News   Oct 28, 2020
 133     0 
News   Oct 27, 2020
 424     0 
News   Oct 27, 2020
 1.2K     4 

Rob Ford's Toronto

Status
Not open for further replies.

EnviroTO

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
3,948
Reaction score
62
Location
Yonge & Mt.Pleasant
I find it funny that for some people the police going to the Ford house on a regular basis due to a call from that house can be polished over at all. See, he is in Florida now with happy kids... there is no way anything could have happened a few days ago. Silly Toronto Star and their misinformation again.
 
G

gabe

Guest
:rolleyes: When was the last time "normal family stuff" prompted someone at your house to call 911?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
I dislike Ford and I'm not defending him, but it's funny how the CBC was all over him for calling 911 when This 22 Minutes Feels Like An Hour showed up on his driveway, unannounced. Ezra Levant exposed the CBC's hypocrisy when he showed up at their headquarters, shortly after that incident, and asked if he could speak with Hubert Lacroix or Jeff Keay. Strangely, a security guard accused him of being belligerent, when he was clearly calm and polite, and a 911 call was authorized if he refused to leave the building (which is publicly funded).
 

voxpopulicosmicum

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Nov 22, 2007
Messages
1,261
Reaction score
0
I dislike Ford and I'm not defending him, but it's funny how the CBC was all over him for calling 911 when This 22 Minutes Feels Like An Hour showed up on his driveway, unannounced. Ezra Levant exposed the CBC's hypocrisy when he showed up at their headquarters, shortly after that incident, and asked if he could speak with Hubert Lacroix or Jeff Keay. Strangely, a security guard accused him of being belligerent, when he was clearly calm and polite, and a 911 call was authorized if he refused to leave the building (which is publicly funded).
It's funny that you claim not to be defending Ford when in fact there appears to be no other possible motivation for your post.

Also -- given that your focus in this thread is the now-familiar CBC bashing that is the new rallying cry forCanadian neocons -- if I had to guess I would say that all clues point to you being another of the right wing propagandists who were recently astroturfed into our midst. Bravo, Nick Kouvalis. Our discourse is all lessened by your existence, as intended.

But I digress; let's look at the "substance" of your argument (such as it is):

The CBC is hypocritical because:
1. two particular CBC employees did not make themselves available for an interview with a "journalist" who showed up at their offices unannounced and then refused to leave when his impromptu request was denied; and
2. "a 911 call was authorized" if the "journalist" refused to leave the building.

I am confused. Is it your contention that the CBC is obliged to grant interview requests to anyone who asks, at any time? If so, does the same standard apply to each and every person who benefits from public funding? Can I walk into 24 Sussex at 3am and demand an audience with Harper?

Assuming you're not so stupid as to argue that the CBC is obliged to grant impromptu interview requests, let's examine the aftermath of the failed interview request for signs of the CBC's hypocrisy. Levant seems to have thrown his typically hissy fit and refused to leave the building. But did Levant, in fact, leave the building as requested by security? Judging by your post, he appears to have done so. Is that not evidence of his acknowledgement that failing to do so would would have been trespassing?

If you were familiar with the laws of trespass, you would know that trespassing is accessing property, without colour of right, in the face of a specific disinvitation by a person with due authority to grant or deny access to the property. In this case, Levant came to the CBC to request an interview (i.e. he entered the property "with colour of right"), the interview request was declined, Levant said he would not leave, and then was told to do so and that the failure to do so would constitute trespassing (i.e. he was specifically disinvited from remaining on the property without colour of right). Levant and the CBC appear to understand the laws of trespassing.

Ford did not lay any charges of trespassing against Marg Delahunty. It appears that, when instruced by Ford to leave his private property, Marg Delahunty complied. If Ford had told Marg to leave his property and she had failed to comply, that would have been trespassing. If Ford had posted a sign saying "private property, no unauthorized access" at the foot of his driveway, then it would have been trespassing. He never claims to have done either such thing, and so it was not trespassing. So again, it appears that the CBC (through its agent, Marg Delahunty) has demonstrated its familiarity with trespassing laws. Heck, even Rob Ford appears to grasp the concept of trespassing.

So please enlighten us: where is the hypocrisy?
 
Last edited:
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
It's funny that you claim not to be defending Ford when in fact there appears to be no other possible motivation for your post.

Also -- given that your focus in this thread is the now-familiar CBC bashing that is the new rallying cry forCanadian neocons -- if I had to guess I would say that all clues point to you being another of the right wing propagandists who were recently astroturfed into our midst. Bravo, Nick Kouvalis. Our discourse is all lessened by your existence, as intended.

