Archive for 2012

Rob Ford’s conflict of interest, it’s worse than you thought

Posted on September 1st, 2012 19 Comments

I wouldn’t blame you if you knew little about the upcoming trial of our ignominious, embarrassing mayor, Rob Ford.

I follow him and his merry band of criminals and I must admit that even I didn’t know the full extent of the abuses of power and influence that are to be tried at the upcoming court date, but hopefully I can make sense of it all in this post and you’ll be able to see why this is such a serious issue (and why the man has to go).

The facts thus far…

Ford is very much the front man for the Rob Ford Football Foundation which, under his name and to his political benefit, funds a number of schools around Toronto. Here’s Rob himself to introduce it:

According to the Notice of Application by Clayton Ruby’s office — he’s the lawyer leading the charge against the Mayor — Ford used the City of Toronto logo on both the envelope and letter to solicit donations to his charity prior to the 2010 election. Just to make sure everyone knew it was Rob, he had it gold-embossed with yet another City of Toronto logo and “Rob Ford Etobicoke North Councillor” on it.

This can easily be seen as vote buying — you donate to Rob’s foundation, he gets you tax receipts and special favours when he gets into the Mayor’s seat. Even if that never happens (though with Ford, it most likely would), the chance of it happening is eliminated by having things like the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act (in fact, that’s the sole reason for this law to exist in the first place!)

Maybe Robbie didn’t know that it could be perceived this way?

Not a fucking chance.

He had done something similar twice before (noted in the same Notice), and was slapped on the wrist for it by Janet Leiper, the Integrity Commissioner. There are also numerous previous examples that clearly demonstrate that Ford was sensitive, sometimes too much so, to conflicts of interest at City Hall. So claiming that he didn’t know would be an outright and easily provable lie.

But this is just the beginning of the story.

In mid-August of 2010, Ford had a formal complaint lodged against him on this issue which was investigated by the Integrity Commissioner. There are some out there, like Giorgio Mammoliti, the same Councillor, and Ford’s personal buddy on Council, who said he’ll openly break the law if things aren’t done his way, who suggest that the I.C. has it in for Ford, basically suggesting that because she’s doing her job, she’s engaging in some sort of personal vendetta.

My own meeting with the Integrity Commissioner suggests she’s one of the most balanced, fair, and carefully-treading individuals I’ve ever met; by far the most professional and unbiased lawyer the city could find. The video above demonstrates exactly the same demeanor I encountered.

But I guess neither Mammoliti nor Ford can possibly imagine that an Integrity Commissioner might be engaged in, oh, I don’t know, investigating breaches of integrity. Keep in mind, too, that she doesn’t do this of her own volition; investigations only ever begin when a citizen files a formal complaint, including an affidavit, under oath (it’s not easy and requires a lot of hoop jumping).

Maybe this is why, instead of speaking to allegations of impropriety, Rob Ford spent his time “explaining” how his program works, how the “Rob Ford Football Foundation” is not in any way about him but about the kids, how he’s not involved in the process at all except that the schools involved make requests directly through him by sending him invoices, he then sends the requisitions onto his foundation, and they send out cheques and cheritable receipts to donors, and so on. All perfectly above board!

Notice towards the end of the video where he holds up the letterhead (sent to Toronto schools), demonstrating that it doesn’t mention that he’s mayor — “you would have no idea that I was a politician … if you didn’t know, obviously, if you were in another city” (Council understandably laughs). The sample letter simply just shows his mug in the corner and “ROB FORD” in big, bold, banner type at the top. So, yeah, no connection to Ford at all.

Ford then admits that he used City letterhead during his campaign: “I was wrong! I took all that off!”

You may be asking why he’s babbling about having to repay money out of his own pocket in that video.

Well, that August 2010 investigation I mentioned earlier found that Ford had breached the City Council Code of Conduct (on numerous occassions), and that in order to avoid being held to account for it, he should repay the lobbyists who donated money to his foundation.

Had he simply given the money back, a mere $3,150 (pittance for a millionaire), he could’ve simply walked away from the affair and continued on his jolly way (a Code of Conduct violation isn’t as serious as something like the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act).

