A Very Interesting Speculation On The Ford Controversy

One of the reader comments on a National Post article caught my attention.  It presents a new light on this Ford controversy.  One that is all too plausible and even more disturbing.

walkingbear • an hour ago

Two Choices. #1…Ford was set up…it is all a hoax. #2. Whoa….wait here. fires his chief of staff for advice on rehab counseling? Over six months makes leagues of outrageous statements and odd reactions to numerous situations, and is thrice in court for his virtual arrogance? hmmm… But then the biggie! One of his football students at Boscoe is gunned down in a drug deal type attack…left dead on the ground. Why? If Ford was involved in crack at a party, where some of his “guys” from that hood at the little venue? Did a couple of them become set up to deal Ford for a video and some cash? Did the kid that was so pointlessly and savagely murdered, have a loyalty to Ford that could have cost him his life? Why have the cops not made a statement. Are they all on extended 24-lof-May weekend? If….IFF. Rob Ford has friends who use crack…or could link him up with it….well…Ford has already said that he knows of that problem in the community of his football players. Thus it is not unreasonable to feel that the boy killed cold have been implicated…perhaps as one loyal to the mayor well a few of his buds and a dealer want to sell him out for some fast cash. Is it too far fetched to think that the murdered boy was indeed Ford’s back in this scenario? Why hasn’t Ford come forward? HOw is it that Ford’s problem with substance abuse is being murmured around the city’s rehab and addiction professionals, while the rest of the world sits in awe? I am a fan of Ford’s policies, his courage to stand up to Adam Vaughan who champions the greedy causes of uncaring destructive union thugs. But…somebody….SOMEBODY PLEASE tell me that video does not include any of those football players and crack, because if it does…or did…or could…then the life of that young man deserves full investigation, along with the actions of anyone associated with that team. This walkingbear has a very bad feeling about all of this. Very bad indeed. The mayor smokes up at a little party with the boys, he is caught on a video …a phone maybe…and then the quarrel is set up between the dealer and those interested in selling Ford out, and the one kid who wanted to protect his coach.

 

Mayor Ford – Not Looking Good

With Gawker saying that they’ve lost touch with the owners of the video and may now not be in a position to use the almost $200 000 that they’ve raised, be prepared for the Ford supporters to grunt something about this all being a baseless hoax.  Perhaps that is true, but it is far from the most likely explanation.

1.  The $100 000 or even $200 000 that was the asking price for the video is not really a large amount of money for media giants to cough up, when it comes right down to it.  Reluctance to buy it was probably more the possibility of choking on it due to the accusations of supporting drug dealers.  However a very plausible scenario is one where other media companies, less concerned about that perception, like the National Enquirer for example, will already have snatched up the video while Gawker is trying to crowd source the money.  Or the Toronto Star itself might have secretly bought the video and is sitting on it until they can either release it or leak it.  Or perhaps it was purchased by someone other than a media outlet for the purposes of either protecting or even blackmailing the mayor (-the latter of these being somewhat concerning).  Any one of these would be reasonable, predictable scenarios under the circumstances, just as feasible as the theory that the whole thing has been  hoax.

2.  Testimony from witnesses is regarded as real evidence in a court of law.  Even if the video has been destroyed, you have two sets of two reporters independently corroborating its contents.  If it were just Star reporters, one could possibly although meagerly argue that it is all part of a conspiracy to tarnish the mayor.  However, the second set of witnesses makes that unlikely.

3.  The mayor’s silence being viewed as a legal tactic would be more convincing if his behaviour wasn’t so suspicious and unprofessional in recent days.  A statement could be made in a way that creates political confidence, even if it were just saying that he’s refraining to answer specific question on the advice of his attorneys.  Hiding in the corner of an elevator and sending his brother out to make a long, mostly unrelated speech about the mayor’s accomplishments will only breed more uncertainty.  While the mayor may claim that he is being badgered by the media, that badgering is the result of his refusal to address a very significant issue.  The people of Toronto have the right to know why their mayor is implicated in such serious matters.

4.  Rob Ford was let go from his coaching position with his lauded football team.  ( A team which, incidentally, he is accused of slurring in the mysterious video, not to mention ignorantly in public speeches.)  While the decision has been in works for a while and is not thought to be in any way related to the current accusations, it is still curious that the school and the school board found it necessary to distance themselves from the mayor for the “best interests of the students”.  “Catholic trustee Maria Rizzo endorsed the board’s decision, saying Ford does not “model appropriate behaviour” for students.”  It is also curious that this is the second time that this has happened.