But I digress; let's look at the "substance" of your argument (such as it is):

The CBC is hypocritical because:
1. two particular CBC employees did not make themselves available for an interview with a "journalist" who showed up at their offices unannounced and then refused to leave when his impromptu request was denied; and
2. "a 911 call was authorized" if the "journalist" refused to leave the building.

I am confused. Is it your contention that the CBC is obliged to grant interview requests to anyone who asks, at any time? If so, does the same standard apply to each and every person who benefits from public funding? Can I walk into 24 Sussex at 3am and demand an audience with Harper?

Assuming you're not so stupid as to argue that the CBC is obliged to grant impromptu interview requests, let's examine the aftermath of the failed interview request for signs of the CBC's hypocrisy. Levant seems to have thrown his typically hissy fit and refused to leave the building. But did Levant, in fact, leave the building as requested by security? Judging by your post, he appears to have done so. Is that not evidence of his acknowledgement that failing to do so would would have been trespassing?

If you were familiar with the laws of trespass, you would know that trespassing is accessing property, without colour of right, in the face of a specific disinvitation by a person with due authority to grant or deny access to the property. In this case, Levant came to the CBC to request an interview (i.e. he entered the property "with colour of right"), the interview request was declined, Levant said he would not leave, and then was told to do so and that the failure to do so would constitute trespassing (i.e. he was specifically disinvited from remaining on the property without colour of right). Levant and the CBC appear to understand the laws of trespassing.

Ford did not lay any charges of trespassing against Marg Delahunty. It appears that, when instruced by Ford to leave his private property, Marg Delahunty complied. If Ford had told Marg to leave his property and she had failed to comply, that would have been trespassing. If Ford had posted a sign saying "private property, no unauthorized access" at the foot of his driveway, then it would have been trespassing. He never claims to have done either such thing, and so it was not trespassing. So again, it appears that the CBC (through its agent, Marg Delahunty) has demonstrated its familiarity with trespassing laws. Heck, even Rob Ford appears to grasp the concept of trespassing.

So please enlighten us: where is the hypocrisy?
I'm not defending Ford, but calling the CBC out on their double standard. Ford was a fool for calling the police.

The CBC rips on Ford for not being "transparent", which is perfectly fine, however, they are the least transparent, publicly owned entity in this country. If they expect Ford to be open with the public, then they should be held to the same standard, no? They refused to comply with access to information requests until 4 different judges demanded that they cooperate and share how they spend public tax dollars. Then before finally being coerced to obey the law they went ahead and blacked out certain expenditures that they didn't want to be made known. Basically they're taking our money and saying we have no business knowing what they do with it. Lacroix should be thrown in jail for this. The public has the right to know what their money is being used for. This is supposed to be a free country, not a dictatorship.

The CBC is hypocritical for making fun of Ford for calling the police over such a petty issue, yet they authorized a 911 call in response to Levant for essentially the same thing (they didn't want to deal with him). The CBC is publicly owned, therefore he had every right to stand in the building as long as he wanted, so long as he didn't hurt anyone. What did he do that justified having him thrown out of the building?

In case you haven't seen the video, here it is.

[video=youtube;bwFUU8wpKcc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bwFUU8wpKcc[/video]

What he did was the exact same thing Marg pulled on Rob Ford (he caught them off guard, unprepared), hence their desperate attempt to have him removed from the building. Who was that guy in the black suit with the wire in his ear? Was that a secret agent?

No, I don't expect the CBC to grant interview requests to anyone at anytime, however, the security guard that Levant spoke to could have at least put in a call to said people and and asked if they had any free time to answer some questions or at least a secretary could have answered on their behalf and scheduled an appointment. Clearly they never want to speak to Levant as he called them several times, well before showing up at the CBC building and they never responded. They're utterly scared of Levant as they know he would expose them for the crooks that they are. Why else would they be so ambivalent towards him if they have nothing to hide? He only showed up at their building because they wouldn't return his phone calls.

Levant leaving on his own initiative isn't evidence that he was trespassing. He knew he wasn't going to get to speak with any of the higher ups, therefore I suppose he left to avoid being questioned by the police, which ultimately would have been a waste of time and a nuisance that wouldn't have solved anything. He most likely didn't want to give them the satisfaction of forcibly removing him from the building so he left before they inevitably tried to do so.

