Ford finally faces legal action.

[Cobalt_Kid]

Ford is actually going to have to issue an honest apology or he will find himself in front of a court possibly perjuring himself.

Ford Apologizes To Toronto Star Reporter Daniel Dale, But Journalist Says It's Not Enough

Rob Ford has apologized to Toronto Star reporter Daniel Dale and claimed he did not mean to suggest the journalist was a pedophile during a televised interview with Conrad Black.

But Dale said Tuesday afternoon that the apology did not go far enough.

The reporter served Ford with a libel notice last week, demanding the mayor apologize and retract what he called a "false insinuation."

It's no revelation that Ford, and many of those behind him, have a sense of unlimited entitlement and feel accountable to no one...but we still have laws in this country. It doesn't matter who his dad, his brother, his "Uncle" Jim or his fishing buddy is, what matters is, were Rob Ford's comments malicious and did they cause Daniel Dale harm.

After making the comment on the Black show, he latter stated he stood by them and then repeated the claims once again on air. His "apology" like so much he does is a transparent attempt to shift blame onto the media. When he made the comments it was clear what he was inferring and who was the target. He knew that his own surveillance video didn't back his claims up and that the police had already cleared Dale of the accusations but Ford attacked Mr.Dale anyway.

Rob Ford's sense of entitlement seems to create a belief in his mind that there are no limits to his actions, even when they harm others. Glib and insincere apologies for political purposes are meaningless when someone has transgressed this profoundly.

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

Dream on, a lawsuit in this case is a long shot. The reporter is still a backyard skulking paparrazi scumbag who works for a news rag with lousy ethical reporting standards. Course that's just my humble opinion. I wouldn't want to make anyone cry and get sued.

Ford is actually going to have to issue an honest apology or he will find himself in front of a court possibly perjuring himself.

Ford Apologizes To Toronto Star Reporter Daniel Dale, But Journalist Says It's Not Enough



It's no revelation that Ford, and many of those behind him, have a sense of unlimited entitlement and feel accountable to no one...but we still have laws in this country. It doesn't matter who his dad, his brother, his "Uncle" Jim or his fishing buddy is, what matters is, were Rob Ford's comments malicious and did they cause Daniel Dale harm.

After making the comment on the Black show, he latter stated he stood by them and then repeated the claims once again on air. His "apology" like so much he does is a transparent attempt to shift blame onto the media. When he made the comments it was clear what he was inferring and who was the target. He knew that his own surveillance video didn't back his claims up and that the police had already cleared Dale of the accusations but Ford attacked Mr.Dale anyway.

Rob Ford's sense of entitlement seems to create a belief in his mind that there are no limits to his actions, even when they harm others. Glib and insincere apologies for political purposes are meaningless when someone has transgressed this profoundly.

Unlimited entitlement? How ****ing stupid are you?

 

[JLM]

Has anyone heard how Ford is doing with his weight loss program?

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

You know I completely get why people want Ford gone, but what I don't get is self righteousness coming from the same crowd who bitched about the people who ran down Princess Di, or called Ken Star a scumbag before he went after Clinton.

You hate Ford, fine. But don't defend these scumbag reporters who make it their mission to destroy people because sooner or later that same gang of self righteous A-Holes will be camped out on someone else's front lawn. Maybe yours.

 

[Cobalt_Kid]

If someone lacks a conscience and everything is just a game, which seems likely with Rob Ford, then there should be some indications. Like inconsistencies that arise from exploiting whatever situation he's in for short terms gains despite the longer term consequences.

Rob Ford apology not enough for Toronto Star reporter in libel claim - Toronto - CBC News

We can see that Ford contradicts himself.

The "apology".

“I never called Mr. Dale a pedophile, I have never used that word to describe Mr. Dale, I do not believe Mr. Dale is a pedophile nor did I intend to suggest that in my comments," Ford's apology began in council chambers on Tuesday.

What he actually said:

In the interview, Ford said: "Daniel Dale is in my backyard taking pictures. I have little kids. He's taking pictures of little kids. I don't want to say that word but you start thinking what this guy is all about."