But he ignored what was then a mere recommendation to repay and later that month Council voted that he violated the Code of Conduct and ordered him, under a legally binding obligation, to pay back the lobbyists.

Oh, and Rob Ford voted on that, and an additional motion to reconsider.

If you still don’t get what’s wrong with this, consider why we wouldn’t allow criminals to sit as both their own jury and judge — that’s very clearly a conflict of interest, exactly like Rob Ford sitting in on a vote to dismiss a punishment against him.

But Ford did it, and this wouldn’t be the last time.

In the meantime, the Integrity Commissioner followed up with a litany of payment requests and reports to Council (six, to be precise), about Ford’s complete refusal to pay back the money.

Finally, in October, Ford claimed that he had written to the lobbyists and they said they didn’t want their money back. (Their politician is bought and paid for, after all)

The Integrity Commissioner replied that the Lobbyist Registrar (yet another office now involved), had contacted the lobbyists and told them that they were violating the Lobbyist Code of Conduct. The lobbyists wisely pulled back their offer to let Ford off the hook and demanded their money back.

Okay, let’s catch our breath here for a second and do a quick wrap-up (because it ain’t over yet):

  1. Ford used City of Toronto letterhead, plus his name and position all over envelopes and letters sent to lobbyists asking for donations to his football charity during the election, to which he admitted:
    He used his influence and office to solicit donations for the Rob Ford Football Foundation
  2. He was warned multiple times prior to this incident about similar breaches, and had on numerous occassions recused himself from votes which might indicate a conflict of interest for him:
    He clearly knows about conflicts of interest and about recusal from votes
  3. The Rob Ford Football Foundation does not operate at arms length, requiring schools to send invoices and requests directly to Rob Ford:
    He is directly involved in the day-to-day operations of his foundation, not disconnected from it as he claims
  4. The Integrity Commissioner warned Ford that this was a big no-no (remember this wasn’t the first time either), and gave him an out (considering his wealth, it woulnd’t have been a huge burden). When Ford didn’t respond, Council voted that he must repay the money, by law — Ford voted against that motion, and then again to reconsider it:
    He knowingly broke the Municipal Conflict if Interest Act twice
  5. The Integrity Commissioner followed up many times to remind both Rob and Council that he had failed to follow up. Instead of doing as he was required to do, by law, he wrote lobbyists asking to be forgiven. The Integrity Commissioner replied to both the lobbyists and Ford that this would amount to further breaches:
    He tried to weasel out of his obligation and ignored the law


Well, you know, this isn’t enough for Ford. He isn’t satisfied with repeatedly flaunting being above the law or endangering the city’s citizens, he has to drive home his complete and utter lack of respect for his office, the rule of law, and even common decency.

Roughly one and a half years later, Ford’s buddy Mammoliti (who, aside from brimming with criminal tendencies himself, is also a spineless toady bent on really fucking up the city every way possible), tabled a motion to let Ford off the hook completely and just fuhgetaboudit!

I guess the Councillors who previously voted on this forgot what it was all about (or were tired of it), and decided unanimously to adopt the motion.

Oh, and Ford voted on this one too.

But not before another vote (on which Ford also voted), that would’ve extended the time he had to repay until October 15 of this year. Of course, kind of a moot point since the follow-up motion got Ford off completely, but I put it in for a total vote tally (I’m not including additional votes to extend speakers’ times and to end the debate — which Ford was also in on).

So at this point, over a historic journey of about two years…

Ford directly, knowingly, brazenly contravened the Municipal Conflict of Interest Act no less than four times.

He believes it’s okay to influence City Hall, and especially the Mayor, through underhanded lobbying techniques via obvious sham organizations, and to do it all out in the broad daylight for everyone to see.

And then comes the deposition that Ford did for Clayton Ruby.

I’m going to cover this endless stream of bickering over whether or not Ford takes his office seriously, or whether or not he remembers a single damn thing, in the next post. If you get a moment, read it through (it’s about 132 pages) — I’m sure that now that you know the facts, you’ll find Fords answers as outrageous and insulting as I do.

And if you happen to have the day off this September 5th, perhaps I’ll see you down at the Provincial Courts, where if there is any rule of law and justice, they must surely prevail.

