News   Jul 09, 2024
Portland Commons Nearing the Finish Line
 547     1 
News   Jul 09, 2024
Trio of Project Settlements to Transform Danforth and Main
 1.4K     2 
News   Jul 09, 2024
Dangers During the Occupancy Period in a Condominium Development
 549     0 

Hazel McCallion on Hot Seat

doady said:
No it is not possible. They are sitting down on a sofa. Who could be behind them? The only possible explanation (besides Photoshop) was that person was sittingto the left of Hazel and was cropped from the photo and had long enough reach to reach past Hazel and put his hand on the opposite shoulder of Peter McCallion. Either way it is bizarre.
Click to expand...

If they are sitting on a sofa, she must be sitting on his lap.
 
doady said:
No it is not possible. They are sitting down on a sofa. Who could be behind them? The only possible explanation (besides Photoshop) was that person was sittingto the left of Hazel and was cropped from the photo and had long enough reach to reach past Hazel and put his hand on the opposite shoulder of Peter McCallion. Either way it is bizarre.
Click to expand...


There could've easily been someone standing behind the sofa.
 
syn said:
Welcome back Muse, you were gone for quite a while. I find that disturbing as well - minutes were doctored and many seem to have no problem with it.

This seems to be a good time to approach the media with your concerns.
Click to expand...

Hi there syn and thanks for the kind words.

Actually the media's had tons of opportunity to deal with issues that I raise. I mean I even go up and give deputations at Council now.

They don't report on me. And when they interview people for opinions, they bend themselves into pretzels actively avoiding me.

Love watching CABLE 10 (I actually videotape Cable 10 doing this) asking people for their opinions on some issue and I've filed six months worth of Freedom of Information on it.

But a member of the public who's clueless won't require anything of the interviewer except a "thank you" after they've made their noises.

Unbelieveable what FOI has dredged up since I was last active here. Forced me to conclude there's nothing that can be done but bear witness. (Like warn the saps most affected by all this).
 
Thathurts said:
She admits only about one of the meetings with her son and OMERS. She has yet to admit to the many many meetings where she took part regarding OMERS and Enersource. She also does not admit to trying to save her son's deal in Mid-December when he had his house on the line. Then what exactly was her role in the city buying THE SAME land. Wow and hey did that not mean that OMERS had to settle with her son and pay him out and he keeps his house. Would that have happened if the deal timed out in a few short months? I am sorry but I am not that easily BSd.

While we are talking about poor conduct -- Did you know that she has been triple dipping? I am amazed that the media does not care. She is paid a large and good salary for her role as Mayor and regional councillor (Peel). Then she gets her pension -- mandatory. Then for several years she took a salary from the hydro utility. When she was caught she made a big pronouncement about giving it back. How nice. What happened to the $500 thousand or so that she collected? Oh the people of Mississauga don't need that money. I know you would like to sweep it under the carpet. She is so nice and good and righteous she does not need bother with silly things like laws and doing right by the people.
Click to expand...

WHOA! You're one of the few who knows what's going on. And you're right about the video.

'cuz I've got it too.

As for you writing, "I am amazed that the media does not care." I'm not. Those spitzbooben built her up! What? They're now going to admit they were wrong?...

(Oh to get the Ontario Ombudsman to shine a light in there. Complete with subpoena power)
 
syn said:
The difference that everyone ignores is that Mississauga has had the same mayor for over three decades. When we look at other cities, suburbs, etc. we can always argue 'well they didn't know any better back then...can't blame the current mayor for problems that occured before her time.... For years they supported poor planning when they should've known better.
Click to expand...

Have to laugh because sometimes Councillors are forced to deal with noise walls or regular walls and have to talk about decisions made regarding developers.

And of course they'd just love to blame the Council of 20 years ago but that'd nail McCallion so they avoid it.

As for you writing, "For years they supported poor planning when they should've known better." It was all about greed and develop$$$$$$$$$$$$ment fees.

Watch. Planners now know what's better for liveable cities. But watch Brampton. They'll go the way of Mississauga with sprawl as well.
 
lordmandeep said:
Hazel has been able to rule as she has because she makes sure a proper opposition can not even start, forget about existing. However, unlike being an emperor, your not above the rules, no matter how beloved you are.
Click to expand...

While I agree with you about what you say, you are WRONG about McCallion.

