Think About It     Oct 8, 2009 3:33 PM

This $66/ year pooling 1 in 5 Incidents of Low Income from 1997 aren’t factored into the 25% of Peel’s PR stunts Muse

Which is why it’s not the first time the moderator kicked Antimuse off this blog interfering a constitutional breach of sections 6) Mobility Rights who’s appears to be “palming off public relations consultations”. All 3 political affiliations had decided to re-open the Malton Bear Head Airbus affair and accordingly are shaking their heads at the Mississauga’s CEO. The political will by all 3 parties is only there to remove McCallion for sleeping at the switch at this time.

The Mississauga Muse     Oct 8, 2009 2:23 PM

For Think About It. Why's it Matter if We Vote or Not? Zero diff.

Hi Think About It. You wrote, "Only a quarter of Mississaugan’s bother to vote because the level of indifference so profound no one cares." Here's the reality. Unless voters lucked out and got real Mayors and Councillors willing to hold their municipal employees accountable --as in FIRE them if they under perform badly or are corrupt, why does it matter whether we-citizens vote or not? What's the difference between the Mayor/Councillor crew Mississaugans have now, and some Other that expects senior Staff who don't follow policies and procedures to alert elected officials that they don't follow policies and procedures. It's ridiculously true, Hun. I have that on tape.

The Mississauga Muse     Oct 8, 2009 2:12 PM

Yes! An AntiMuse! Isn't that NEAT, Uatu?

Uatu you wrote, "You've reached another milestone, Muse. Someone actually registered as AntiMuse. I would love to see you two go head to head in a debate." Um. Well if this person is the AntiMuse that means his/her side of the debate won't be based on facts (ie: Freedom of Information) or irrefutable evidence (ie: video or audiotape).. If I want a trod through those apples, I only have to read the pro-City, pro-McCallion comments over at the Toronto Star, Sun or Globe. Or just read Cheryl Glassford's "No conflict" letter to the editor where m'lady writes, "The facts are that she did declare a conflict." all without her ever bothering to listen/watch the May 21, 2008 Council meeting. QUIS CUSTODIET IPSOS CUSTODES? Uatu?

The Mississauga Muse     Oct 8, 2009 1:55 PM

Actually I agree, that's a horrid pic of McCallion

AntiMuse you wrote, "If you knew anything about debating, one of the first rules is to attack the issue, not the person. If you both have such an issue with Corporate Security or the City itself, may I offer you a bit of your own advise - you don't have to live here." Actually, just a reminder because I’m sure you know this as someone serving up advice on debating skills. One of the LAST tricks people with weak debating skills end their noises with is the dismissive and loathsome "you don't have to live here." Other debating bug-outs include, “Get a life” “Haven’t you anything better to do” and of course the totally ridiculous “re: Corporate Security. I've had several dealings with them. I've always found them competent and willing to help.” “competent” HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAAHAA Have I got FOI’s!.. Oh. Wait. You’re not interested in facts and CorpSec internal emails!

The Mississauga Muse     Oct 8, 2009 1:42 PM

Hi AntiMuse! Identify yourself. My name is Ursula Bennett and I back up everything I write with Freedom of Information or videotape

Re: your comment about my "insipid FOI rants" being tedious. Yes, I know. There is a sector of society that are authoritarian –meaning they stand by their leaders no matter what. These people are scary and it is from that authoritarian mentality that we-Canadians can find our closet-fascists. To authoritarians Freedom of Information is Enemy. After all, FOI contradicts what Hazel McCallion claims –and does so repeatedly. A timely article in today’s Toronto Star, “Parents sue over daughter's jail death” this quote, "Each time (she is transferred) her status as a segregation inmate is stopped and reset so the 60-day review period never kicks in, meaning there is no oversight mechanism to ensure that the propriety of how she is being treated is reviewed." FOI confirms that “there is no oversight mechanism to ensure that the propriety of how [youth] is being treated is reviewed." at City of Mississauga either.

The Mississauga Muse     Oct 8, 2009 1:25 PM

Hi AntiMuse! Identify yourself. My name is Ursula Bennett and I back up everything I write with Freedom of Information or videotape

I assume as AntiMuse then that means that you're going to avoid all FACTS and use pitiful “debating” noises like "you don't have to live here". So your solution to me not liking the City of Mississauga Corporate Security's ABUSIVE TREATMENT of Youth and minors then I " don't have to live here." Right? FACT. At the September 30, 2009 Council meeting, Councillor Pat Saito had this to say about Security: “I think it’s important that our residents are…made aware of the various steps that are taken, because a ban is not an instant step. Usually.” And also “There are other steps that have been taken before that happens in many cases.” COMPLETELY FALSE! How can she NOT KNOW that City Security guards BAN KIDS as the first and only step?! And should they return during their bans they WILL BE arrested. Repeat, AntiMuse. Identify yourself. Signed, Ursula Bennett MISSISSAUGWATCH

AntiMuse     Oct 8, 2009 12:04 PM

Another One Trick Pony

Uatu - you miss the whole point. Couldn't really care less about your whining re: Corporate Security. I've had several dealings with them. I've always found them competent and willing to help. And your right, I don't have to read the comments, EXCEPT when she switches from attacking a public official, to a citizen who was just responding to an article that they (and many others) felt stepped over the lines of decency. If you knew anything about debating, one of the first rules is to attack the issue, not the person. If you both have such an issue with Corporate Security or the City itself, may I offer you a bit of your own advise - you don't have to live here.