Filed under: B Sides, Patrick Bay, Videos

Krista Ford tweets…

Posted on August 29th, 2012 8 Comments

Bask in the Fordish wisdom:

Filed under: Dispatches, Patrick Bay, Pictures

No, Chief Blair, we need security to protect us from Rob Ford, not the other way around

Posted on August 16th, 2012 Be the first to comment

At this point, the news of Rob Ford openly breaking yet another Ontario law has made headlines from coast to coast.

This time around, Ford was caught on camera, driving on the Gardiner Expressway reading some printouts.

This is hardly the first time that His Illustrious Rotundness has been caught brazenly endangering others on the road, but it’s the first time that photographic evidence proves it. Not only that, but Ford doesn’t deny doing this and, in his casually wishy-washy way, pretty much admits to doing it outright in the media. And so what, he claims…he’s busy!

But if that wasn’t infuriating enough, Toronto Police have declared that, instead of charging Ford with the serious offense that careless driving is, that photographic evidence of him breaking the law isn’t enough (especially without witnesses).

So the cops have, once again, unilaterally decided that they are the arbiters of what laws apply to who, refusing to lay charges without even asking for witnesses to come forward (presumably there’s at least one — the person who took the picture), and are openly lying to the public by claiming that photo evidence isn’t enough to prove that someone is breaking the law, despite the fact that it seems to be good enough for the cops to drag people in front of courts when it comes to reg light camerasphoto radar, and protests (unless, of course, it’s their own people).

Additionally, the cops say that the mayor’s offense isn’t charge-worthy unless “there’s a pattern of behaviour”, a pattern that has now been clearly established, while they simultaneously lay charges on others breaking exactly the same laws in exactly the same way in a blitz barely two weeks old in which they insist that “impaired, distracted, and aggressive driving will not be tolerated”.

Even the cops’ flimsy excuse that this is Toronto and not Ontario jurisdiction is complete bullshit with Toronto Police themselves recently launching another rake-in-the-cash distracted driving campaign in which they had no problems laying charges against no less than 10,000 people.

And then, just to add insult to injury, Ford’s police chief buddy insists that the solution is for Ford to get a chauffeur (no doubt on the taxpayers’ dime), who doubles as security because it’s the mayor that needs protection from us!

” Scumbags” doesn’t even begin to cover it.

Filed under: B Sides, Patrick Bay

GFL and Ford’s trashy rhetoric

Posted on August 9th, 2012 4 Comments

You could almost see the Bush-style “Mission Accomplished” banner waving behind the incomprehensibly obstinate Ford supporters at City Hall. “We did it!”, they scream, “we got a major campaign promise under our belt!”

Except that, at very best, at this point it’s only half true:

The City must put in place solutions to make waste collection reliable and affordable.  Etobicoke, for example, uses contracted providers and saves the city $2 million each year.  By adopting the same approach for the whole city, taxpayers will save about $20 million each year and can have the confidence their garbage collectors won’t go on unnecessary strikes.

Everything west of Yonge constitutes precisely half the city (both geographically and in the estimated savings), not the whole, so claiming 100% victory is like saying that Ford won the election with a majority of votes (in reality 47%)

What makes this “victory” especially laughable is that it was supposed to demonstrate the “efficiencies” and remarkable resilience that the private sector musters over city employees (the kind of statement repeatedly used in Ford’s campaign literature):

Garbage and other solid wastes must be collected on schedule, without fail.  The strike during the summer of 2009 put the health of people and families in Toronto at risk.

The City must put in place solutions to make waste collection reliable and affordable.

Now that Rob Ford’s buddies at GFL have taken over garbage collection, what we’re seeing is the exact opposite of what Ford claimed:

Three days after a private company began collecting garbage between Yonge St. and the Humber River, its chief executive clashed with Mayor Rob Ford’s administration and the city’s waste chief over how long it should be forgiven for missing pickup deadlines.

It will take four to six weeks for Green for Life Environmental Corp. to start meeting the 6 p.m. daily deadline in its seven-year contract, said CEO Patrick Dovigi.

Six weeks is unacceptable, responded solid waste general manager Jim Harnum. The city will consider imposing financial penalties after four.

