28a27dc735:85 Thank you…

Nothing, Greg, except that we HAVE his side of the story, twice…once from him, once from Byfield. What I’d like to see is a report from another source. I’ll check your supplementary posting.

Oh, dear. You guys really do need a bit of clarity around this whole “journalism” thing.

Come on, balbulican - cut me some slack here - what’s wrong with giving a guy the opportunity to share his side of the story?

Anyways, a friend of mine forwarded the actual RCMP Police Report sent out to the various media outlets in Central Alberta. I’ve created a new posting for this report.

No, I mean generally skeptical. When a Palestinian press release announces that X children were killed by an American bomb at a wedding, I generally google to try to track the story back to its original source. More often than not, it sources back to a single report, with no outside corroboration. That reports gets picked up and reported by dozens of outlets: but while the proliferation of a story through a range of ideological websites creates the illusion of validity, you can usually tell it’s bullshit if it stems from one report.

By which you mean selectively skeptical, of course.

Oh, dear. You guys really do need a bit of clarity around this whole “journalism” thing.

Ryan, if that’s the case, do you have any sense of what the original source was? There isn’t a editor in the world that would touch a story that weak AS NEWS, so you may well correct; IF the story was published elsewhere, I’d assume some due diligence.

I frankly doubt it, but I’d love to see a source or link.

“When other media don’t report on the story, that’s haughtily dismissed as one of those “evil MSN coverups.”

Heh. I see you still have gone in for that irony tune-up, have you? I don’t think this is a case of media coverup, Aaron. I think (he said again, wearily) that it’s a weak victimhood story, with no corroboration, and that no serious editor would touch it.

“Anyone else noticing the cognitive devices that Balbulican employs to view the world precisely as he thinks it should be?”

Don’t know what you can deduce from all this about my “view” of the “world”, other than I’m a bit more sceptical that you.

For sure. Maybe you could find and talk to one of them, since I’m obviously not able to help you.

As Balbulican said, he’s a columnist.

When his family was still publishing “The Report” magazine, they were quite proud of the fact they didn’t actually consider themselves “journalists” - and the crap they wrote showed it.

Neither do I know how much investigation Link Byfield gave to his piece. Maybe he phoned the court in Drumheller.

Unless you investigate, your claim that the story is unsupported remains an unsupported claim. Then again, I guess some folks understand the difference between news and propaganda.

I don’t know. I know he’s a columnist. Do you understand the distinction? His publication of an unsupported allegation, based exclusively on the “victim’s” allegations, without any other apparent source, suggests that no, he is not a journalist. Or at least, not a good one.

“You have to be pretty dense not to know that there are more than a few recent reports of injudicious RCMP conduct.”

I’m quite aware, thanks. Some such reports have a basis. Some don’t. That’s why a “journalist” looks for corroboration.

“If it were untrue, you’d think some guy running for office on the basis of it would provoke a statement from them.”

Heh. You don’t do a lot of PR work, do you? Why on earth would the RCMP bother denying an improbable account that appears to have no evidence to back it up? It’s simply not credible, except to the ideologues for whom credibility is secondary to utility.

“Phone the court in Drumheller and report back.”

Naw. I don’t follow up on most Elvis or UFO sightings, either. There’s a certain threshold at which I take these reports seriously. An unsupported statement from the alleged victim doesn’t quite make it.

You, of course, are free to set the bar as low as you want. I’m just pointing out to your readers that this story has very little actual merit. The chronically histrionic and outraged can get upset if they want. Folks who understand the difference between news and propaganda may pause.

Righteous wrath and indignation? How’s that for the pot calling the kettle black. I’m not the one taking issue with the veracity of the story, so why would I investigate it further. I’m not jumping on board with Mr. Rew’s separatist Republican agenda, but you have to be pretty dense not to know that there are more than a few recent reports of injudicious RCMP conduct.

The alleged victim is running for public office on the basis of alleged “RCMP malfeasance.” If it were untrue, you’d think some guy running for office on the basis of it would provoke a statement from them.

As far as putting one’s critical faculties on hold, please, phone the court in Drumheller and report back; given your righteous wrath and indignation.

Not. What we have is a “story” based on one person’s narrative, with no actual journalistic coverage.

“veracity can likely be determined through the court at Drumheller…”

By all means do so, if you care to. Since you haven’t, I assume all this righteous wrath and indignation is based on the extremely weak sources already noted.

“Second, if this story is not true, the RCMP would likely have issued a denial.”

No. There is so far no credible evidence that any RCMP malfeasance has occurred, beyond an unsupported statement by the alleged victim. Why on earth would they?

“Maybe it is; maybe not.”

Indeed. As an occasional journalist/editor, I find the story risibly weak: but the folks who find it ideologically useful seem to have put their critical faculties on hold.

There’s no “new

Second, if this story is not true, the RCMP would likely have issued a denial. The RCMP seemingly manage and protect their public image more than any other government agency in Canada.

Anyone wishing to discredit this story has means to do it, besides, that is, peremptorily bellowing about the lack of news coverage, how it must be a sham.

Maybe it is; maybe not.

No police, news or witness reports appear to be available, and there is no indication that any report or explanation from the police was sought. Curiously, this potentially explosive “story” is for some reason being ignored by journalists from every medium and every political stripe…except, of course, the gentleman running for office, and the “columnist” who heads a political movement espousing views similar to those of Mr. Rew. No doubt one of those evil MSM coverups, right?

Say, I just got a letter from a banker in Nigeria with really interesting busines proposition I can’t go into right now. Send me your email address and bank account number, and I’ll share it with you.

I first learned of the incident through the Link Byfield column posted in the article which appeared in a local weekly newspaper.

As for the validity of his story, I can only take Mr. Rew at his word. I don’t know why he would lie, however if anyone has any insight as to why Mr. Rew would choose to fabricate a run-in with the RCMP, and follow that up by taking a last minute run for office, I am open to hearing them.

George, given your indignation, are you aware of any other source? Any source on any website seems to track directly back to a single source, Mr. Rew, who appears to be parlaying his victimhood into a run for office. Given that, I think my question is legitimate.

Anyone? Any other source?

Come on Aaron, the story is a little bit over the top; with exploding television stands and singed doors, and all.

From who? The RCMP? The guy’s mother?

Never mind. The guy’s a gun owner. Must also be a liar.

*crickets*