It’s rare that is happens, says John Elvidge of the city clerk’s office, but sitting mayors do have the right to poke their noses into the various standing committees at City Hall, including sitting in on and taking part in votes, exactly as Rob Ford did on Monday night. It’s an executive privilege.

It’s the second time Ford has done this in a week, this time on the 2014 Service Level review for the Parks and Environment Committee. The Committee, which meets irregularly once every three months or so, makes decisions on things like spending on public parks, gardens, and outdoor programs.

The vote before the Committee on Monday included a number of potentially sizeable increases which were not spelled out in any detail that I saw, although considering the fact that only existing services were listed, it seems that the numbers should be straightfroward to estimate.

Regardless, Ford declared that the as-yet-unspecified amount was too much, voted the item down, and walked out before another motion was adopted to move everything under the purview of the 2014 city budget process. Dougie was also absent for this follow-up vote.

“We can’t have these lefties spending like drunken sailors,” Ford said after his rare appearance at the parks and environment committee.

Ford says a lot of things about money at City Hall.

Things like swearing that freezing property taxes is “job one” for his administration, a claim which he rescinds drastically and early on after being voted into office (actually defending a hefty property tax increase in the process). Then, after being unable to come up with any alternative ideas to fund various city projects, settling on optimistically championing a property tax increase, then a month later calling for a property tax freeze yet again. And all of it in the unabashed service of business, which Ford says is tantamount to working for the common man.

So when Ford says that he’s getting involved in cherry-picked committee votes to curtail leftie spending, or for the benefits of the taxpayer, or any of his other disproved, divisive, and derisive nonsense, let’s just say I’m very skeptical.

The 2010 G20 demonstrations, along with the repeated slaps to the face that Torontonians received from the courts afterwards, were about to become a clean sweep with the cops completely exonerated in caging (literally) 1,1100 innocent people and breaking  many laws in the process.

Those thousand Torontonians who had no charges laid whatsoever were submitted to quite brutal and demeaning conditions, often after being illegally assaulted by gangs of police who made up their own laws and rules as they went along.

The abuses by police far outweighed any provable good they did on that weekend which, judging by what the cops allowed to happen, had nothing to do with protecting Toronto or its citizens.

The incident of Adam Nobody, though probably more provoked than most bystanders those days, has demonstrated some of what went on that day, resulting in the first (and probably only) conviction of a cop for assault.

Constable Babak Andalib-Goortani, now convicted of assault with a weapon, plus three other officers had the chutzpah to make up vivid stories about Nobody as a troublemaker that day (having made no such notes in their notebooks). At least that’s what the judge thought. The same constable also removed his name tag and badge number before the assault.

Together these would seem to be aggravating charges, no? After all, the police viciously pile charge upon charge on innocent people they want to put the squeeze on. But as we see repeatedly they escape with, at worst, a paid vacation and the reassurance that their brothers, sisters, and supervisors are working hard to serve and protect their asses.

Among the rare times I’ve had an interaction with police that didn’t include them being confrontational and aggressive, one — some physical threats from meth-cooking neighbours — further demonstrated this simple fact to me. They went to their door first first to let them know who was complaining, then visited us to tell us that he’s known to them but that his “alleged” drug production (which the landlord spent many months and much money cleaning up after), and her “personal choice” to prostitute herself out of their premises, were none of our business and we would just have to get along. And while in our place acting like we were ticking them off with our very existence,  they took the time to snoop around, a courtesy they did not extend to the neighbours.

Not accurate? Let’s do the math:

1 conviction to 1000 wrongful arrests, assaults, Charter Rights violations, etc. = 0.1% justice rulings in favour of innocent citizens, 99.9% justice rulings in favour of armed, trained law-breaking paramilitary forces (especially on that day). The established facts are simply that when it comes to crunch time, the Toronto police do not serve and protect the community or citizens, and the courts will back them up.