Everything the CBC owns is/was funded by public tax dollars, including their headquarters. Does Levant not have a right to use public space? What grounds did the CBC have for asking him to leave the building? He wasn't inflicting harm or threatening anyone. He simply asked for an interview and that constitutes the right to make him leave the premises? Why didn't they tell him that he cannot speak to Lacroix or Keay at that moment but ask if he would like to make an appointment to speak with them at a later date? I agree that showing up, unannounced isn't typical protocol to conduct an interview. He was just letting them know what it must have felt like for Ford to be surprised by a camera crew on his own driveway. He knew he wasn't going to be allowed to speak with any executives. Do you think Lacroix or Keay should grant Levant's wish and speak with him in the future? If Ford is expected to speak to the Toronto Star and CBC, who abhor him, shouldn't Lacroix, whose paycheck is provided by the Canadian public, give Levant the same respect? Is that not a fair compromise? If the CBC, which is supposed to represent all Canadians, continues to hide how they spend our money, then shouldn't Ford be allowed to ignore the requests of the left wing media? Personally, I think both parties are at fault and they ought to be open with everybody. The CBC has no right to hammer Ford for being sneaky or reclusive as long as they handle the money of Canadians in a stealthy manner.

Does the CBC have 'no trespassing' signs infront of entrances to their headquarters? The public is allowed to step foot inside. Notice how Levant was harassed outside before entering the building? He just as easily could have laid charges against them. People brushed up against him and his camera man, which could be argued as battery.
 
Last edited:

Ak2809

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
128
Reaction score
0
What exactly was the point of derailing this into an attack on the CBC?

What does arguing that the CBC are hypocrites contribute to a discussion on Rob Ford?
 

denfromoakvillemilton

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 30, 2008
Messages
6,733
Reaction score
752
Location
Former City of York, Ontario, Canada
It's so easy to spot the returning forum trolls by how they always pick the most obvious user names.

This is why people would rather be at skyscraperpage/skyscrapercity or they turn into rabid TO Sun guys.

He's has a different opnion but is being calm, confident , well spoken. Let's not push him away maybe?
 
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 30, 2011
Messages
25
Reaction score
0
What exactly was the point of derailing this into an attack on the CBC?

What does arguing that the CBC are hypocrites contribute to a discussion on Rob Ford?
Well I think it's fair to question the CBC since they continue to write negative stories about Ford yet won't answer to their opponents. How can they bash Ford and his policies so much when their own management is far more corrupt? If they want to hold a strictly leftist point of view then they should seek private funding. I'd start a thread in the political forum instead, however, for some reason I'm not allowed to start a new thread.
 
Last edited:

k10ery

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 20, 2009
Messages
1,578
Reaction score
43
Well I think it's fair to question the CBC since they continue to write negative stories about Ford yet won't answer to their opponents. How can they bash Ford and his policies so much when their own management is far more corrupt? If they want to hold a strictly leftist point of view then they should seek private funding. I'd start a thread in the political forum instead, however, for some reason I'm not allowed to start a new thread.
The CBC didn't break the Christmas 911 story, the Star did. The only other person I know who is this confused about what the CBC is and what it does is ... Rob Ford himself. Hmm.

I don't think the CBC is continuing "to write negative stories" about Ford. If anything they have been timid about the 22 Minutes incident. They had an on air item saying Ford verbally abused the 911 dispatchers and that's it. If the story is false, then all Ford has to do is authorize release of the 911 tapes. But he won't.
 

Ak2809

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 24, 2009
Messages
128
Reaction score
0
Well I think it's fair to question the CBC since they continue to write negative stories about Ford yet won't answer to their opponents. How can they bash Ford and his policies so much when their own management is far more corrupt? If they want to hold a strictly leftist point of view then they should seek private funding. I'd start a thread in the political forum instead, however, for some reason I'm not allowed to start a new thread.
Then create a thread arguing the hypocrisy of the CBC. Perceived corruption in the CBC is only peripherally related to Rob Ford, and really has no place in this thread.

Either way, I'm sure you're aware that as one of the media the CBC will do whatever it can to grab headlines in much the same way Ezra Levant does. This really is a non-issue.
 

toto

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 20, 2010
Messages
393
Reaction score
0
Going to be a little politically incorrect for this bit. My apologies if I offend anyone. That's not my intent.

The term that best describes the Ford family is "Rich White Trash". I grew up in an east Toronto neighbourhood in the 60's, were Ford's poorer counterparts, flourished. Calling the police on each other was a daily occurrance. Odd thing was that the same people that would call the cops on a family member, would go out of their way to be nice to you on the street. Many of my childhood friends came from this type of domestic environment. I saw it first hand. The roots of this kind of family dynamic are deep and long. It's a hard life to escape. Looks like Rob hasn't been able to. Although, I'm sure he has been trying.
 
Last edited:

ladyscraper

man alive
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 25, 2007
Messages
529
Reaction score
0
This is why people would rather be at skyscraperpage/skyscrapercity or they turn into rabid TO Sun guys.

He's has a different opnion but is being calm, confident , well spoken. Let's not push him away maybe?
I just get annoyed when the same posters that get banned keep returning with a new user name. They are too obvious about it.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top