Ford is drawing a line to a conclusion that many people would make based on the context. Which he latter said he stood by and then repeated on another show. Ford original statement was in a serious context, his following statement that he stood by what he'd said reinforced the serious nature of the remark and his repeating of the accusation further reinforce it's impact.

Ford can keep playing games, but my feeling is he's going to find the way to meet the absolute minimum requirements to avoid any responsibility. He's clearly incapable of feeling genuine remorse.

He's also still trying to make it someone else's fault.

"It's unfortunate the word I did not say has been ascribed to me by the media," Ford said. "I certainly did not mean to suggest he is a pedophile."

He said he trusted a report from a neighbour he has known for 15 years that there was someone "lurking" near his backyard. When he went to investigate, he found Dale near the fence of his backyard.

Dale takes issue with Ford's mention of the neighbour. "He blamed his neighbour. He used the words 'lurking' and 'leering'" Dale complained.

"I have no issue personally with Daniel Dale," said Ford, offering to apologize to Dale in person. He did go on to say he did have an issue with Dale's employer, the Toronto Star. Ford faults the paper for putting him and the reporter in the position he was in.

The mayor was attempting to to acquire public land to enlarge his property, of course it's fair game for a possible story. Ford's whole attitude is he should be beyond scrutiny, despite the glaring evidence that he's unable to respect laws, morals and ethics that most of us are required to follow to avoid causing damage to others.

What "Psychopath" Means: Scientific American

First described systematically by Medical College of Georgia psychiatrist Hervey M. Cleckley in 1941, psychopathy consists of a specific set of personality traits and behaviors. Superficially charming, psychopaths tend to make a good first impression on others and often strike observers as remarkably normal. Yet they are self-centered, dishonest and undependable, and at times they engage in irresponsible behavior for no apparent reason other than the sheer fun of it. Largely devoid of guilt, empathy and love, they have casual and callous interpersonal and romantic relationships. Psychopaths routinely offer excuses for their reckless and often outrageous actions, placing blame on others instead. They rarely learn from their mistakes or benefit from negative feedback, and they have difficulty inhibiting their impulses.

 

[JLM]

You know I completely get why people want Ford gone, but what I don't get is self righteousness coming from the same crowd who bitched about the people who ran down Princess Di, or called Ken Star a scumbag before he went after Clinton.

You hate Ford, fine. But don't defend these scumbag reporters who make it their mission to destroy people because sooner or later that same gang of self righteous A-Holes will be camped out on someone else's front lawn. Maybe yours.

I fully agree, that is why I've sort of been in Ford's corner from the get go, but I must admit I do sometimes wonder if it's wrongly so!

 

[SLM]

I fully agree, that is why I've sort of been in Ford's corner from the get go, but I must admit I do sometimes wonder if it's wrongly so!

It has nothing to do with being in his corner. It is perfectly plausible to not be a Ford supporter and yet still be completely disgusted by what is supposed to be legitimate news sources behaving like tabloids. I've never been a Ford fan (but he's not my mayor so I really didn't give a damn) and I think the behaviour of the media has been atrocious.

We need to get away from this black and white, either/or thinking!

 

[Zipperfish]

I fully agree, that is why I've sort of been in Ford's corner from the get go, but I must admit I do sometimes wonder if it's wrongly so!

The only people in Ford's corner are Randian wingnuts who just want to watch it all burn.

 

[BornRuff]

It has nothing to do with being in his corner. It is perfectly plausible to not be a Ford supporter and yet still be completely disgusted by what is supposed to be legitimate news sources behaving like tabloids. I've never been a Ford fan (but he's not my mayor so I really didn't give a damn) and I think the behaviour of the media has been atrocious.

We need to get away from this black and white, either/or thinking!

What has the Toronto Star done that isn't perfectly legitimate journalism?

Ford has continually attacked them, but in the end, what have they reported that isn't true?

How many times did he attack them for reporting on him being inebriated in public or smoking crack cocaine, only to admit to doing exactly what they reported?

The guy is just mad that there are people who challenge the BS he tries to serve to his constituents. He tries to deflect from his own problems by attacking them, and some people are dumb enough to believe him since he is so good a playing the poor underdog(despite being a spoiled rich kid).

