Anyone seeing a pattern here recently?

In the past week we had an American lifeguard poohing the ROF on BNN. We've had a member of the Sierra Club with "interesting" partners..poohing the ROF.

And today....Tonda MacCharles..from The Star.

All in one week folks!

Earlier today..this link was posted by Shakey witten by Tonya McCharles from The Star

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/06/25/supreme_court_ruling_on_land_title_will_affect_natives_government_industry.html

At first I was puzzled why Tonda MacCharles from The Star would even mentioin the Ring of Fire in her article. The project did not apply to the context of the article.

so...

I followed the verdict today...and I want to point something out to you if you give me your patience in this longer post.

The first thing I did was check to see the outcome today and to see what Tonda from The Star and OTHER publications had to say.

So....

Here is a fresh update article from Tonda MacCharles from The Star with the verdict today:

http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2014/06/26/supreme_court_grants_land_title_to_bc_first_nation_in_landmark_case.html

Once again Tonda MacCharles feels the need to Pooh Pooh the ROF. But she does use the weasel clause "MAY" again.

Pay attention to this portion :

"The principles the court laid out Thursday may well impact talks around other key developments, such as Ontario’s massive mining play in the north, known as the Ring of Fire."

I'm still not understanding the relevance to the Ring of Fire which has treaties in place unlike the case in BC. So I thought I'd look to see OTHER publications written today after this news hit. Here are links for you to read from OTHER media covering the same news event

Open up all of them ...you won't find any mention of the Ring of Fire. Ask yourself ..why?

Why doesn't the CBC , or Reuters, National Post, The Globe...why not mention RING OF FIRE in this featured news event???????? The articles are all pretty much giving you the same story ....but no mention of how this "MAY" impact the ROF. Even our buddies at Republic of mining chose to use the Globe version.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/supreme-court-expands-aboriginal-title-rights-in-unanimous-ruling/article19347252/

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/tsilhqot-in-first-nation-granted-b-c-title-claim-in-supreme-court-ruling-1.2688332

http://business.financialpost.com/2014/06/26/first-nations-tsilhqotin-supreme-court/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+FP_TopStories+(Financial+Post+-+Top+Stories)&__lsa=ba4e-2e31

http://www.tbnewswatch.com/news/national/346285/Landmark-Supreme-Court-ruling-grants-land-title-to-B.C.-First-Nation

http://nationtalk.ca/story/landmark-supreme-court-ruling-grants-land-title-to-b-c-first-nation-cp/

http://ca.reuters.com/article/domesticNews/idCAKBN0F11KV20140626

http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2014/06/26/supreme-court-decision-bc-first-nation_n_5533233.html

http://www.republicofmining.com/2014/06/26/supreme-court-expands-land-title-rights-in-unanimous-ruling-by-sean-fine-globe-and-mail-june-26-2014/

So,....does it not appear to you ...that this is fishy? ONLY TONDA MACCHARLES from THE STAR..mentioned the ROF in her own coverage of this BC land claim story. I can't find any other publication covering this story that did.

Ask yourself why??

I'm reminded by the conversation I had a few years ago with a major paper. It was explained to me the importance of the "LARGEST ADVERTISERS."