She IS Above the Rules. She truly is.
 
doady said:
The "original" uncropped "photo" can still be found here:

http://www.mississauga.com/news/article/150947--mayor-at-meetings-about-son-s-project

Okay, so first Hazel was called out on her lie about declaring a conflict of interest. Then it was revealed that the city clerk has fabricated the minutes about her declaring a conflict of interest. And now people are pointing out the Toronto Star's doctoring of photos in their reporting of these news. Crazy...

What is point of this I wonder? Obviously, someone else was sitting beside him in the original photo, and Hazel was photoshopped in. What is the Toronto Star's agenda? My guess is that they wanted to make her and her son look really close so that the conflict of interest seemed more plausible. Sneaky...
.
Click to expand...


here's some info found in the image:


Code: 
ImageDescription - 021401 left to right: son Peter McCallion, Hazel, son Paul McCallion, and daughter Linda Burgess get together for a pre-show portrait. ken faught toronto star

Make - NIKON CORPORATION
Model - NIKON D1
Orientation - Top left
XResolution - 72
YResolution - 72
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - Adobe Photoshop CS Macintosh
DateTime - 2009:09:18 07:30:08
Artist - Ken Faught
YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
ExifOffset - 424
ExposureTime - 1/60 seconds
FNumber - 5.60
ExposureProgram - Manual control
ExifVersion - 0210
DateTimeOriginal - 2001:02:15 10:07:46
DateTimeDigitized - 2001:02:15 10:07:46
ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
CompressedBitsPerPixel - 4 (bits/pixel)
ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
MaxApertureValue - F 2.83
MeteringMode - Multi-segment
FocalLength - 26.00 mm
UserComment - 
SubsecTimeOriginal - 7
SubsecTimeDigitized - 7
FlashPixVersion - 0100
ColorSpace - sRGB
ExifImageWidth - 504
ExifImageHeight - 410
InteroperabilityOffset - 864
SensingMethod - One-chip color area sensor
FileSource - Other
SceneType - Other

Thumbnail: - 
Compression - 6 (JPG)
XResolution - 72
YResolution - 72
ResolutionUnit - Inch
JpegIFOffset - 990
JpegIFByteCount - 6399


from the description, paul and linda are missing from that photo. what this is supposed to mean, i don't know. what is incriminating about a family photo? the question is, why were two other family members shopped out? and why would the original description be left in the image?
 
Prometheus The Supremo said:
here's some info found in the image:


Code: 
ImageDescription - 021401 left to right: son Peter McCallion, Hazel, son Paul McCallion, and daughter Linda Burgess get together for a pre-show portrait. ken faught toronto star

Make - NIKON CORPORATION
Model - NIKON D1
Orientation - Top left
XResolution - 72
YResolution - 72
ResolutionUnit - Inch
Software - Adobe Photoshop CS Macintosh
DateTime - 2009:09:18 07:30:08
Artist - Ken Faught
YCbCrPositioning - Co-Sited
ExifOffset - 424
ExposureTime - 1/60 seconds
FNumber - 5.60
ExposureProgram - Manual control
ExifVersion - 0210
DateTimeOriginal - 2001:02:15 10:07:46
DateTimeDigitized - 2001:02:15 10:07:46
ComponentsConfiguration - YCbCr
CompressedBitsPerPixel - 4 (bits/pixel)
ExposureBiasValue - 0.00
MaxApertureValue - F 2.83
MeteringMode - Multi-segment
FocalLength - 26.00 mm
UserComment - 
SubsecTimeOriginal - 7
SubsecTimeDigitized - 7
FlashPixVersion - 0100
ColorSpace - sRGB
ExifImageWidth - 504
ExifImageHeight - 410
InteroperabilityOffset - 864
SensingMethod - One-chip color area sensor
FileSource - Other
SceneType - Other

Thumbnail: - 
Compression - 6 (JPG)
XResolution - 72
YResolution - 72
ResolutionUnit - Inch
JpegIFOffset - 990
JpegIFByteCount - 6399


from the description, paul and linda are missing from that photo. what this is supposed to mean, i don't know. what is incriminating about a family photo? the question is, why were two other family members shopped out? and why would the original description be left in the image?
Click to expand...

They simply cropped to show the relevant two people they were referring to. What's so hard to understand about that?
 
Tuscani01 said:
Wow... Hume is flopping like a fish out of water. One day its 'Hazel needs to go!' the next its 'Leave Hazel alone!'
Click to expand...

Hi Tuscan, I don't read Hume's second article as a flip-flop. He's quite consistent actually. About Mississauga not being a city but rather a way for Sprawl to map itself.

And I've been filing Freedom of Information on Mississauga municipal governance now since January 2006 (over $2,100 including appeals to the Information and Privacy Commissioner.

