professional digital manipulators AW keeps talking about but can't quite pin down.

Edited June 28, 2013 by BubberMiley

[scribblet]

So, has anyone read anything about Gawker's money, did they donate it yet, or ?

[jacee]

I trust that professional journalists don't invent things of this stature out of whole cloth. You're suggesting a conspiracy between three individuals from two different media outlets in two different countries to fabricate a story.

Also, if they made the story up they'd be fired and likely never work in media again.

And most telling, if the story was entirely fabricated Ford would be suing them for defamation.

He's not.

He's never even mentioned the possibility.

That says a lot.

[Spiderfish]

Also, if they made the story up they'd be fired and likely never work in media again.

And most telling, if the story was entirely fabricated Ford would be suing them for defamation.

He's not.

He's never even mentioned the possibility.

That says a lot.

He's already been cornholed for over $100,000 fighting charges which he won. He has mentioned several times that the reason he won't sue the Star is because the cost would be too high. Maybe Gawker would consider contributing to his legal fund. I hear they have a couple hundred grand just burning a hole in their pocket.

[Black Dog]

He's already been cornholed for over $100,000 fighting charges which he won. He has mentioned several times that the reason he won't sue the Star is because the cost would be too high. Maybe Gawker would consider contributing to his legal fund. I hear they have a couple hundred grand just burning a hole in their pocket.

The family are multi-millionaires. They can afford it. Hell they spent at least $75K on Robs new whip a while back.

And of course if it's as open and shut case of fraud/libel as some here think, he'd get his expenses back in a settlement.

[g_bambino]

You think it's impossible that drug dealers would have contacts who would know how to fake such a video?

I'm certain that it's highly unlikely.

--------------------

Oh, I didn't see this before I posted the above.

You shouldn't speak for other people, especially after the numerous times you've gotten bent out of shape about others supposedly speaking for you.

Having said that, he never once said anything is impossible. He has been saying all along that it's very highly unlikely. And it is, but some people seem to have a difficult time grasping that concept.

Thank you.

[ed.: +]

Edited June 28, 2013 by g_bambino

[PIK]

Ya that's funny GostHacked!

Oh and by the way,American Woman is talking down to you as if you are incapable of understanding or less intelligent in some manner.

This is abusive and is against the rules.

I got so tired of hearing it from her/reporting her that I put her on my ignore list.

WWWTT

I thought section 13 was cancelled? So playing the'' I am offended'' card does not work anymore.

[cybercoma]

I'm certain that it's highly unlikely.

--------------------

Oh, I didn't see this before I posted the above.

Thank you.

[ed.: +]

Didn't mean to speak for you.

[Guest American Woman]

I'm certain that it's highly unlikely.

--------------------

Oh, I didn't see this before I posted the above.

Thank you.

[ed.: +]

"Thank you??" Do you, too, not realize that a question mark means I'm asking you a question, not making a claim of what you think? You answered the question, so one has to assume that you knew it was a question.

Furthermore, I never claimed you said anything other than what you said. Good Lord.

A thousand times over.

[WWWTT]

I thought section 13 was cancelled? So playing the'' I am offended'' card does not work anymore.

You sure about that?

I'll take my cues from the admin. here,not you!

WWWTT

[Signals.Cpl]

Key words are "three people saw the video."

And a lot more than three people said that Iraq had WMDs so where are they since three people's opinion is infallible...

Before the story broke?

Source?

We're not discussing the authenticity of the video here. We're talking about whether or not it exists.

Its one and the same, nice deflect though... you are using the fact that three people "saw" the video as proof that it exists and I am saying that three people being fooled is nothing new especially if 2 of the three are predisposed to believe anything negative about Mayor Ford whereas the third might be a sucker used only to lend some "credibility"... They might have seen a video of a fat white guy smoking crack but it could be just some random guy of the street thus the video is not available because if it were to come out it will be seen as proof that the whole controversy is engineered by his opponents...

I trust that professional journalists don't invent things of this stature out of whole cloth.

Yeah and I can say the same thing about dozens of professional doctors, police officers, military officers, politicians, businessmen, teachers, professors etc... who have had the trust of people yet they destroyed it...