You know I completely get why people want Ford gone, but what I don't get is self righteousness coming from the same crowd who bitched about the people who ran down Princess Di, or called Ken Star a scumbag before he went after Clinton.

You hate Ford, fine. But don't defend these scumbag reporters who make it their mission to destroy people because sooner or later that same gang of self righteous A-Holes will be camped out on someone else's front lawn. Maybe yours.

Haha, you are dating yourself with those examples. They are also very ****ty examples.

To be clear though, Ken Star isn't a reporter. He was a lawyer and former federal judge appointed to investigate the White House.

Princess Diana was killed by a driver who was drunk and speeding, and her not wearing a seat belt. The fact that people wanted to take photos of her in no way necessitated any of that.

The fact is that if you are a public official like Ford you are accountable to the public. It is the media's job to hold you to account. If you want to make it hard for them to do so, then they are going to have to do it the hard way.

 

[JLM]

I'm beginning to wonder if Ford isn't completely off his rocker.

 

[relic]

Wonder ?? If ??? How can anyone, in control of their faculties, still defend these arseholes ?!

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

What has the Toronto Star done that isn't perfectly legitimate journalism?

Nothing you won't find on a rack in your local grocery next to The Enquirer/

Ford has continually attacked them, but in the end, what have they reported that isn't true?

I'm not defending Ford.

How many times did he attack them for reporting on him being inebriated in public or smoking crack cocaine, only to admit to doing exactly what they reported?

The guy is just mad that there are people who challenge the BS he tries to serve to his constituents. He tries to deflect from his own problems by attacking them, and some people are dumb enough to believe him since he is so good a playing the poor underdog(despite being a spoiled rich kid).

Read my post again.

Haha, you are dating yourself with those examples. They are also very ****ty examples.

Your right, how about the Mother of Tori Stafford. The media camped out on her lawn for a montha nd began raising eyebrows and making innuendo about she had a drug problem, one be so bold as to ask. "Did you kill her." That was just down the road from here and not that long ago. Micahel Rafferty and Terry Lynn McClintic did.

To be clear though, Ken Star isn't a reporter. He was a lawyer and former federal judge appointed to investigate the White House.

Princess Diana was killed by a driver who was drunk and speeding, and her not wearing a seat belt. The fact that people wanted to take photos of her in no way necessitated any of that.

Good god okay, the media played no role in the high speed chase that resulted in her death.

And yes Ken Star was appointed to investigate corruption and the best he could do was nail Clinton on a come stained dress. Hardly Watergate, but it was news.

At any rate this obviously went over your head.

The fact is that if you are a public official like Ford you are accountable to the public. It is the media's job to hold you to account. If you want to make it hard for them to do so, then they are going to have to do it the hard way.

The media's job is not to hold people to account. It's job is to report the facts. How they go about gathering those facts is supposed to be through ethical behavior unless they are a pappazzi. I know that might be hard for you to comprehend, but that is the way its supposed to be.

 

[SLM]

What has the Toronto Star done that isn't perfectly legitimate journalism?

Ford has continually attacked them, but in the end, what have they reported that isn't true?

How many times did he attack them for reporting on him being inebriated in public or smoking crack cocaine, only to admit to doing exactly what they reported?

The guy is just mad that there are people who challenge the BS he tries to serve to his constituents. He tries to deflect from his own problems by attacking them, and some people are dumb enough to believe him since he is so good a playing the poor underdog(despite being a spoiled rich kid).

What I'm seeing clearly here is that you refuse to separate the two behaviors, The Stars from Fords. It is in fact perfectly reasonable that they can both be wrong, neither one has taken the high road here. Most media these days are becoming more and more sensationalistic. I expect better than that. Now, do I expect better from a public official than the behaviour that Ford has displayed? Absolutely I do! But I'm also not about to give a pass to the media for their behaviour just because of that.

Now if choose to interpret that as being in support of Ford or as being "dumb enough to believe him", knock yourself out. You'd be dead wrong, but knock yourself out.

Nothing you won't find on a rack in your local grocery next to The Enquirer/



I'm not defending Ford.