Funny that Dovigi should be saying this considering how much “research” he claims his company has invested in — 20 people for 10 weeks, to be precise — to ensure that it would be providing the most efficient services:

GFL submitted the lowest bid in Toronto’s tendering process, a testament to the company’s proven record as an efficient operator, its cost efficiencies realized from its existing Toronto infrastructure of three facilities and the efforts of its dedicated workforce.

“While some have questioned how GFL can deliver $78 million in savings to Toronto while providing residents with waste collection service as good as or better than they currently have, the fact is that we carried out extensive research prior to submitting our bid,” said Patrick Dovigi, President and CEO of GFL Environmental.

“The research we conducted prior to submitting our tender offer included analyzing the process of how the City collects waste, right down to observing the routes and operations that trucks use when on the streets,” said Dovigi. “The cost savings GFL has identified and efficiencies we bring to waste collection will result in service levels as good as or better than what people currently enjoy, at a lower cost to the City of Toronto.”

It’s not that people weren’t calling bullshit on this. In fact, questions were raised years ago, and another GFL “too good to be true” bid was rejected elsewhere in Ontario (after which GFL took out a full-page newspaper ad to express their disgust at being questioned by city council). Note how drastically even the estimated “savings” has jumped around; Ford initially claimed $20 million, then revised it to $8 million, while Dovigi puffed it up to $78 million. Today it sits somewhere around $11 million.

But none of this kept people like Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong from jumping the gun and announcing GFL had won the bidding process before anything was official. Yeah, that’s the same guy now expressing surprise at what he himself enthusiastically rammed through City Hall:

…Councillor Denzil Minnan-Wong, the public works committee chair and Ford’s point man on the garbage file, said he did not expect delays of such length.

“We didn’t hear any of these reasons and any of the excuses — all these things that occurred this week were not presented by GFL. They didn’t tell us that these delays would be occurring,” Minnan-Wong. “So I think the public is being very generous and understanding with a company coming in with new routes, and we all want them to succeed, but the patience and goodwill of the residents in District 2 is not limitless.”

It also didn’t stop people like GFL’s Dovigi conveniently ignoring his own crap about using a “dedicated workforce”:

In 2009, the Ontario Labour Relations Board presided over a case involving GFL subsidiary National Waste Services. After winning a contract to haul residential waste in Hamilton, the firm relied on a personnel agency to provide staff instead of hiring drivers and haulers directly. The practice came to light during a certification drive by the Canadian Auto Workers; the OLRB ruled in favour of the CAW.

And after all this, it’s not simply that GFL is running late in picking up garbage, it’s actually missing chunks of the city altogether. “Inefficiency” doesn’t even begin to cover it.

Beyond even this, all of Ford’s angry tirades about the unions failed to mention that Dovigi is CEO for the Ontario Waste Management Association which acts as both a powerful government lobby as well as a sort of union for collectivizing the efforts of private, for-profit waste management companies in Ontario:

All levels of government recognize the OWMA as the ‘voice’ of the private sector waste industry in Ontario. We monitor and assess regulatory and policy initiatives to determine their impact on the industry and on your business. We provide members with advance notice of new or changing government initiatives, and work proactively to ensure that such initiatives are justified, simple, and practical to implement.

 

Filed under: Patrick Bay, Why I'm Right

Free speech disappeared and no one noticed

Posted on August 8th, 2012 5 Comments

I was strolling by the south-west corner of Nathan Phillips Square a couple of weeks ago when I noticed something was conspicuously missing:

I recalled that on this very spot used to stand a podium dedicated to free speech. But was it just some weird mixed-up memory that was bubbling up to the surface?

I searched the web and discovered that I had, in fact, been correct. The podium was called Speakers’ Corner:

Yeah, that’s the one! It was a podium guarded over by the ghost of Winston Churchill, dedicated to free speech and public expression.

Except that now, it’s gone. All that’s left is a slab of concrete where it used to stand. And to be honest, I don’t remember the last time I’d seen it there anyways.

I visited City Hall and asked the information desk about its whereabouts.