Of course it’s not fair to say that all cops are in on this racket, and every once in a while we see a successful prosecution, but with numbers like these and story after story of cops getting away with pretty much anything and everything, it is completely fair and accurate to say that this corruption is systemic and far reaching.

Boy did I need a break from the Ford news cycle — and what a doozie of story to do it on!

I wasn’t aware of this but apparently Christopher Peloso, husband of former mayoral candidate George Smitherman, went missing late on Monday afternoon.

He was found just before noon today, needing “immediate help” but alive near some train track in the western section of downtown. There are no indications that going missing like this is something that Peloso is likely to do, and turning up injured near train tracks even less so.

Obviously something strange and interesting happened, and that’s about the only obvious thing we know right now.

 Loading ...

“In our respectful opinion, connections between drug dealers, gun dealers, a notorious crack house and the chief magistrate of Canada’s largest city fit the definition of something that can and should be explored in the public interest.”

These were the words of Michael Cooke, editor of the Star, yesterday at a hearing before the Ontario Press Council about complaints in which the news (including the Globe and Mail) has been reporting on the Ford family’s blatant lies, hypocrisy, and criminality. Those are my own words, by the way, which I have also gone to great lengths to back up in previous posts.

But that’s not good enough for some people.

One complainant, Darylle Donley, had this to say:

“I would be curious to know just how far a TV or radio reporter or newspaper person, has to go before they are sanctioned or curtailed? The Ford brothers are being lied about, innuendos and allegations are being made against them. The news should be concrete and proven truth.”

Of course, the same questions must never be posed about our public officials — right, Darylle? And what about the fact that you’re publicly slandering the newspapers by calling them liars? Where’s your “concrete and proven truth”?

And what sort of insane newspaper prints only well-established and proven truths? By that logic, we wouldn’t know anything about the gas plant cancellations by the provincial government which, judging by her allegiance to Ford, is exactly the type of thing she would want to have revealed. Donley’s narrow-mindedness is staggering and, sadly, unsurprising.

And just to demonstrate her bizarre mental processes, she followed up with a not-so-subtle racist rant that had nothing to do with the hearing:

“The persons in the story, were they connected with the Don Bosco football team? Around the Don Bosco football team, there were a lot of unsavory characters.”

If you’ll recall, this is the same community that decided to tell Rob Ford where to go after he slandered them in pretty much the same way as Donley (clearly she swallowed his shit, hook, line, and sinker). He then used city staff and resources to collect his football equipment “donation” from Don Bosco — if they aren’t willing to play the poor, disadvantaged, drug-addled hood kids to his magnificent white saviour image, fuck ’em!

In other words, the community itself rose up against Rob Ford to tell him unequivocally what they think of him. So of course his supporters, instead of listening to all of the people directly affected by Ford’s benevolence, decided instead to listen to, and wholeheartedly believe, the crap that poured out of the mouth one well-known public liar.

Donley is no stranger to publicly exposing her ability to blindly jump to conclusions, even going so far as to make not-so-veiled threats against those she deems unacceptable:

Regarding the 411 on Ford’s 911 (NOW, November 3-9). I wouldn’t know Mary Walsh if I tripped over her. If she accosted me at any time, never mind in that outfit with a sword on her ample hips, I would probably push her and then call 911.

She touched Mayor Rob Ford on the shoulder. How would Walsh react if someone came up to her early in the morning in her driveway?

Walsh is not a particularly delicate, fragile-looking person and could easily be a threat to anyone, even without opening her vicious mouth.

Darylle Donley
Toronto

Donley readily admits that if someone who she had never met, but doesn’t like because Rob Ford told her to, she would be willing to get violent on the spot.

Maybe this isn’t the same Darylle Donley, but that’s a pretty unique name, and the attitude fits to a “T”.

That’s Ford Nation for you, prototype or personified. They have such a hate on for anything that dares to question their beloved leader that they reject it all outright. Even when they claim that they are the subject of persecution (offering zero evidence, which of course makes their own claims complete lies by their own definition), they do offer insights into why they are so universally adored with statements like “Maybe it’s a woman thing”, and “…this is all down to a bung of women who like spending money…”

These are the same supporters of Rob Ford who, on his radio show cuts off people while inserting questionable “supporters” which, it turns out, openly lie about their identity and work directly for Ford.

