Don’t get me wrong. I don’t want the abandoned Union Pacific Park reopened. It was a crime-ridden attractive nuisance from the day it opened even without considering the toxic substances that had to be remediated after the damn thing was built.
But there seems to be an interesting reason the park hasn’t been reopened 18 months after the City Council ordered the fence around the vacant land be taken down. And the reason could be that there isn’t enough money in the Park Dwelling Fee Fund to pay for it. These funds are collected from developers to pay for new park facilities, presumably to reflect the new projected increase in population.
This situation emerged at a Fiscal Sustainability Committee meeting a while back. The Fund has about $800,000 to $900,000, according to Assistant City Manager Daisy Perez, and at least $300,000 of that is already earmarked for the delusional “Trail to Nowhere” plan. It also emerged that the massive eyesore project called “The Hub,” on Commonwealth at the 57 Freeway, has not paid it’s Park Dwelling Fees, a number amounting to $5,000,000, staff said.
We gotta go up!
It seems that for some reason the City gave the developer of the project a waiver on the required upfront fees, until the project has a certificate of occupancy. That $5 million is burning a hole in somebody’s pocket, and it sure ain’t our pocket. How this happened is another story, and a good one, too, I’ll bet.
In the meantime, we seem to have some sort of Mexican Standoff – UP Park vs. Trail to Nowhere. The Park is assumed to have been given priority, but there’s no money for it. Meantime the Trail to Nowhere waits in the wings, embarrassingly, having missed several entrance cues demanded by the State, the most important of which were submission of plans by 6/24; start of construction by 8/24; and viable plant life by 10/25.
The idea may have been bad, but it sure was old.
One of the selling points of the Trail to Nowhere is that it connected to the UP Park (of course that was another lie, too – it ends at Highland Avenue). But what if there is no UP Park at all?
FFFF has received the following communication from a Wilshire Avenue resident who has asked for anonymity to avoid persecution from the Walk on Wilshire pressure group, stirred up by the Fullerton Observer:
The mob looked a lot bigger than it was…
This past Tuesday, Fullerton City Council permitted the reopening of Wilshire Avenue to auto traffic, removing the annoying impediment known locally as “Waste on Wilshire.” Starting January 31, the street will reopen to through vehicular traffic, marking the end of the Wilshire Avenue experiment in frustration, deception, and stupidity.
Yesterday, at the invitation of the Fullerton Observer, a handful of self righteous dopes gathered at the Waste. The Observer had encouraged them to show up and “join the peaceful gathering and protest the decision,” bringing “Save WoW” signs to show solidarity.
Their cult followers were asked to mislead passersby into believing this is an overwhelmingly unpopular decision driven by selfish or ego-centric motives. They framed the post as a “fight” against two corrupt of council members and a couple selfish businesses – implying that the WoWers represent a vast and unified community sentiment when, in reality, it was never more than a core handful of ideologues with nothing to lose.
While the Observer statement expresses appreciation for the supporters of the initiative and “incredible” individuals met throughout this process, it purposely suggests that only those who supported Walk on Wilshire are the only the ones truly connected to the community—ignoring those with valid concerns that didn’t align with the narrative of “saving” the space.
Thank God Vivian Jaramillo was not elected to the City Council, otherwise the City would be looking at a lawsuit that would only end with a big payday to the City Attorney defending another losing lawsuit, leading to yet again, a big loss for the taxpayers of Fullerton.
I say for now because in Fullerton nothing truly goes away if staff wants something. And boy did they want the wasteful, little-used, annoying road blockage.
Still, for the present, staff has been directed to open the street.
Thoughts and prayers…
At last night’s City Council meeting, no majority was present to keep the embarrassing WoW on life support, let alone expand it to Malden. On a 2-2 vote no positive action could be taken. Now businesses and residents who used to use Wilshire to get to and from Harbor Boulevard will be able to do it again.
