[CalgarianExOntarian]

well, I'm not sure it will be all that effective since:

a) nobody reads the post

b) if they do (accidentally, or otherwise), a vast majority of readers give up on any conrad black article after a paragraph or two (unless, of course, it is conrad himself reading aloud to barbara as I'm sure he does)

Heh, yeah, I think you're right.

But in addition to being irritating as hell, Black is a puzzle. I get that he has a giant ego and will blast away with a lot of big words but not much logic at anybody that bruises that ego. But Rob Ford lied to Black, and Black believed him, which led directly to Black looking like a lazy idiot in his interview with Carol Off. And somehow the Star deserves to be attacked over this episode, not Rob Ford?

 

[pattycakes]

YAY!!! @80sDougFord is back!

Does anyone know who is behind that? It's hilarious

That's great news, he is so funny
Also new fake for hotmail lawyer is pretty good, Dennis Morris Esq.

 

[dforthandbview]

I can't seem to find the tweet at the moment but I do remember a few months ago someone tweeted that he saw Ford checking in alone at the Sheraton hotel downtown. A date with a cachet lady, perhaps? Edit: Not Twitter but Reddit and not the Sheraton but Eaton Chelsea. http://www.reddit.com/r/toronto/comments/1l3frf/rob_ford_just_checked_in_alone_the_eaton_chelsea/

 

[CalgarianExOntarian]

That's great news, he is so funny
Also new fake for hotmail lawyer is pretty good, Dennis Morris Esq.

Thanks for the pointer! This is awesome ...

Dennis Morrris Esq ‏@hotmailawyer 11 Dec
Golfing again. It is a bitter irony that I can keep a Minotaur from charging into prison but cannot put a tiny ball in a hole. Good grief.

 

[GeekGirl]

It was your comment about "I know drug dealers who aren't that paranoid" (about being secretly recorded) that struck me. Because drug dealers who operate at a level that they need to think about being recorded are (I would think) further up the food chain than the person who sells small quantities to their friends and acquaintances. And you evidently know more than one dealer at that level, which strikes me as unusual. It has nothing to do with fitting stereotypes, just probabilities. There can't be so many dealers-at-that-level around that the average person knows a bunch of them.

Well that depends on the drug and the person. A white male selling e or coke to people is under the radar. A black male selling crack or e, not so much. Loads of responsible, working people do drugs every weekend. Who the police chose to target is almost always based upon race. That is how the police operate.

 

[sarnya]

What happened in that case, IINM, is that Ford didn't want to go forward with the whole process. He just served them the notice that he would be suing if they didn't apologize and then he let his own deadline expire.

Rob Ford didn't follow through on something? Quelle surpirse!

 

[GeekGirl]

I believe he's not running. He must hate city hall where it's become impossible for him to get anything done. He likely still has provincial ambitions which puts Hudak in a tight spot. How does Hudak court the Ford Nation vote without the toxic Fords? If he freezes Doug out, does he risk losing votes? If he lets Doug run, is it worth the agony of having a rogue MPP with a big mouth?

Hudak is a sleaze ball. He will stand by Doug Ford. No question.

 

[TOperson]

Well that depends on the drug and the person. A white male selling e or coke to people is under the radar. A black male selling crack or e, not so much. Loads of responsible, working people do drugs every weekend. Who the police chose to target is almost always based upon race. That is how the police operate.

The sub-conversation isn't about police targeting or stereotypes or who uses drugs. It goes back to a remark MTown made.

 

[Bennett000]

Perspective indeed. I do enjoy your posts and your way of thinking, Bennett, and this one was no different!

Thanks for the compliment! I actually get a little paranoid that I pile on too much etc, so I'm glad you're getting something out of my posts.

I don't follow this thread very closely anymore so I apologize if the following question has already been asked.

Has it not occurred to the Star that they have a little 'splaining to do with regard to defamation etc. They charged that Ford beat up a football player a couple of years ago who popped up and volunteered that the whole story was nonsense but no apology ensued. I am not a lawyer or a Latin scholar but the situation may be identified as a case of "tit for tat".

I would be a little nervous if I were the Star.

Before the Troll machine is fired up may I say in my defence that no opinions were stated on the merits of any of these activities.

The player denied the incident occurred, but the Star still has/had two witnesses who said otherwise. I would guess if the Star was reporting on what their witnesses said, their story stands, but I'm not a legal expert, or even a lawyer.

Interestingly, I just realized that there's a good chance I know people who were at the game; I intend to ask around. I'm doubtful I'll find out much unless I talk to people in person though, and I don't expect to socialize in those circles for around eight months. Although that's still before the election, so it may still be topical then.

 

[flonicky]

This is going around Twitter:

"Just reported on The National - Flaherty was pissed Kenney called for Ford to resign. And they got into a tense exchange."

"Flaherty yelled at Jason Kenney to "shut up" about Rob Ford on the floor of the House of Commons???"

"CBC says Flaherty swore at Kenney and told him to "shut up." Some MPs and cabinet ministers watching said it was all very awkward."

Here's the CBC article:
http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/ken...parked-profane-rebuke-from-flaherty-1.2463984

 

[GeekGirl]

The sub-conversation isn't about police targeting or stereotypes or who uses drugs. It goes back to a remark MTown made.

Yes I understand that. I think my point is, some people prefer booze, some prefer weed or some other substances. Many of us know people who supply. I guess my point is, they are regular people, just like us.

 

[requiem]

Could Ford claim he was just describing what he was thinking at that moment and he wasn't actually defaming Dale?

 

[kbdid]

Could Ford claim he was just describing what he was thinking at that moment and he wasn't actually defaming Dale?

Yeah, he could, but then there's the little matter of him saying that he's standing by his comments etc and then repeating the same stuff on US radio, so not so sure that defence would be that effective.

 

[CalgarianExOntarian]

Could Ford claim he was just describing what he was thinking at that moment and he wasn't actually defaming Dale?

I assume your question is about whether that would be a viable defense, because if you're just asking if any of us think RoFo might try that angle, well, of course he could.

I am not a lawyer and do not have any real knowledge of related statutes or precedents. But God help us all if that kind of crap could fly in a court of law.

If Rob shot his mouth off within a few hours of the incident and never mentioned it again after he cooled off, maybe he was just an overheated overreacting asshole for a short period of time and ought to be given the benefit of the doubt.

But Rob brought the story up apropos of nothing but a vague and pandering question from Conrad Black a year and a half after the incident, then said he stood behind his account two more times, and got backed up by Doug. Rob and Doug must pay, literally, with cash, and figuratively, with their reputations somehow going even farther below zero than they already are.

 

[pud99]

I assume your question is about whether that would be a viable defense, because if you're just asking if any of us think RoFo might try that angle, well, of course he could.

I am not a lawyer and do not have any real knowledge of related statutes or precedents. But God help us all if that kind of crap could fly in a court of law.

If Rob shot his mouth off within a few hours of the incident and never mentioned it again after he cooled off, maybe he was just an overheated overreacting asshole for a short period of time and ought to be given the benefit of the doubt.

But Rob brought the story up apropos of nothing but a vague and pandering question from Conrad Black a year and a half after the incident, then said he stood behind his account two more times, and got backed up by Doug. Rob and Doug must pay, literally, with cash, and figuratively, with their reputations somehow going even farther below zero than they already are.

The guy on Q today from the National Post tried that one on. It does not fly. Robinoccio was not asked about his state of mind. He was asked what he considered to be his worst encounter with the media. He answered with a fabricated version of events (parts of which are themselves defamatory) and then suggested that Dale is a sicko.