This is the same Rob Ford that openly lies about his administration’s accomplishments – unquestioningly championed by glassy-eyed Ford Nation.

This is the same Rob Ford that calls the media all sorts of names and gets openly angry at anyone who wants to look into what he’s doing on the job as a public official. He is, after all, the Mayor and doesn’t need to answer to anyone.

This is the same Ford that repeatedly demands that the media are just a bunch of liars, despite the ridiculous number of statements by editors  and staff standing firmly behind their stories, while Ford himself abjectly refuses to answer any questions (and insults whole groups of people while doing it —  par for the course for Ford).

This is the same Rob Ford that has had to defend himself against a slew of lawsuits on a broad range of topics. None of these are being mentioned, of course, including the fact that it was legally proven that Ford had broken the law numerous times while on the job.

This is the same Rob Ford that surrounds himself with criminals and ne’er do wells who run around trying to cover up the fat man’s misdeeds.

Above all, it doesn’t matter that these allegations have been corroborated by so many independent sources, or that the so-called “anonymous” sources that Ford supporters complain about are not anonymous at all. And of course it’s just fine and not at all sheer hypocrisy that 30 of the 41 complaints before the Press Council meeting are anonymous (and only 6 are formal and in writing)! Besides this, many of the names connected with the Ford crack scandal have been corroborated (not to mention being printed in the news), to the n-th degree. Rob Ford’s evidence in his own defense: zilch.

I could go on for days but the brunt of the issue is that Ford and his supporters are entirely guilty of the very same accusations they throw around like they invented them. They want news media to engage in responsible journalism while they themselves think it’s perfectly okay to deceive and insult and threaten, while there’s not a single shred of evidence that the stories about Ford are false, and much evidence exists to prove that they’re true.

Isn’t it hypocritical of me to be name calling like this? In fact, isn’t it slanderous?

Recently a TCL reader left a reply to a mayoral candidate post I’d done a while ago that reminded me of how deluded and just plain bizarre people’s understanding of these things are, so let me explain what the difference between slander and merely an uncomfortable yet fully legal article is: facts.

This little concept still seems to be lost on so many people.

They think that calling a proven liar a “liar” is slander. They think that anyone who mentions a known, proven criminal as a “criminal” is engaging in irresponsible journalism.

Whatever you do, just don’t bring up facts and use words that accurately describe those facts, especially if those facts are about the Fords!

They believe that corroborating and linking to the facts that back up your claims are irrelevant — only what known liars and criminals say, with no proof or evidence of any kind, is acceptable.

There is an interesting closing point I’d like to mention here:

Snickering, sneering Ford Nation are about to get a taste of their own medicine. While Rob Ford managed to scrape by on appeals when it mattered, we’ve seen many examples where breaking the law has had absolutely no repercussions — from campaign finances to conflicts of interest. There seems to be no mechanism to hold our elected officials to account at all. And while I think this Ontario Press Council thing is a sham, the reason I’m not getting upset is that they have roughly the same teeth as those groups tasked with making sure politicians don’t break the law.

In other words, even if they find that the Star, Globe and Mail, etc. all did something inappropriate, the best that they can do is have the newspapers print the decision.

I’m certain that, no matter the decision, the news outfits will make at least this small gesture. I’m equally sure that, based on everything we’ve witnessed thus far, Rob Ford would do no such thing. In fact, he would deny any wrongdoing whatsoever, insult and denigrate those who question him, genuinely slander a few more for good measure, and then fuck off for the rest of the early afternoon to go coach football with city staff and resources. And it wouldn’t be the Fords if they didn’t repeatedly lie about it all afterwards!

For once I’m not going to involve Rob Ford in this except to mention that it’s his office that’s involved in the situation. I’m not blaming the man personally, though if you were to tell me that it was his doing then it wouldn’t seem at all out of place.

