Evil T.O. STAR at it again, Merry Xmas

:mad:
Nice, on Christmas Eve, Front Page of The Star, there is a cute picture of a pitbull balancing on a fire hydrant (??), under the headline Naughty or Nice? Then there is the sub-heading, "IN THE DOGHOUSE Pit bull's bites far worse than their barks".

Then on E3 (GTA), "NAUGHTY OR NICE - Pit bulls and a very good deed top this year's list"

Picture of man and pit bull, "NAUGHTY: Tim Trow, president of the Toronto HUmane Society, holds Bandit, a pit bull awaiting a court appeal on his fate following an attack on a child in 2003."

Story:



They bit: Liberals barked
Attacks spur plan to ban pit bulls Owners put up

a fight for dogs


NAUGHTY:

They bit people — and the people bit back.

Pit bulls made headlines in the worst way this year for a series of savage attacks, incurring the wrath of Attorney General Michael Bryant and leading to the introduction of legislation that would ban the breed from the province.

The worst attack took place in the early hours of Aug. 28, when two pit bulls set upon a man in the downtown Isabella and Church Sts. area. The 25-year-old victim had been looking after the animals for a friend. This may have seemed like a nice thing to do until about 3 a.m. that morning, when he was out for a walk with the two animals and they turned on him.

About six neighbours came to the aid of the screaming victim. The animals didn't break off the attack until police killed the dogs.A month later a 19-year-old man suffered a deep cut to the head and bites on his elbow and ankle after he was attacked by two dogs — a pit bull and a Staffordshire terrier — as he was about to mow a lawn.

He was doing yard work at a home in the Midland and Danforth Aves. area when the owner returned home and opened the back door to let the dogs out for a nice run, not realizing someone was there.

After this spate of naughtiness, the McGuinty government decided it would be a nice thing to introduce Bill 132. Now before the Legislature, the bill would prohibit ownership, sale, breeding and importation of pit bulls.

Dogs already in custody of a responsible adult would be "grandfathered" under the proposed law and spared mass expulsion but would have to be spayed or neutered, and muzzled and leashed when in public.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
`The day will come when paperboys and moms (won't worry) about having their face chewed off by a pit bull'

Michael Bryant, Ontario attorney general

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Many pit bull owners say Bill 132 is naughty.

They argue their dogs are nice and the real problem is naughty people who don't raise their pit bulls properly.

The Toronto Humane Society, where pit bulls often account for one-third of the animals awaiting adoption, also thinks Bill 132 is naughty.

So does the Rottweiler Club of Canada. So does the Veterinary Medical Association.

Bryant wasn't having any of this.

He promised reporters: "Once the ban is in place the day will come when paperboys and moms can go about their way without worrying about having their face chewed off by a pit bull."All this is strictly academic for Bandit, the pit bull-Labrador cross that was sentenced to death for a savage 2003 attack on a 3-year-old. Little Daniel Collins needed more than 200 stitches to close the wounds on his head.

Bandit's owner, Daniel's grandmother, wants the dog destroyed. The city wants the dog destroyed. And in October a justice of the peace agreed.

But the Toronto Humane Society, which took custody of Bandit after the attack, thinks it would be nice to give the naughty dog a second chance. It has launched an appeal.

End

In the NICE story, we have the lady who found $40, 000 and returned it, with a picture and story about Dalton McGuinty and how all the liberals cheered her in the legislature. :yuck:

All I can say is OH MY GOD. I hate this paper!! I love how they quote Bryant again, out of context to the truth of the Hamilton situation, and play up the poor guy (drug dealer?) out with the dogs at 3 a.m. I heard an unconfirmed story that those dogs had been trained to fight and had not been fed or watered for 3 days, and that he kicked them or something, and they decided they couldn't take any more. But the truth plays no part in journalism anymore, does it? I don't think that other than Alex Pierson, there is a single credible reporter left in this city.

Sorry for the rant. Just thought you should be aware that the enemy is still lobbing bombs at us on Christmas.

Not to mention that the attack on the paper boy and mother was not a pit bull.

Nor was the dog the advertised that bite its owners child in Hamilton.

Fuel to the fire....no truth to them.

To all the Pitbull owners out there...it's Christmas, enjoy your Children & but this to the back of your mind until the New Year.

Special Kisses to all the Pitbull Babies this Christmas......

From Whinnie & Boo cause they KNOW HOW GREAT YOU ARE

I wrot ethe star and let them know about the cambridge incident and gave em sh@t for not ever reporting that part of the story

I do believe the star is actually run by some liberals if I'm not mistaken...gee...surprised? :rolleyes:

What a bunch of A holes..merry christmas to you too you SOBs... :P and kiss my pittie's bumm bumm.

The Star is the official mouth-piece of the Liberal party. Don't expect any criticism from them.

I heard an unconfirmed story that those dogs had been trained to fight and had not been fed or watered for 3 days, and that he kicked them or something, and they decided they couldn't take any more.



Sorry,but I just have to comment about this.I'm not sure where you heard this,but this is not true at all.And this is what I don't like.It's people not knowing the real facts of what happened.We have already had a thread going on about this.And the owner is NOT a drug dealer.If these dogs were trained to fight,then can I ask why on earth did they let a couple of robbers break into the house and rob the owner?Yes,that's right,they let them come into the house.The reason they got out was because of a hole in the fence.So I guess who ever told you this didn't even bother to hear the whole story.Sorry,don't want to sound rude or anything,but these are the true facts and not unconfirmed.

Hi Mona - They quote Bryant `The day will come when paperboys and moms (won't worry) about having their face chewed off by a pit bull' - I meant that he said this after the Cambridge incident, not Hamilton, my mistake. Unfortunately I've added to the confusion -- Very sorry!!!

In addition, the info "I had heard" and posted was about the guy who was bitten by the two pits in Toronto, who were subsequently shot to death. My apologies for not being clear. I hate to quote heresay, but in this case, it was a fairly reliable source... and no one has heard that version yet.

I was not referring at all to the Hamilton fellow with the hole in his fence, but if it came across that way - sorry again.

I hope that everyone had a great Christmas!! :party:

I too have heard that the attack on the man in Toronto had questionable provocations. For one thing, while this attack is trumpeted by the Liberal party and its lackeys ar Der Star, there has never been a statement from the victim. For one thing, the victim was the "breeder" of the Dogs (can you say back-yard breeder?) The area in Toronto is one known as troubled with drugs and drug transactions. They have not put forth this guy's face or let him tell his story, like they have with the typical "innocent" victims of these attacks. It is strange to say the least.

That's ok Pit. :)

It's just that you mentioned the Hamilton one about the 2 dogs.So I took it as you were talking about that one... :)

The Sunday sun is up to no good as well today, page 101. "Pit bull Law Unleashed" "AFTER COUNTLESS vicious pit bull attacks" It's a very typical sun artical on the one hand they tout how "Similar bans have been tremendously successfull in other municpalities" and then goes on to say the new bill would have do nothing to prevent some of the reported attacts. So in the end, the average person is still confused, and uninformed after reading the artical with all it's gore. And still no admition that all breeds can and do attack, leaveing all the blame on the pit's, and not the humane who is responsible for the dog.
He put the people opposed to the bill, in between some of the attacks, to discredit there views, and obscure the facts.(typical Liberal tactic)
The artical was penned by Chis Ducette.
chris.doucette@tor.sunpub.com

Since this article doesn't appear to be in the online version of today's Sun, I will attempt to transcribe it in another post.

This Chris Doucette (girl or guy?) deserves to be blasted for another dishonest smear job.