Read my post again.





Your right, how about the Mother of Tori Stafford. The media camped out on her lawn for a montha nd began raising eyebrows and making innuendo about she had a drug problem, one be so bold as to ask. "Did you kill her." That was just down the road from here and not that long ago. Micahel Rafferty and Terry Lynn McClintic did.



Good god okay, the media played no role in the high speed chase that resulted in her death.

And yes Ken Star was appointed to investigate corruption and the best he could do was nail Clinton on a come stained dress. Hardly Watergate, but it was news.

At any rate this obviously went over your head.



The media's job is not to hold people to account. It's job is to report the facts. How they go about gathering those facts is supposed to be through ethical behavior unless they are a pappazzi. I know that might be hard for you to comprehend, but that is the way its supposed to be.

Well put. Somehow I'm guessing the point will be completely missed though.

 

[Liberalman]

Dale lacked common sense when he had a camera in the back of Mayor Ford house he did not have any pictures on his camera of Ford's kids but according to the Mayors neighbour he was pointing it at the Ford's house while standing on bricks to be able to peer into the backyard. Reporters have to take responsibility for their actions if they want to protect freedom of the press or they will lose the privilege.

 

[pgs]

Nothing you won't find on a rack in your local grocery next to The Enquirer/



I'm not defending Ford.



Read my post again.





Your right, how about the Mother of Tori Stafford. The media camped out on her lawn for a montha nd began raising eyebrows and making innuendo about she had a drug problem, one be so bold as to ask. "Did you kill her." That was just down the road from here and not that long ago. Micahel Rafferty and Terry Lynn McClintic did.



Good god okay, the media played no role in the high speed chase that resulted in her death.

And yes Ken Star was appointed to investigate corruption and the best he could do was nail Clinton on a come stained dress. Hardly Watergate, but it was news.

At any rate this obviously went over your head.



The media's job is not to hold people to account. It's job is to report the facts. How they go about gathering those facts is supposed to be through ethical behavior unless they are a pappazzi. I know that might be hard for you to comprehend, but that is the way its supposed to be.

The media's job is to sell advertising nothing more nothing less .

 

[BornRuff]

Nothing you won't find on a rack in your local grocery next to The Enquirer/

I'm not defending Ford.

Read my post again.

I am not saying that you support his policies, but you are accepting his claims about improprieties by the Toronto Star. The fact is that in his relentless attack against The Star over the years, it has been proven time and time again that he is outright lying. Only an idiot can't see it for what it is right now, which is a really weak attempt to deflect attention from his own problems.

Your right, how about the Mother of Tori Stafford. The media camped out on her lawn for a montha nd began raising eyebrows and making innuendo about she had a drug problem, one be so bold as to ask. "Did you kill her." That was just down the road from here and not that long ago. Micahel Rafferty and Terry Lynn McClintic did.

You seriously think that the mother of a murder victim is comparable to someone who chooses to run for public office?

Being accountable to the public is a central part of his job, and it is the media's job to get the necessary information. If he refuses to answer their questions in the normal forums, that doesn't mean he just gets to avoid accountability.

Good god okay, the media played no role in the high speed chase that resulted in her death.

The only reason there was a high speed chase was because their driver was drunk and decided to race down the road at twice the posted speed limit.

People trying to take pictures of them did not necessitate their driver getting drunk, driving twice the speed limit, and driving them into a concrete pillar.

And yes Ken Star was appointed to investigate corruption and the best he could do was nail Clinton on a come stained dress. Hardly Watergate, but it was news.

At any rate this obviously went over your head.

What exactly is your problem with Ken Star? Are you mad that he didn't find more? His job was to investigate what was there. Not all investigations uncover massive criminal conspiracies because that is not always what is going on.

The media's job is not to hold people to account. It's job is to report the facts. How they go about gathering those facts is supposed to be through ethical behavior unless they are a pappazzi. I know that might be hard for you to comprehend, but that is the way its supposed to be.

The media needs to ask questions and get answers in order to report the relevant information. If Ford wont answer questions in the normal venues, then they need to do stuff like wait in front of his office and his home.