This all has to do with various Municipal Freedom of Information Act requests to City Hall — Rob Ford’s office, to be specific — that are being basically ignored. The law states that Ford’s office has 30 days to comply, or give reasons for a delay, but the Star is noting that some of their requests are more than a month past-due without so much as a peep from Ford’s office.

This isn’t terribly out of place with today’s increasingly authoritarian, secretive, and oppressive model of government; Canada being no exception. More than one professional journalist group has raised the alarm about this as they discovered the same tactics being used by all the various levels of government.

For the common Joe, it can quickly become prohibitive to keep paying for the little bits and pieces of information (or more likely appeals), that the government deems that he’s worthy to know. That’s because the government has few, if any obligations to Joe.

Instead, almost all of the obligations, requirements, rules, stipulations, demands, laws, by-laws, regulations, and penalties fall on the head of common Joe. The rights, expectations, protections, aegises, mandates, wills, and general declarations of “this is what we can and will do to you” are exclusive to governments and big corpo.

Take the Municipal Freedom of Information Act, as a contextual example. There are a couple of sections in there mentioning your rights, hardly any mention of what happens when your rights under these terms have been violated, and the vast majority of the document describes how you can and will be refused FOIA requests as well as all the ways in which your privacy will not be protected. Within the “Offenses” section, a maximum $5,000 fine is specified as a penalty for six items, one of which potentially punishes a government employee for sharing personal information, and five of which punish you for a broad variety of things. For example, the government implicitly retains the right to lie and mislead you while specifically stipulating that it’s against the law for you to do so to them.

On the flip side of the same coin, while most corporations will break the law and then pass the financial penalty (if any) onto their beholden customers, some large and established organizations are emboldened enough to publicly demand that they are not, and should not be legally required to tell the truth in things like contracts and advertising claims.

Legalese is carefully crafted and such things don’t happen by accident. Most laws and regulations are squarely aimed at the everyday citizen and designed to exclude government and large corporations. This is cold hard reality, publicly expounded and codified.

This is also why it seems that these same groups seem to be getting away with breaking the law. That law, if applied to you or me would see a swift and decisive response before you could bat an eyelash in protest. Not so much if you’re part of a government gang or elite corpo clique. And even if it turns out that they had actually broken a law, that law is just retroactively changed by them or their buddies to make it all good and legal — now it’s even more in line with what the law was intended for!

Even something as trivially simple as taxes reveals this disparity: if you pay late, they will come after you no questions asked and charge you interest for the privilege. If they mess up and send you a rebate cheque late, or for the wrong amount, would any court seriously entertain an interest charge in your favour? In fact, who do you complain to?

Keep in mind that this isn’t the free market and so we don’t just up and over to a new government. A waxy dead-eyed new figurehead, yeah, but that’s hardly the same thing.

Unchecked, I think it’d obvious where this is headed. However, I also console myself with the fact that some people are cynical about all things corpo-government. In my experience, they don’t really care much for laws that seek only to oppress and control them. Some people don’t need to be told by some pinhead with a lofty title what’s right and what’s wrong. When these same people are in the majority, it doesn’t much matter how much that pinhead insists that he is the moral authority. And no matter how much that pinhead insists that without his laws society would just crumble into a depraved orgy of destruction and death, we know otherwise.

The problem is that right now there is a great deal of complacency, fear, and childish distraction among Canadians. The laws being erected against us are turning into real, physical systems. At the same time, Canadians are unwittingly being chemically lobotomized and mentally damaged while subsisting on a diet of numbing drugs and chemical-laced water, all while consuming mindless media that promotes violence and vulgarity. This confluence of factors may be nothing more than coincidence, but it doesn’t change the facts.

Politicians and money men have been called scoundrels (and much worse), since time immemorial, probably owing to the fact that it’s a perfectly true statement. What we’re just beginning to experience now, however, is what happens when those scoundrels are allowed, encouraged even, to rule over us through fear, violence, and deception.