5.  Finally, Mark Towhey, Mayor Ford’s Chief Of Staff, was fired yesterday, reportedly for telling the mayor to “go away and get help”, specifically in the form of rehab treatment.  The mayor’s office wants it to look like the disagreement was over Towhey’s urging of Ford’s staff not to get involved in a proposed party at the Mayor’s home for his football team (even after they dumped him), but it is clear that the issues were much broader.  Towhey is quoted as saying, “There’s no more I can do for you.”

In spite of all that, Ford supporters are still wanting to hang on to their misguided beliefs, like the Creationist who dismisses all scientific evidence because they just can’t believe that the Earth wasn’t created 8 000 years ago.  There are comments under news stories like, “So where’s the video? Just another witch-hunt without a shred of proof…yawn.”  Or, “So far it looks like anonymous tips and guessing presented as news.”  Such desperation to avoid having to admit you’re wrong!  Eye witnesses and suspicious photographs are not anonymous tips.  The firing of a valued Chief of Staff is not guessing.  The dismissal from a coaching job as a decision about “what is best for our students”, is not a witch hunt.  One can’t help but wonder where these yahoos are going to go and hide if and when this all blows up.  Even if some of it proves to be false or exaggerated, it is the role of the news media to fervently pursue stories involving the competence of our elected officials.  I have no problem with pressuring the mayor to respond to serious allegations.  Better that than to allow the free reign of corrupt or incompetent politicians.

The writing is on the wall, whether the Ford Nation likes it or not.

Interesting quote from U.S. media regarding Canada

“Like most Americans, one of the few things I know about Canada is that it’s supposed to be better than us. It’s an almost unbearably functional place, what with its non-collapsed banking system and strongly growing economy and harmonious, cosmopolitan society (Quebec excepted),” wrote Josh Barro of Bloomberg News. “But I have bad news for you, Canada: Americans have learned about Rob Ford, and we’ll have no more of your smug superiority.”

 

Whether said satirically or not, I kind of like it.  Canada is moving farther and farther away from that status, as we try more and more to be like our neighbours to the south, including their passion for fundamentalist right wing ideologies, and a partisanship that puts winning above governing.

Kaleidoscope Photography

I’m mentally gearing up for my week teaching photography at Arts Camp by experimenting with a few new ideas.  One idea that I’ve seen in a few magazines and web sites is the technique of turning in natural picture of a tree, flower or shrub into a kaleidoscope image.

This is easily done in Photoshop by copying and flipping cropped segments of the picture.  Increasing the saturation and adding poster edges brings out a slightly surrealistic quality.

 

Hopefully I will have some interesting photos to post after the week.

 

Toronto’s Mayor Ford

What can you say about Rob Ford?  Readers of this blog know that I don’t hold him in any high regard.  He’s a buffoon.  I figure that when there is a continuous, recurring bad smell around something for a long time, it usually means that something’s rotten.

So the recent allegations of crack smoking provides only mild surprise.  Before starting a hearty chant of “I told you so,” lets take a look at the facts.

I see this as being a huge story no matter how it plays out.

If the story ends up being bogus, then The Toronto Star, a major and reputable newspaper, has made a serious error in journalistic judgement and has placed itself in the same trash bin as The National Enquirer.  That’s a huge story in itself, leading to follow-up law suits.  The fact that the Star reporters viewed the video in question over two weeks before breaking the news indicates that the actual video is not cut and dry, but is probably somewhat ambiguous.  If it were clear, I’m sure that they wouldn’t have waited until they were scooped by another media source (The Gawker - perhaps not the most reputable site itself).  However, I have a hard time believing that The Star is suicidal and so there must be something to this.  Perhaps the video is not clearly showing crack smoking, but maybe a bong or something.  Perhaps it’s too grainy to be sure that it’s the mayor.  Or perhaps the idea of giving $200 000 to Somali drug dealers just wasn’t that appealing.

On the other hand, maybe the video is the real deal, showing Rob Ford smoking crack, or perhaps another drug.  Just as one wonders about the stupidity of The Star, you can also wonder whether Ford could be so stupid.  The difference is that Ford has demonstrated poor judgement and an unrealistic state of denial several times in the past, -even if you discount the incidents that are questionable.  Not only does Rob Ford seem all too quiet about this accusation, but so does his brother, saying only that he’s never seen Rob associate himself with crack.  -Not with drugs, with crack.