At first they had no clue what I was talking about — a podium? Speakers’ Corner? Oh, wasn’t that at the old Citytv building further west on Queen Street?

Nope, I replied. It was in front of the old statue of Churchill.

Ask security, said the woman behind the desk. Maybe it’s been temporarily moved because of the construction.

Okay, I suppose (even though it wasn’t near the fence).

The guy at the security desk also had equally little idea of what I was talking about. He called the boss and was told that the podium can be found at the south-east end of the Square.

Umm, actually, I think it had been moved from there, I replied. And besides, it’s definitely not there. Not south-west either.

The security guy shrugged his shoulders and said he had no idea. But maybe I could call the City of Toronto information line?

Okay, I’ll do that.

3-1-1 … hello?

The guy on the other end responded courteously.

“Hi. Just a quick question for you…I’m looking to find out what happened to Speakers’ Corner. It was a dais at the south-west corner of Nathan Phillips Square where people could go to speak their mind.”

“Oh, well if you want information about Citytv…”

“No, no, not that Speakers’ Corner. I’m talking about the lectern that used to sit in front of the Winston Churchill statue at the south end of the square. It had a plaque on it that read that it was provided by the city for the people of Toronto. Dedicated to free speech.”

“Hmm, I’ve never heard of it. You should try to contact the City Hall staff…”

“Oh, I already did. I spoke to the receptionist as well as to security. Neither of them had even heard of it.”

*pause*

“Well, I suppose Marguerite Reid might know something about it. She’s the special events coordinator at City Hall.”

Special events? Didn’t seem like a special event. Still, I let the 311 guy connect me to her extension which landed me in her voice mail. It told me that she’ll be on vacation until the 13th of August, at which point I have no doubt that she’ll try to refer me to Citytv to discover what happened to their vaunted corner.

Essentially, the tiny section of City Hall set aside for citizens to voice their opinions and express their free speech disappeared, and no one noticed. In fact, few people even remember it.

Okay, yeah, it might not have gotten much use over the years that it had been there, but then again no one “uses” the statue of Churchill just behind where it stood either. Yet the statue remains while the podium, a symbol of citizen freedoms, was quietly removed. And yeah, it’s fair to say that it was mostly symbolic. In the same way, the Canadian flag is merely a symbol of the country, even if it doesn’t really do anything. It could just as easily be replaced with something like a twisted Swastika or a sickle and hammer. A few years down the road, would anyone even remember what Canada had been?

Filed under: B Sides, Patrick Bay

This way to your despotism, folks!

Posted on August 4th, 2012 Be the first to comment

I was planning on going down to Caribana today but the heat and humidity were so oppressive, I thought better of it early on.

And that wasn’t the only thing that was oppressive:

Police, volunteers and private security guarded entrances to the Scotiabank Caribbean Carnival, patting people down and searching bags before they entered.

A network of barricades and fences kept the public back from the dancers with glitter-dusted skin and colourful headdresses as they made their way down Toronto’s Lakeshore Blvd.

“There’s so much fences that I can’t hardly see anything,” said Ann James, a nurse from Bloomfield, CT., who was trying to find her way to the end of the parade route.

Pat downs? I thought there weren’t going to be any pat downs! And I thought they were supposed to be reserved only for the saps in the bleachers … you know, all the lowlife criminal scrum like families and the elderly that attend the parade.

And now that I think about it, I’m certain that I mentioned that this was going to turn out to basically be security theatre intended to intimidate the general public.

And now, having mentioning these things (and incidents involving police acting as simply armed thugs, not enforcers of the law), I’m sad to report that they happened last night and today exactly as I predicted.

In fact, Sarah and I decided to go out for some chicken wings in the evening and I don’t remember seeing such a ridiculous number of cops on the streets since the G20. There were cops from all over; Peel Region, Waterloo, Halton. And they were parading around in gaggles of anywhere from four to ten at intervals of — and I’m not exaggerating in any way — every single block around the city core. At times there were more cops than pedestrians.

And I can’t tell you the number of parking enforcement cops that simply strolled by cars parked in front of fire hydrants and blocking intersections, right in front of our wing place, no more than a meter away from us and clearly visible through a huge glass pane window. To put it another way, the police weren’t enforcing the law, they were out to make sure we all saw their presence.