In addition to his numerous flashes of brilliance, one of Giorgio Mammoliti’s ideas included sticking a huge flagpole in a spritely section of town called Emery Village. Business owners in the area were to be mafia-style-“convinced” to support Mammoliti’s tourist-magnet concept of Canadian majesty.

“Emery village is not a tourist area. You put a giant flag at city hall or the Eaton Centre. It’s an industrial area here.” – Walter Berton, owner of Berton Seeds on Weston Road

Sadly, it seems that Giorgio’s brainchild may not be coming to fruition. The thing was supposed to have been erected at some point in 2011 and the winning idea has been hanging limp since.

It seems that Mammoliti’s bluster exceeded his capacity to carry it out. Even the concept flag in the scale model sitting outside of his office has been purloined.

This comes at the same time as Mammoliti’s buddy and everyone’s number one guy, Rob Ford, is being bitch-slapped by the Toronto Star about his economic claims. Some of the more interesting revelations on the 11-item list include:

1. “I said from Day 1: the city has a spending problem, not a revenue problem. I have proved my statement to be correct.”

For a mayor that claims that the city doesn’t have a revenue problem, Rob has spent a lot of time trying to come up with various revenue tools for city projects.

2. “Before I took office, any annual surplus was used to fill holes in bloated operating budgets. Guaranteed, this will not happen while I’m mayor. We have put an end to the unsustainable budget practices of the last administration. It is over.”

This is a Rob Ford “guarantee”, so that tag alone should be indicative how how true this statement is. In addition, the Star points to three specific instances where surpluses or “unsustainable budget practices” were used to fill budget holes under Robbie’s reign.

3. “As many of you know, I came from the private sector before I got into politics. Very, very fortunate to run my dad’s company that he started 50 years ago.”

Apparently, Rob never ran his dad’s company, he only worked for it. If his current schedule is evocative of his earlier attendance at Deco Labels and Tags, however, to say that he “worked” there would be a further stretching of the truth.

Amidst all of this looms the end of summer, spelling the end of easy season down at City Hall as everyone comes back from vacation; plus, we’re just over a year away from the next election … not a good confluence for Ford Nation.

Even if you don’t smoke pot yourself, chances are pretty good that you know someone who does. As a result, you’ll probably also have experienced what marijuana does to people, and you’ve probably noticed that it lacks the nasty side-effects of other, legal medications.

It’s interesting to note, in fact, that it’s been primarily governments and scientists who have been spreading many of the lies and misinformation about the topic, with police eager to support these well known perjuries in order to bump up their drug enforcement budgets.

It’s not surprising to learn that the “authorities” openly lie and deceive the public like this, so I can’t help but wonder what changed behind the scenes that so many politicians are now coming forward and admitting to the occasional puff or two.

It started with Justin Trudeau and Kathleen Wynne, both of who gave the standard “I tried it a long time ago and didn’t like it” response. Rob Ford, stunningly and especially considering the whole crack thing, went way beyond this and admitted to blazing “a lot”.

In the meantime, tea-totaling Stephen Harper openly lied to millions of Canadians by claiming that, because Trudeau admitted to smoking pot, he was promoting it to children. Of course, this is not even close to the truth. Harper has embraced misleading the public in pretty much the same way that his cadre of underlings have done … even down to the same bullshit invocation of children.

Harper claimed that Justin’s “actions speak for themselves”. True. Harper’s actions also speak for themselves, and they describe a horrific, lying, slandering, murdering sociopath who should be behind bars. The man is a criminal and he proves it a little more every time he opens his mouth.

I visited London a little while ago. That London. I only got to be a tourist for about four hours at the end of the local work day (and I had to skip the pub!) Here’s what I saw, including the occasional double image or ghostly figure:

Sweets and Tea at Harrods

Harrods Egyptian Room

Harrods Seafood Lounge

Somerset House after dark

Memorial Gates at Green Park

Battersea Power Station on the Thames

Legally required London photo booth shot

Near Trafalgar Square somewhere

Piccadilly Circus. Note the lack of clowns, elephants, tent, etc.

