Oh, *sigh* ... if you didn't think Rebel News' Sheila Gunn Reid could possibly be any more worthless and pathetic a journalist, well, I have bad news. Let's set the stage by reading my earlier piece, which documents Gunn Reid's basic awfulness, and we'll take it from there by (God help us) watching at least some of the accompanying video over at Rumble, wherein we will learn just how much worse this gets. First, go read (and memorize) my earlier piece -- I'll wait.
Dum de dum dum ... ah, you're back. Let's go.
OK, the dumbass stupid starts literally at second zero, at which time bloviating twatwaffle (and subsequent defendant) Wendy Kirkland, when asked for proof of her mask exemption, claims that it is at her doctor's.
Stop right there to appreciate the eye-rolling dumbth of that claim.
What the hell value is it to have a medical mask exemption if it is at your doctor's? What possible good is it going to do there? ("Yes, officer, I have a driver's license, but it's at my local Service Ontario office.") This might seem like a minor quibble but we will be coming back to this idiocy shortly. Because, Jesus Mary Mother of God, it gets so much stupider in a hurry.
Kirkland then continues by lying blatantly as she insists she has no obligation to provide that information to the police or anyone else, which as we already know is sheer nonsense:
Despite being thigh-suckingly wrong on this point, Kirkland goes all "I know the law" and continues to insist that she is legally in the right, even as the local constabulary are being thoroughly professional. Now, before we continue, let us summarize what we know:
- Kirkland claims to have a mask exemption, but will not or cannot produce any proof of that.
- Kirkland further claims (incorrectly) that she has no such obligation.
- It is obvious that store employees have already asked Kirkland to leave and she has refused, which is why the police were eventually called.
Oh, there is one more observation you might have missed -- Kirkland insists her mask exemption is at her doctor's, even as she insists she has no obligation to show it to anyone. If that's the case, what is the purpose of a mask exemption in the first place? What does it mean to say, "I have a mask exemption, which I am under no obligation to show to anyone?" Then why have a mask exemption at all? In any event, here is where it descends into farce as, not much further on in Gunn Reid's execrably shitty propaganda, well, helloooo, what do we have here? Oh, for fuck's sake:
In other words, for the sake of this ludicrous Rebel News propaganda video, Kirkland magically manages to produce the exemption which, if she had simply produced in the first place, none of this would have happened. How convenient that Kirkland can't find it for the police, but miraculously hands it over to Rebel News. Man, is that lucky or what? But, as always, it gets worse since, if you read the exemption carefully, it states that Kirkland is allowed a mask exemption but only if she wears a face shield instead!
Now that's fascinating since there is nothing in the video that shows Kirkland wearing a face shield (with which I suspect she would have been allowed to shop unmolested), but it also means she lied to the cops by omission by insisting she did not have to wear a mask but only if she wore a face shield instead. So Kirkland appears to be playing fast and loose with the facts yet again. But we're not done, and this goes back to Gunn Reid's emotional propaganda from her article, wherein she blathers stupidly:
"It’s also ]Kirkland's] right not to be forced to share her private medical information with total strangers just to get a little shopping done."
Now that is superficially believable ... except for the fact that the very exemption Kirkland conveniently produces (but only for the execrably shitty Gunn Reid) contains absolutely no "private medical information" of any kind; as you can see above, it simply grants Kirkland a mask exemption, subject to wearing a face shield so, as always, Gunn Reid ridiculously misrepresents what is happening for the sake of separating the gullible rubes from their paycheques:
At this point, it's unclear what happened after Kirkland finally left the store, but it is clear that:
- She had been asked numerous times by store staff to leave and she refused, and
- She was asked to leave by the law, and proceeded to argue with them instead.
But just when you think it couldn't get any stupider, well, let me help you out. Here's a CBC article article describing the event ... note well the publication date of Dec 1, 2020:
That would be Dec 7, 2020 ... six days after the incident. Do I really need to explain that?
In any event, if there is one lesson to take away from all this, it's that Sheila Gunn Reid is an awful journalist. Like you needed reminding.
BY THE WAY, if you're not convinced by my narrative, the CBC article referenced above lays it out nicely as to why Kirkland got her ass kicked:
She was asked to leave several times, and she refused. I think we're done here. And, remember, kids ... Sheila Gunn Reid is a shitty, shitty, shitty journalist.
COMING SOON: Rebel News' "Fight the Fines": The most perfect grift ever?
JUST BECAUSE: I realized it's beating a dead intellect, but it's worth pointing out one more time just how shitty a journalist is Sheila Gunn Reid. Here she is, insisting that Kirkland had no legal obligation to provide proof of a mask exemption:
when a simple online search would have proven otherwise:
It hurts to even contemplate that level of incompetence and stupidity.
It's interesting to see how all of the people Sheila defends are her demographic -- middle-class whites. We all know that if a Muslim woman had behaved EXACTLY THE SAME WAY, Sheila's article would have been, "Muslims don't think laws apply to them!"
Jesus, but she's a bigot.
Isn't saying "Sheila Gunn Reid is a shitty, shitty, shitty journalist" a bit like saying "Henry Cavill is actually TERRIBLE at leaping tall buildings in a single bound"?
She's not a journalist at all - she co-splays one on Ezra's blog.
Best evidence of that is her "live blogged" hearing of Arthur Pawloski eariuer this week.
Pawlowski is a an anti gay, anti Muslim thug who runs a "ministry" in Calgary, where he refers to himself as "The Lion of God". He has been charged multiple times for public order offenses, and was until this year best known for claiming that Flooding in Alberta had been caused by God's displeasure with gays.
He is currently the Rebel's poster boy for disease promotion, holding prayer sessions where people refuse to mask, practice sanitation, or maintain social distancing; screaming at cops and health enforcement personnel; and bragging that he will continue to offend.
Sheila live-blogged his first court appearance. It really must be read to be believed, but her "reporting went something like this:
9:30 am: Artur's brilliant attorney makes a stunning point that causes the entire courtroom to gasp in wonderment.
9:45 am: The Crown pulls some stupid legal jibberish out their hat. Really boring.
And so on.
I think she should submit a copy of that as a sample of her professionalism next time she applies for accreditation as real media.
How much of SGR can be explained by willful ignorance, and how much can be explained by her having an IQ in the 70s?
Has anybody (like, a real journalist) actually checked with the doctor to confirm that letter is real? Because I must admit to a tiny bit of scepticism when I see that they can't spell 'exemption' correctly; pro-tip, it's not 'excemption' with a 'c'!
Post a Comment