You may, at this point, be wondering if the word “despotism” was accurate in the title of this post. After all, it’s a pretty weighty word with lots of nasty connotations. Well, how about we let Encyclopedia Britannica explain (and while you watch, keep the banking bailouts, growing disparity between rich and poor, government censorship and gagging, and the near dictatorial pronouncements and oppressive, repressive laws and practices coming from both down south and here from Harper’s Canada, in the back of your mind):

Filed under: B Sides, Patrick Bay, Videos

Down the rabbit hole

Posted on July 25th, 2012 Be the first to comment

Remember yesterday when I was talking about the seeming unwillingness of the government to curb violence? I’m sure I’m not the only one to notice this, but the only conclusions that people are drawing are that Harper and his cadre are doing this either through sheer incompetence or some level of meat-headed obstinance that simply won’t allow them to do anything else.

Except what if there’s a third option? One in which this is a cold, calculating move designed to get us all under the yoke of a tyrannical government. I mean, you only have to look as far back as Bills C-11, C-10, or C-38 (the Omnibus Crime Bill) to see exactly where they want to take Canada, and it’s a very ugly direction indeed; Orwellian, even — and that is not an exaggeration by any means.

And if you doubt that, today’s news offers an early glimpse into the plan made incarnate at this year’s Caribana (you know everyone still calls it that!) Here’s just a sample of what they deem is “normal” for private security (these aren’t even sworn police officers, and this is in a public place):

Security guards will be searching visitors’ bags for alcohol, drugs and weapons.

[Organizer Stephen] Weir said the people who usually purchase bleacher seats are seniors, families with young children and tourists. He doesn’t expect pat-downs will be part of the screening process.

Oh, he “doesn’t expect” pat downs will be used on children? That means that, yes, most certainly the troglodyte security goons will most definitely be grabbing at your kids’ genitals, a la US TSA gropings. And since these are mostly elderly and kids and families sitting in the bleachers, off course they need to be the subjects of a security crack-down. They are, after all, typical of the most despicable criminals out there. Makes sense, right?

People are unfairly linking us with an event in another part of the city that was really tragic, but we should be doing this.

Oh, it’s unfair. We don’t have a violent event, so of course we’ll be frisking people. And only the the law-abiding citizens who paid for their tickets; everyone else just walking around on the street won’t be subject to this. Makes sense, right?

If you’ve brought in food and non-alcoholic beverages, we don’t care. But if someone tries to bring in drugs or alcohol or projectiles and the worst-case scenario, a weapon, we have police standing by.

So what exactly is the point of security then? You know, it’s one thing to watch the crowd for sketchy people, but frisking people and rifling through their bags, especially when they’re families, elderly, and kids, has only one purpose, and it’s exactly the same purpose that the police at the G20 were put out in such force and ended up breaking the law in far larger numbers than even the demonstrators (who actually had larger numbers): fear and intimidation.

If you doubt this, read the official reports on the G20 (I’m sure I link to them from this blog somewhere). Does that help to answer why the police didn’t give a fuck when the vandals were wrecking Toronto? They weren’t there to serve and protect — it’s that simple.

They are not there to help you, they’re there to teach you to kow tow to authority, to demand that you allow flabby fucks to manhandle your kids, to scare you into obeying whatever commands they issue, even if they themselves have no more authority than the average citizen on the street. It’s important to repeat this last part, because in a public place like the Caribana parade, you have as many rights as any pudgy fuck with a pseudo-badge and a hard-on for fondling your wife’s breasts. And if you don’t like it, you can be sure that there will be hundreds of security cameras recording your every move, without your knowledge or permission, exactly as described in Orwell’s 1984.

Just today I saw two police cruisers in Allan Gardens and four bicycle cops for a total of eight uniforms busting an old man. One of the officers was doing a little jig while two others were laughing up a storm; the old guy just stood there looking down at the ground. Ridiculous? Of course not, it’s fear and intimidation; they’re doing their jobs!

You know, if the evidence fits then whatever the theory it supports must necessarily be true, and frankly all the crap that the mayor and the mainstream keep throwing at us makes no sense at all (see above).