Along Piccadilly

Still along Piccadilly

The Red Lion at Derby Gate. Beer!

A Drury Lane pub. More beer!

A bit o’ the old symbolism near the Eye

The Eye and a mysterious London moon. West from Waterloo Bridge.

The mysterious London financial district. East from Waterloo Bridge.

At one time, my mentions that we are being illegally tracked by our government/corporate owners were derided as conspiracy gibberish, along with the verbatim “tinfoil hat” comments that all such enlightened contrarians regurgitate, despite the reams of independent, corroborative evidence I would trot out.

Then, with the news of NSA spying scandal came confirmation that, yes indeed, this is exactly what’s happening and if anything I didn’t go far enough in my descriptions.

None of it is news to the informed, to be sure, and there is enough independent verification going back many years from the best sources one could find — there’s absolutely no doubt that we are being spied on constantly, and that our government is forcing this on us at the behest of private, for-profit, and for-control interests. Even if you believe the highly incredulous claims that CSEC, Canada’s version of the NSA, is not spying on Canadians, there’s no doubt that our neighbours are only more than willing to do so and to share that information with CSEC:

CSEC relies on its closest foreign intelligence allies, the US, UK, Australia and New Zealand to share the collection burden and the resulting intelligence yield. Canada is a substantial beneficiary of the collaborative effort within the partnership to collect and report on foreign communications.

The issue of why the government is doing this usually pops up at this point. The naive assumption is typically that this is being done for the protection of citizens (terrorism!) and that even if our data is temporarily stored and analyzed, ultimately no one is interested in harvesting all of your innermost secrets.

Of course, I’ve already mentioned that the government is imposing these measures on behalf of power-hungry organizations seeking global domination (is that sufficient motive?), which also sounds like a conspiratorial rambling — if only it weren’t for the fact that CSEC directly states this on their website:

The IT Security Program has earned highly valued global respect and a reputation of technical excellence. It now extends its expertise past its traditional technical clients to those within the Government of Canada who are responsible for the formulation and implementation of policy and program managers. This approach encourages harmonization between Government of Canada’s operational IT security requirements with its business needs and processes.

The IT Security Program will aid the Government of Canada’s effort to make cyber security a business enabler.

It’s fair to say that protecting profits, whether government or corporate, isn’t CSEC’s only job:

During the Cold War, the Establishment’s primary client for signals intelligence was National Defence, and its focus was the military operations of the then Soviet Union. Since the end of the Cold War, Government of Canada requirements have evolved to include a wide variety of political, defence, and security issues of interest to a much broader range of client departments.

While these continue to be key intelligence priorities for Government of Canada decision-makers, increasing focus on protecting the safety of Canadians is prompting greater interest in intelligence on transnational issues, including terrorism.

Here CSEC, under the reliable guise of “terrorism”, is openly promoting surveillance and spying. Note how there’s no mention of protecting citizens from predatory governments or other large organizations with the means and proven willingness to do real harm.

The agency, unsurprisingly, works hard at convincing everyone that with every new power they’re granted they’re being extra cautious and rigorous, but such words are hollow and meaningless when cut short by insistence that actual details are top secret and therefore you can’t know about them.

I’m not the only person to point this out, but what is clearly apparent is that the government and all of its shadowy organizations are focused on protecting corporate and government interests while either ignoring are actively eroding individual rights and freedoms. Their words are loud enough by themselves, but their actions practically scream their intent.

This is not only enshrined in both the despicable mandates and lack of any accountability underlying CSEC, CSIS, and other such groups, but we see real-world examples of what is truly important to their operations. Between destroying potentially incriminating evidence, allowing international spying to happen under their noses, being watched over by fraudsters, and championing horrific laws, it’s really hard to see any of them as the cheerful, helpful, protective entities they claim they are.