You would not BELIEVE the difference between what McCallion and the City claims publically and what Freedom of Information confirms.

Try this letter to the Mississauga News written by Tom Urbaniak who wrote the book, "Her Worship: Hazel McCallion and the Development of Mississauga"

Hazel will fight

Fans of the Montreal Kik Cola women’s hockey team knew it almost 70 years ago: Hazel Journeaux plays offence.
Rarely has there been a cornered or retreating Hazel McCallion. When it happens, it’s not pretty.

The current conflict of interest allegations against McCallion probably won’t be a career-stopper for the 88-year-old mayor. If a violation of the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act is found to have been the result of a “bona fide error in judgment,” a stubborn McCallion will claim total vindication, as she did in 1982 when Judge Ernest West ruled she had breached that statute but without corrupt intent.

If there has been any error or wrongdoing in this case, would McCallion take full responsibility? I’m not so sure.
As president of the Anglican Young People’s Association of Canada (1949-51), she won rave reviews for making herself visible. Her colleagues called her an “inhuman automaton” because of her energy. But when the Calgary bishop wrote to criticize her on a membership issue, she avoided the missive, then tried to shift the focus to the western delegates.

McCallion lost her first municipal election, when she ran for deputy reeve of Streetsville in 1965. At no point did she concede defeat with grace. For the next two years, she used her newspaper, The Streetsville Booster, to attack her opponents mercilessly and sometimes personally.
McCallion sat on the raucous 1974-76 council that was described by one reporter as a hotbed of “big-city politics.” She was an ally of inexperienced Mayor Martin Dobkin. She was an ally in offence, that is, but not so much in defence. The young Dobkin was often left all alone to handle withering attacks from the old guard.

And in 2001, an obstinate McCallion had to be prodded by media and multicultural groups over a period of many days to finally issue a grudging, partial apology. She had been quoted in The National Post complaining that Credit Valley Hospital’s emergency room “is loaded with people in their native costumes.” She insisted that she had been taken out of context and was referring to illegal immigrants.
McCallion has admitted to mistakes, but the admissions have been pre-emptive rather than conciliatory gestures. Rather than facing strong activist groups or opposition on council, she has always been able to sense subtle changes in the public mood and get in front of the parade before anyone else showed up.

This is how, a decade ago, she restyled herself as a critic of urban sprawl. But when the “Our Future Mississauga” planning exercise revealed last year that “there is a stronger appetite for change than the politicians may realize,” McCallion responded by blaming the people for being inconsistent in their aspirations. It was not vintage Hazel.

McCallion’s idols are former Ottawa Mayor Charlotte Whitton and former British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Both secured their places in history, but neither left office in glory. McCallion’s handling of events over the next few months may determine if history repeats itself.
Click to expand...

That dude gets it.
 
Coruscanti Cognoscente said:
They simply cropped to show the relevant two people they were referring to. What's so hard to understand about that?
Click to expand...

it's not really a crop but a shop. they should have just cropped the image. i don't see the point to the shop.
 
Prometheus The Supremo said:
it's not really a crop but a shop. they should have just cropped the image. i don't see the point to the shop.
Click to expand...
How on earth is it 'shopped? If there was an empty area to either side of the mayor or her son, you might have a point, but the photo is clearly cropped to a smaller size to exclude anyone other than the two people in the photo.

Do you think someone's smiling mug was nestled into Hazel's hair but then painted out? If you look more closely, you can see a patch of blue/black to the right, next to her shoulder. It's hard to pick out against the greenish-black shade of the furniture, but my guess is that it's the suit-clad shoulder of the person who belongs to the 3rd hand.
 
Last edited:
Marko said:
How on earth is it 'shopped? If there was an empty area to either side of the mayor or her son, you might have a point, but the photo is clearly cropped to a smaller size to exclude anyone other than the two people in the photo.

Do you think someone's smiling mug was nestled into Hazel's hair but then painted out? If you look more closely, you can see a patch of blue/black to the right, next to her shoulder. It's hard to pick out against the greenish-black shade of the furniture, but my guess is that it's the suit-clad shoulder of the person who belongs to the 3rd hand.
Click to expand...

i did some adjustments and i do see a little patch of something over the left shoulder. okay, it does look cropped now but now there's something even more sinister to worry about: an unusually long arm! :p of course, this could be a perspective issue (optical illusion) since hazel could have a thin torso, her sit angle and also the other son's angle of sit.


looks like all the excitement was for nothing.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top