What exactly have they done that isn't ethical? Ford has made lots of claims, but every time anything is fact checked it turns out he is lying.

What I'm seeing clearly here is that you refuse to separate the two behaviors, The Stars from Fords. It is in fact perfectly reasonable that they can both be wrong, neither one has taken the high road here. Most media these days are becoming more and more sensationalistic. I expect better than that. Now, do I expect better from a public official than the behaviour that Ford has displayed? Absolutely I do! But I'm also not about to give a pass to the media for their behaviour just because of that.

Now if choose to interpret that as being in support of Ford or as being "dumb enough to believe him", knock yourself out. You'd be dead wrong, but knock yourself out.

Well put. Somehow I'm guessing the point will be completely missed though.

Of course it is possible that both of them are wrong, but there simply isn't any reason to believe that is the case other than the repeated claims by this proven liar.

The stories about Ford may have seemed "sensational", but it only seems that was because they were reporting on a truly ridiculous human being. We now know that it was all true and it actually goes much deeper than anything any news outlet previously reported.

 

[pgs]

I am not saying that you support his policies, but you are accepting his claims about improprieties by the Toronto Star. The fact is that in his relentless attack against The Star over the years, it has been proven time and time again that he is outright lying. Only an idiot can't see it for what it is right now, which is a really weak attempt to deflect attention from his own problems.



You seriously think that the mother of a murder victim is comparable to someone who chooses to run for public office?

Being accountable to the public is a central part of his job, and it is the media's job to get the necessary information. If he refuses to answer their questions in the normal forums, that doesn't mean he just gets to avoid accountability.



The only reason there was a high speed chase was because their driver was drunk and decided to race down the road at twice the posted speed limit.

People trying to take pictures of them did not necessitate their driver getting drunk, driving twice the speed limit, and driving them into a concrete pillar.



What exactly is your problem with Ken Star? Are you mad that he didn't find more? His job was to investigate what was there. Not all investigations uncover massive criminal conspiracies because that is not always what is going on.



The media needs to ask questions and get answers in order to report the relevant information. If Ford wont answer questions in the normal venues, then they need to do stuff like wait in front of his office and his home.

What exactly have they done that isn't ethical? Ford has made lots of claims, but every time anything is fact checked it turns out he is lying.



Of course it is possible that both of them are wrong, but there simply isn't any reason to believe that is the case other than the repeated claims by this proven liar.

The stories about Ford may have seemed "sensational", but it only seems that was because they were reporting on a truly ridiculous human being. We now know that it was all true and it actually goes much deeper than anything any news outlet previously reported.

Actually the news media need to file copy in order to sell advertising. Nowhere does it say the copy must be accurate .

 

[BornRuff]

Actually the news media need to file copy in order to sell advertising. Nowhere does it say the copy must be accurate .

That is false. If they report things that are not accurate they are open to the same type of legal action that Ford is facing right now. Ford actually tried to sue the Star before but gave up.

 

[Retired_Can_Soldier]

Dale lacked common sense when he had a camera in the back of Mayor Ford house he did not have any pictures on his camera of Ford's kids but according to the Mayors neighbour he was pointing it at the Ford's house while standing on bricks to be able to peer into the backyard. Reporters have to take responsibility for their actions if they want to protect freedom of the press or they will lose the privilege.

This is probably the first time IN THE HISTORY OF THE WORLD that I agree with you wholeheartedly.

That is false. If they report things that are not accurate they are open to the same type of legal action that Ford is facing right now. Ford actually tried to sue the Star before but gave up.

Yes I remember the story they ran accusing him of roughing up a kid he coached in football. During the election no less. Turned out to have no validity, but it certainly illustrates their bias from the very beginning.

 

[BornRuff]

Yes I remember the story they ran accusing him of roughing up a kid he coached in football. During the election no less. Turned out to have no validity, but it certainly illustrates their bias from the very beginning.

You can read the article for yourself.

They reported on an altercation that happened between Ford and a player on his team that lead to him leaving the team shortly after.

They clearly reported the varying witness accounts of the story, both positive and negative.

Rob Ford told he was unwelcome as a football coach at Toronto high school | Toronto Star