You can go even further to prove this for yourself by calling any government agency, whether it’s the Canada Revenue Agency or the Public Safety Ministry, and ask the person on the other end the simple and blunt question: does the government work for the people or do the people work for the government? The answer should only be, “but of course the government works for its people!”, and part of that work should include being able to answer this question; however, it’s highly unlikely that this is the response you’ll receive. In fact, you should take a moment to relish the derision and/or idiocy you’ll receive as a response from the people who you’re paying to force you to jump through hoops for — then you’ll be clear about who is expected to bow to who.

This seems so juvenile and simple that few people would bother actually picking up the phone and learning the disturbing truth for themselves. Instead, they will wrap themselves up in yet another layer of delusion and will, by corollary, have answered their own subsequent questions about how governments and corporations are able to get away with this, how people could be so blind and blasé as to allow it to happen, etc.

The question, for those of us who can add two and two, is not whether we’re being tracked and surveilled, it’s what we can do about it. The idiotic claim that, because we’ve done nothing wrong we have nothing to hide can be re-stated equally as simply as because we’ve done nothing wrong you have no right to watch us. In fact, if these agencies are so squeaky clean, why do they obstinately refuse any oversight or inspection? If they didn’t do anything wrong, why do they refuse to answer any questions?

Because it’s one standard for us, the reprehensible child-molesting rabble who should count themselves lucky to be protected from all those nefarious terrorist plots, and another standard for our historically benign and loving government/corporate owners. And when we complain about this inconsistency, we’re reminded in less-than-gentle ways that their 24% support represents a “majority” and if we don’t like it we need to shut the hell up and wait until the next “fair” election.

When we see corporate-backed governments collaboratively going after those standing up for truth, honesty, openness, and justice, even when those people have not broken any laws, while the governments themselves, at the highest levels, are openly breaking law after law and engaging in open fraud and deception, it’s obvious what side of the moral/ethical/legal debate the “authorities” stand on, and moreover, who their number one enemy are.

The sad thing is that the willfully ignorant still expect tanks to roll through the streets in order to recognize the action as a coup, never once thinking that guns and bombs don’t need to be used when gullible fools like them unwittingly and gladly hand over everything to their criminal overlords.

At this point in time I’ve pretty much used up almost my entire vocabulary of expletives and colourful adjectives for Rob Ford so I’m not gonna go down that road.

Nope.

Let me just say that I find Ford latest behaviour extremely disappointing.

I’m referring to the latest news that has Robbie calling a special rush-rush meeting to decide what to do about his unfilled Deputy Mayor seat.

The meeting, in and of itself, is sensible considering the recent departure of Doug Holyday for provincial pastures. Hard to find fault with that. But, as usual, that’s only about five percent of the story.

The fact that Holyday would be running, and that the Deputy Mayor seat could be vacated was hardly a secret, so this meeting that Rob is calling probably didn’t have to be so last minute.

But so what? Aren’t meetings part and parcel of Council’s job?

Yes, but it sucks hard to be told that you need to cut short your vacation time because Fordo couldn’t see past his limited imagination a few weeks into the future and instead waited until the ball was already in the net.

This is especially egregious considering how Rob Ford skipped out of a Council meeting not more than a month ago, so that he could take off early for … guess what? … a vacation!

And let’s not forget how Rob Ford famously skirted his responsibilities as ambassador to this city (more than once), for the Pride event that draws millions of people from all over the world, in order to go for … guess what? … a vacation!

In between vacations, Robbie seemingly has an overabundance of free time, which makes the whole thing extra slap-in-the-face-y. Yet Ford seems to be so disconnected from reality that apparently this doesn’t bother him in the least. This is evidenced by the additional facts that he’s seriously considering getting back into coaching football, despite all the trouble that his obsession has led to, and despite the fact that his last coaching gig ended up with a lot of pissed-off people.

I mean, that’s Robbie right? The same man who’s administration is internally so unstable that it continues to bleed staff (another “personal assistant” this time), like it’s going out of style.

My adjectives dwindle with every passing day.