Q.E.D.

Sadly, most people will just go along with our descent, much to the resounding joy of Harper and his underlings who see their hellish visions of a “modern” society coming to life, and these people will cower in fear and bow to “the authorities” (whoever they claim to be), whenever they’re told to.

This is just the very beginning.

 

Filed under: Patrick Bay, Why I'm Right

Ford desperately grasps at straws in response gun violence

Posted on July 24th, 2012 Be the first to comment

What with Toronto being the center of the Canadian universe, it’d be hard to miss the latest spat of gun violence around town. Funny thing is, it only seems to make news when it happens in neighbourhoods where it usually doesn’t. Oh, don’t get me wrong, the Morningside area of Scarborough where the latest big shooting happened I’m well familiar with (I went to high school there), and it’s never been a terribly pleasant place to visit. Even the hookers along Kingston Road are lacking a certain je ne sais quoi — hard to believe hooking could get seedier, but it does.

But this particular neighbourhood where the shooting happened is a small residential street near The Guild, a ritzy part of Scabby Row, not the rundown hellhole ‘hood people are making it out to be on the news. And that’s precisely why it made the news.

You see, nary a night goes by when a *pop pop pop* isn’t heard down the street from my place; that’s either a lot of fireworks, backfiring cars, or guns going off. I’m pretty sure it’s the later. And it’s the same for nearby Regent Park. When guns go off, neither the media nor the mayor give a shit. In fact, the best people like Ford can do is put on an idiotic bravado by vowing to get those pestilent immigrants out of our fair city, or butting heads with the premiere and pretending to stand on the side of the common man by refusing to take any “BS” (i.e. demanding money from the province), even after voting to cut every single community violence prevention project around town (and being literally the only councillor to do so), and sporting a brand new luxury SUV to demonstrate exactly how much he himself is cutting corners in these tough times.

Let’s not mince words, Ford is a hypocritical piece of filth and he knows it. And he and his buddy, the Chief of Police (incidentally one of the few city agencies to get a plentiful raise while all others received cuts, not including the latest boost from the province), just plaster newspaper headlines with more crap about gun control (were any of the guns used legally purchased?)  And is it coincidental that these shootings coincide with the criticisms of Harper’s Omnibus Crime Bill, in the same way that Obama was forced to back off on his gun control legislation just as the Denver shootings took place? Sure, it’s a bit conspiracy theory, but you have to admit that the timing couldn’t be better. Almost too good.

Also interesting to note that the police don’t appear to keep statistics on how many deaths they’ve caused, but judging by the general number of complaints against them, I’d say that the first step in addressing crime is to overhaul the police services, not allow them to investigate themselves, and to show the public that crime by armed, trained, sworn police officers is dealt with as seriously as crime by civilians, not covered over, drawn out for years, and summarily dismissed. When neighbourhoods can trust the cops to actually enforce the law and not be more crooked than the criminals (I don’t recall any criminal taking an oath to serve and protect the public), then maybe the neighbours will have a reason to report crimes and criminals in their midst. And then maybe something will change.

And in case you’re wondering why most people don’t want to talk to police after shootings — that’s the reason! The vast majority of them believe cops can’t be trusted, and a lot of the time they’re right on the money. Why invite armed thugs, a.k.a. Toronto Police, into the neighbourhood when they’ve seen them selling drugs and pushing people around while being given a free pass by the law to do as they wish (in fact, being licensed to do it)? Not such a big mystery, is it?

Any news reporter mention that? Did Ford blurt that, even in passing, out of his bloated giblet?

But this, the path of transparency, honesty, and propriety, is clearly not one Harper and all of his underlings, including Ford, are willing to take, despite being told for years what the issues are. They know the problems, they know the solutions, and they’re heading in exactly the opposite direction. The only conclusion must be that they’re not interested in curbing violence, they’re interested in keeping the population scared and huddled until they can swoop in on their pale horses and take away all of our rights in the name of “safety”.

If only their efforts weren’t so transparent, one might be tempted to call them absolute imbeciles. Sadly, the truth of the matter is much more insidious.