While paying off drug dealers with a huge price tag for this video is very unsavory, getting hold of it one way or another is essential.  It’s evidence.  The testimony of two sets of reporters indicates that it is at least credible.  It’s probably not pure scam material.  From a public service point of view, there can be no question that a man who may have demonstrated such an incredibly poor sense of judgement should not be the mayor of Toronto.  Not only that, but it would cast new light on all of the other incidents that Ford has managed to sidestep over the past years.  It would, indeed, be damning.  Has Ford himself offered to take a drug test, or has he done so in the past?  (I don’t know whether such tests would be able to detect drug use several months in the past.  Perhaps all politicians should have regular drug tests.  As public servants their ability to make responsible decisions is in the public interest, and drug dependency could easily lead to blackmail or being compelled by criminal elements.)  Has he provided any explanation that might settle the rumors?  No.  His silence may be seen as a prudent legal stance if he is innocent, or the calm before the storm if he is guilty.

Either way, the accusations have gone world wide, prompting other news agencies to dig up the pile of manure surrounding Ford that Torontonians have witnessed over the past years, but will be fresh fodder for foreign markets.  When summarized, Ford’s career and encounters with the media are quite entertaining, or at least would be had it not been at the expense of a great city.  One way or another, I think he’s finished.

And yet the world is full of surprises.  Just look at Anthony Weiner.

Stouffville Flea Market – Live Animals

Early this morning I visited the Stouffville Flea Market and got a look at the livestock stalls, mostly selling live birds.  I witnessed ducks, chickens, turkeys and pigeons crated in containers, in tight quarters, but not dramatically so.  I witnessed them being picked up and moved into larger cages for display, handled in a way so that when they were put down they just continued about their business, not really showing any displeasure or ill effects.  I saw them purchased by many people, mostly of obvious Italian, Greek or Oriental ethnicity, and placed in large onion bags for individual transportation after sale.  Once in the bags, the birds didn’t seem alarmed.  I talked to many of the stall owners and workers, discovering that they were from small businesses and farms as far away as Kitchener or Kingston.

All in all I did not witness any overt mistreatment of animals.  They were not in an animal, free-range heaven, but they were being treated respectfully, though in the clear knowledge that they were going to shortly end up as food.

In my opinion, the controversy and protest spearheaded by Heather Clemenceau is highly misguided and hypocritical.  In a world where animal mistreatment in the large food factories of agribusiness is a well known fact, why would you protest against small family farmers trying to sell their livestock directly to the public.  I can guarantee that the conditions in which the Flea Market chickens and ducks were raised are infinitely superior to conditions suffered by the animals that end up on styrofoam trays in our big supermarket chains.  Have these protestors looked into conditions at King Cole Ducks, just north of Stouffville?  Have they seen the slaughterhouses that produce a large amount of our beef?  Why protest the most humane source of animals rather than demonstrating against the supermarkets?  These small business farmers are in direct competition with the large supermarkets, and by zeroing in on them, she is helping to stamp out any alternative to the cruelty of agribusiness animal factories.  It seems counterproductive to the cause that she is at least pretending to support.  I say “pretending” because her being a vegetarian, I can’t help but wonder what her true motives are.  Perhaps she’s one of those shallow vegetarians (-and I don’t presume to paint all with the same brush-) who just doesn’t like to see animals in cages (especially cute ones), but it’s all right if they suffer some place where you can’t witness it before they get sliced, diced and presented in a sanitary tray.

Clemenceau’s worry about how these animals might be killed is a bit farfetched, especially when witnessing the ethnic, old world, customers that were doing the purchasing.  I seriously doubt that any of the chickens were going to end up as unwilling participants in some voodoo ritual.  These people know how to care for, slaughter and clean animals to prepare their own food.  While the “Killing standards”, as she puts it, of the factory farms may be more quick and uniform, every stage up to that point is comparatively a travesty.  Choosing to ignore that is blatantly ignorant.