You're suggesting a conspiracy between three individuals from two different media outlets in two different countries to fabricate a story.

What I am saying is that two people who are predisposed to believe that Mayor Ford would do this saw what they wanted and expected to see and ignored what they didn't want to see while the third was just a poor sucker for credibility.

Even though it's policy not to pay for this stuff?

You are right, Newspapers, magazines and Television Networks will NEVER buy evidence because of their policy... So if it was two journalists from Fox news claiming that Obama smoked Crack in the oval Office would you buy it simply because two professional journalists said so?

Yes, I'm sure you always give equal consideration and the benefit of the doubt to ex-cons accused of crimes.

Luckily I am not the justice system nor am I associated in any way with the justice system... if this "evidence" were to go to court it would be laughed out very quickly.

No, it simply gives the story an air of plausibility.

I'm sorry but this would apply for a wide range of things then, from murdering a hooker to killing a puppy simply because he has done stupid things in the past. I remember sometime ago after the Eaton Centre shooting the suspect was caught on camera and by witnesses yet members on this board were adamant on him being presumed innocent until proven guilty without consideration for his past behaviour yet when it comes to Mayor Ford no such consideration is given. The pressure is on Mayor Ford to prove that he didn't do it rather than his accusers proving that he did do it.

[guyser]

Its one and the same, nice deflect though... you are using the fact that three people "saw" the video as proof that it exists and I am saying that three people being fooled is nothing new especially if 2 of the three are predisposed to believe anything negative about Mayor Ford whereas the third might be a sucker used only to lend some "credibility"... They might have seen a video of a fat white guy smoking crack but it could be just some random guy of the street thus the video is not available because if it were to come out it will be seen as proof that the whole controversy is engineered by his opponents...

Had you the wherewithall to have followed along, you wouldnt post such tripe.

[Shady]

Had you the wherewithall to have followed along, you wouldnt post such tripe.

On behalf of those of us who haven't been all consumed with a bogus story about a non-existent video, I apologize.

Carry on. I'm sure there's even more speculation you can speculate about.

[Signals.Cpl]

Had you the wherewithall to have followed along, you wouldnt post such tripe.

How so? Did I miss the major revelation that was made in this thread by you?

There is no evidence whatsoever that this video existed in the first place, the only evidence the video "existed" is the word of 3 journalists who may have lied to fabricate a story or been lied to in order to get them to fabricate a story. I, like every other person who has any common sense knew this video would never surface since the video never existed in the first place and because this was a smear campaign with no basis in fact and the three journalists are either willing members of the smear campaign or just three fools who were tricked in to furthering someone else's agenda...

[BubberMiley]

I, like every other person who has any common sense knew this video would never surface since the video never existed in the first place...

But ultimately that's just your opinion. You don't have any more information than anyone else. And while I realize the photo of Ford with the crack dealers doesn't exist in your world, ultimately Shady and I agree that people will believe what they believe.

[Signals.Cpl]

But ultimately that's just your opinion. You don't have any more information than anyone else. And while I realize the photo of Ford with the crack dealers doesn't exist in your world, ultimately Shady and I agree that people will believe what they believe.

Photo's can be manipulated very easily by anyone with my skills with photoshop and I am not good so I can imagine what those who are handy with Photoshop can do. But more then than what does one photo prove? They can be taken out of context and used as "evidence" to prove anything... What exactly does the picture show? Does it show him smoking crack? Does it show him doing anything illegal?

[BubberMiley]

I think we've established you don't believe he smokes crack. We've also established I do. Until something else happens, nothing is going to change.

[Shady]

I think we've established you don't believe he smokes crack. We've also established I do. Until something else happens, nothing is going to change.

Just work on finding the magical illusive video.

[BubberMiley]

I think you mean "elusive."

But keep beating that dead horse.

[Shady]

I think you mean "elusive."

But keep beating that dead horse.

Nope, I meant illusive, you're still pretty sore about that huh? Try expanding your vocabulary. But seriously, just find the video. Then perhaps the dead horse you've been beating for 80+ pages might have a bit of life.