Filed under: B Sides, Patrick Bay

Toronto Sun reaches new height of journalism

Posted on July 17th, 2012 2 Comments

The birdcage liner aimed at Toronto’s avid knuckle-draggers really outdid itself today. I am now no longer able to distinguish it from other vaunted tabloids like the Weekly World News (more interesting), or the Onion (more funny).

Story goes: dude walks up, sees other dude with bag on seat, screws up face, takes a photo, hobbles off on account of a gimpy leg. Didn’t ask for the seat, didn’t motion like he wanted to sit down, just cast a glance like, “who the hell are you to be taking up my seat with a bag?” Breaking news reported to Sun News who interview gimpy leg dude in the street; now front page of Toronto Sun and most likely running on high rotation on Sun News Network alongside the hot dog rat story.

And look, as of this post, 95 people registered their rabid displeasure at the event — that’s three times as many as the story in which a three-year-old boy kills his dad with his handgun.

Filed under: Dispatches, Patrick Bay, Pictures

Gettin’ our trendy Wellies on

Posted on July 15th, 2012 Be the first to comment

Sarah and I made a sort of unnofficial agreement — well, no, really I made a proposal and she agreed — that we would try to try out a new breakfast joint every Saturday morning, time and money willing. I use the word “morning” lightly because Saturday and that word are not usually best of buddies; I’m sure you know what I mean. But this being Toronto, there are plenty of places around willing to serve breakfast at all manner of un-Godly hours, so that shouldn’t cause us any problems.

Yesterday, for our inaugural journey, Sarah found a place called Bar Wellington for us to try out. It’s a red brick job sitting on the corner of Wellington and Portland Streets, a trendy area with lots of trendy people wearing trendy clothes, walking trendy dogs, riding trendy Vespas, and just generally being trendy.

Trendiness, per se, doesn’t really agree with me — I tend to gravitate more towards the unwashed vagrant look. Plus, the intersection reminds me of the varied and harried times slinging code for evil advertising agencies I’d spent within literally a stone’s throw of there, not all of them bad, but always commensurate with the amount of overall trendiness exhibited by whatever employer I was under the yoke of at the time. In other words, I tend to whinge uncontrollably whenever I’m in the presence of threadbare shirts, fashionably unshorn faces, trendily asymmetric quaffs, and thonged-feet (this ain’t the beach, buddy!)

I was, however, able to put my judgement aside long enough to dig into a plate of sunny-sided eggs, brown toast, and a delightful, albeit misnomered, rendition of hash-brown potatoes consisting of cubed potatoes and lightly herbed cherry tomatoes, and washing it all down with fresh OJ and a glass of oddly vegetable-flavoured water. Sarah couldn’t verify this last part for me because she was busy slamming down a much more vegetable-laden Caesar and ripping into a plate of “Not So Classic” eggs Benedict in which the Canadian bacon is replaced with prosciutto. An extra side of hollandaise went mostly to waste as there was enough of the home made concoction to aptly smother everything on her plate.

Aside from what I thought was somewhat bland hollandaise (I like more zing in my butter/yolk artery-hardener), the $25-ish price tag seemed quite reasonable for a tasty (even the vegetable water wasn’t off-putting), fresh meal, that was big enough to be left partially unfinished. The outdoor patio was breezy, which was just as well since we would never have been able to get Sarah’s wheelchair into the inaccessible building otherwise. It could have been quieter, but then again this is just off of King West on a Saturday; expectations must be tempered.

Overall, I’d give the place a double-thumbs up. I know Sarah thoroughly enjoyed her meal, and I was pretty satisfied too. It was certainly a step-up from the traditional greasy spoon where the hollandaise comes out of a packet and and the hash-browns are swimming in month-old grease. As I said, the hollandaise could’ve used more acid, but Sarah seemed satisfied with it so I guess that’s a matter of personal preference. Next time I might try the “Wellington Medallions”, their fru-fru, Grand-Marnier-infused take on pancakes, but the breakfast was good enough that there’s nothing to make me think twice about returning to an area immersed in nightmarish memories of insane advertising agencies sporting trendy assholes riding trendy Vespas with trendy girlfriends holding trendy dogs…

Filed under: B Sides, Patrick Bay