Heather Clemenceau, if you want a cause, go to the seafood section of a large supermarket, where they keep the lobsters.  Claws bound shut, these animals are packed into a tank until they become part of someone’s bourgeois dinner by being dropped, still living, into boiling water.  Anyone who doesn’t think that these animals suffer when boiled alive haven’t heard the scream when they’re plunged into the water.  (Not that I, personally, don’t enjoy the occasional lobster.)  And yet, you don’t see Heather and her group of “enlightened” protestors in the local Metro or Supercentre protesting in the fish department.  Why not?  Well first of all, I doubt that the supermarkets would be very amused.  Seeing a threat to their business, these large businesses would be very intolerant to any such protest.  They’d be out on their asses in no time.  Second, protesting lobsters or the source of the products in the poultry or meat sections, is not going to sit well with an unsympathetic public which is satisfied with animal suffering as long as they don’t have to see it.  This is the paradox.  A huge level of animal cruelty to bring you your BBQ steak is tolerable, but seeing relatively better cared for animals in cages at the Flea Market is not tolerable.  This is the height of hypocrisy, on which Heather Clemenceau is capitalizing in order to garner a little bit of attention in her community.

Cyprus Bank Heist

So I’ve been looking at the situation in Cyprus for the past few weeks, and several thoughts have been rattling around in my head.

If I have this straight, banks in Cyprus have decided that depositors with more than 100 000 Euros in accounts will have to give the bank somewhere between 20% and 80% of their funds.  I put the range in there, because if you look at the reports it is not at all clear what the final rate is going to be, and it has already changed at least once.  So if your life savings was 200 000 Euros, you could easily lose half of that in what they’re calling a “bail-in” as opposed to a bail-out.  Banks that have incompetently lost money or which have succumbed to the financial winds of other big institutions that have lost money will be able to recoup their losses by dipping into the personal accounts of its customers.

And nobody seems to be screaming bloody murder!  While the situation is being reported in the media, it doesn’t seem to be getting the “Holy shit!! What the hell is happening here!!” treatment that it should.  There is very little investigative reporting around, say, the fact that many wealthier customers were tipped off about the policy in advance and were able to withdraw their funds before they were frozen.  There seems to be little mention of the hardships that many of the ordinary people who may lose their retirement nest egg will suffer.  And, very notably, there is very little concern about whether this tactic will be used in other countries.  That this can happen in a European country and be accompanied by so little attention and outrage is deeply concerning.  I try not to be a conspiracy theorist, but one can’t help buy wonder if the media inattention, and the eclipse of the issue by the gay marriage question, might be deliberate.

The second thought was, “Who’s next?”  The answer seems to be, “Everyone!”  There are already signs that this tactic is being adopted in other European countries.  In Canada, while the threat of our banking system’s demise is significantly less than it is elsewhere, Harper and the Canadian government just passed a bill   which establishes “bail-ins” as a strategy to deal with the problems of banks and financial institutions.  Once again, this has been done with almost no media coverage.  That’s not surprising.  The Cyprus banks had to freeze assets and limit withdrawals because of a run on savings.  Imagine what would happen in Canada or the U.S. if there was even a hint of this possibility.  The run on the banks of people withdrawing their money would be enough to topple them.

One might ask, “Well, what is the answer then?  Should failing banks not be the responsibility of their customers?  Why should taxpayer bail out banks?”  These are all legitimate questions.  The problem is that we’ve already seen with the U.S. (and Canadian) bail-outs, that the within a few years banks are back to billions in profits with millions in bonuses for executives, but the customer victims of the whole mess are still unemployed, and have still lost their retirement funds or houses.  There is nothing to suggest that the “bail-in” strategy would not have the same outcome.  Additionally, while you might say that customers should bear the responsibility for the financial decisions that they make, there aren’t too many options.  Based on what we’re seeing here, maybe everyone should remove their money from the banks and turn it into gold or something similar.  Maybe it all needs to be invested into real estate, although that’s not protected from potential property taxation and confiscation.  I don’t know the answer.  I do know that if this situation develops, and viable alternative options are found, that doesn’t bode well for banks, and that’s not good for anybody.

What a mess.  The situation seems to be “no win”.  Why?  Because there is a climate of corporate and financial greed and irresponsibility which is being encouraged by governments allowing it to happen.  Because financial institutions are encouraged to be opportunists and are self aggrandizing rather than responsible custodians of their customers’ resources.  They are companies that have lost sight of their customers, even though they are totally dependent upon customer resources in order to maintain their own resources.

Under those circumstances, I wouldn’t blame customers to be outraged to the point of revolution if the banks just decided to steal their money.  I’m surprised that the reaction isn’t more violent in Cyprus.  Perhaps it well arise in coming weeks.