he didnt know who he was until he went up to him. If you think its ok to invade ppls privacy like that then fine, but I seriously doubt you'd like the star creeping you. all you ppl defending this reporter are just splitting hairs. he's lying about the whole thing bc he knows what he was doing was wrong
Daniel Dale on what happened near the mayor’s home
- Thread starter Jennifer_
- Start date
he didnt know who he was until he went up to him. If you think its ok to invade ppls privacy like that then fine, but I seriously doubt you'd like the star creeping you. all you ppl defending this reporter are just splitting hairs. he's lying about the whole thing bc he knows what he was doing was wrong
lol - wow.
I definitely don't believe Rob's story - all we have to look at is what he claimed happened during the "this hour has 22 minutes" fiasco vs what we saw on film.
Daniel Dale was writing a legitimate article about a sketchy attempt to buy a piece of city-owned land. http://www.thestar.com/news/cityhal...f-etobicoke-park-to-build-security-fence?bn=1 He was taking pictures of said land with his Blackberry while researching for his article.
Ford freaked because he recognized the reporter as being from the Star. Most people with any intelligence would know their safety was not being compromised and react civilly - questioning why the well-known reporter was there rather than run after him like a lunatic.
I agree , what the fuck is this guy taking pictures at night? You would go during the day to take pictures....the Star has become like the National Enquirer taking pictures of ford going to KFC and now this. I agree, its not about left or right its stupidity.
Nonsense blackrock. You are thinking of criminal harassment, and it would have to include some sort of interference or threat.
There is nothing illegal about checking out a property from all angles, even hanging around awhile to see what goes on. Especially if you are writing a story about the property as he was.
Whether his version is correct or Ford's there is nothing criminal either way, more is it trespassing.
Ford claimed there were people accessing the back of his property at night. To see if that is true you would want to go there at night and observe awhile.
There is nothing illegal about checking out a property from all angles, even hanging around awhile to see what goes on. Especially if you are writing a story about the property as he was.
Whether his version is correct or Ford's there is nothing criminal either way, more is it trespassing.
Ford claimed there were people accessing the back of his property at night. To see if that is true you would want to go there at night and observe awhile.
boo hoo - If you don't want to be in the public eye - then don't run for Mayor.
If you fear for your safety - take your peers' advice and hire security personnel.
If you don't want to be embarrassed - don't do embarrassing things.
If you want favourable press - don't do stupid, sketchy, immature, and/or corrupt things.
Being in the public eye and expecting to have people taking pictures at night over your fence are two different things. Even the British press are generally seeing the difference and follow it.
why the fuck should he? he's not some big hollywood actor. don;t you ppl realize that it costs time and money to do that, when he's probably working 16 hour days running the city and his family business. name me one other politician who has to put up with this kind of harassment.
Marge-Gate revisited.
I'm sure the beacon of 'truthiness', Police Chief Bill Blair will chime in soon to shine the light of 'truth' about the now infamous 'Fence-Gate' incident.
"I have reviewed the the mayor's account of the incident and I doth proclaim it so chock 'full of truthiness and goodiness'.
Finger-Gate, Fat-Fuck-Gate, Belligerent-Drunken-Abuse-Gate, 911-Gate, Marge-Gate, Chicken-Gate, Fence-Gate.......there is something seriously askew with this sorry excuse of a man, notwithstanding his utter and complete failings as a mayor.
Last edited:
I actually hate using -gate when there is not -gate involved, but just this once, how about, "Should-have-stayed-behind-the-gate-gate".
And the reason for that is Toronto is considered a left-wing town.
The Star has a long history of childish stakeouts on Ford's property, hell they even went up to his cottage one day to "interview" him. The Left cant wait to get him out of office, never mind the fact the majority of TO voters still support him
What I'm seeing on this thread is a lot of jumping to attack/defend the mayor based on politacal leanings it appears. I consider myself a moderate with no real leanings beyond a hope for common sense. That being said I would have reacted the same as the mayor did. The time of day is very suspicious. Watching the reporter explain himself today my sense is he is trying to cover his tracks. But in the interest of fairness I will withhold final judgement until any video pictures are released.
As a side note that the reporter is planning to continue to cover the mayor in light of this incident is very distasteful. Until this is resolved he should recuse himself from covering the mayor. That the Star supports this decision when any other responsible corporate entity would not says a lot to me. The Star comes off as taunting really. Makes me believe they are becoming a bit pathological about the mayor. Is their no (property) line they won't cross?
As a side note that the reporter is planning to continue to cover the mayor in light of this incident is very distasteful. Until this is resolved he should recuse himself from covering the mayor. That the Star supports this decision when any other responsible corporate entity would not says a lot to me. The Star comes off as taunting really. Makes me believe they are becoming a bit pathological about the mayor. Is their no (property) line they won't cross?
I think Kelly McParland at the National Post has nailed this one. Assessing the playpen fight between Ford and the Toronto Star, McParland says they both look bad:
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...to-star-or-two-babies-and-a-very-big-playpen/
I think everyone would chuckle at McParland's reaction to Daniel Dale's account of how he (Dale) almost almost peed his pants:
http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com...to-star-or-two-babies-and-a-very-big-playpen/
I think everyone would chuckle at McParland's reaction to Daniel Dale's account of how he (Dale) almost almost peed his pants:
Too funny.
Given Ford's abysmal record of losing it, lying about losing it and then having to backtrack, you'd think by now he'd have learned to keep quiet and calmly call for back-up to catch the trespasser red-handed.
Now he's trying to blackmail the entire City Hall Press Corps into kicking Daniel Dale out; if they don't he won't talk to any of them. As McParland said, playpen level politics.
But just imagine: A pol voluntarily going without press coverage. Nah! Never gonna happen.
Now he's trying to blackmail the entire City Hall Press Corps into kicking Daniel Dale out; if they don't he won't talk to any of them. As McParland said, playpen level politics.
But just imagine: A pol voluntarily going without press coverage. Nah! Never gonna happen.
True, although Ford wouldn't be the first guy to restrict access:
http://www.thetelegram.com/News/Loc...nalists-award-for-most-secretive-government/1
From what I can see, Ford is threatening to up the ante to freeze out the Star. He's still going to seek other press coverage: http://www.torontosun.com/2012/05/03/ford-still-steaming-mad-at-the-toronto-star