But oh Sweet Baby Jebus, how the crowd gave it a go. Dozens of speakers cheered for the dumb idea, almost none of whom had any skin in the game, as they say. The nonsense went way over the top, including some who actually said businesses were going to be hurt if the street was opened! The only businesses supporting this were not even located on Wilshire.
My God, their descriptions of this 200ft kiddie chalk surface were rhapsodic. The Garden of Eden. Central Park. Golden Gate Park, doncha know. Cars are frightening. So fun to get off the sidewalk. Peaceful and serene. Back to nature, even!
Naturally a few of the speakers were vitriolic. One, a ill-tempered shrew named Karen Lloreda questioned the integrity of Jamie Valencia for taking campaign money from bad people. Lloreda didn’t bother share with the public that she was an endorser of Kitty Jaramillo, the woman Valencia defeated to become a councilmember, so I’ll do it here.
Diane Vena, proud Scott Markowitz supporter…
Diane Vena, another Jaramillo supporter (and supporter of the felonious Republican candidate Scott Markowitz) showed up to take the usual moral high ground, too, adding some unintended irony to the goings on.
Then there was this acolyte of Ahmad Zahra, a perpetually angry little person spilling her overflow of venom at council meetings in a rapid-fire succession of aspersions. She claimed to be a business owner (of course no details forthcoming) and asserted that opening Wilshire would be detrimental to business! It seems that if your heart is in the right place you can make any claim you want.
The train of thought short, but it sure was slow…
Of course the younger Kennedy sister, Skasia showed up to support the stupid, and yammer about something so far above her head she might as well have been discoursing on astrophysics.
Dancing on the grave of Walk on Wilshire…
We learned three things last night. Jamie Valencia and Fred Jung can demonstrate commonsense in the face of angry, histrionic boohoodom. We also learned that Councilmember Shana Charles appears to be the mastermind behind keeping Wilshire blocked off. Her closing statement was a litany of her special academic qualifications as an urban planner and a public heath expert of some sort. And in retrospect one gets the idea that it was she who rounded up speakers to attend the meetings last year, too. Her completely callous attitude toward Wilshire businesses may come back to haunt her. If Charles thinks she gets to tell businesses whether they are doing well enough to satisfy her, and expects them to buy it, she’s got another think coming.
We also learned that Sunaya Thomas, Fullerton’s was willing to let the Council believe that $50,000 to $250,000 was a price range for closing the block, when in reality it was just the possible cost of the design side of stuff. Zahra jumped at the chance to waste $50K up front and let staff come back for more, a typical, incompetent attitude.
One step ahead.
And finally let’s give another nod to Fred Jung, whose suggestion to close down the whole block gummed up the works, but good.
And let’s celebrate for ourselves. At least for now the taxpayers of Fullerton dodged another losing lawsuit that was surely headed our way.
At the last Fullerton City Council meeting, newly elected 4th District representative Jamie Valencia proposed reducing the time allotted to each general public commenter from three to two minutes. Her reasoning was to produce more efficient meetings. The motion failed 3-2 with Nick Dunlap, in what seems to be a trend, voting with Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles – the Council’s two obnoxious moralistic pontificators.
The speakers present at the meeting objected, as well they might. That’s because many of them are constantly haranguing the Council majority about this or that, enjoying three minutes to blather away.
And of course the semi-literate Skaskia Kennedy at the Fullerton Observer couldn’t resist angry editorializing:
“In an apparent disregard for public engagement, newly elected District 4 councilmember Jamie Valencia made a motion to reduce the time allotted for each public commentor (sic) to speak at the start of city council meetings from three to two minutes.“
The general thrust of the opposition to the motion was that this proposal was an affront to public engagement, public participation, etc., etc.
Now, these are the same people who, if given three minutes will use it up, in pointless repetition, non sequitur, and in one recent case, a minute of silence just to annoy everybody.
On the face of it, Ms. Valencia’s proposal seemed like bad politics, and maybe it was.
What seems to be missing here on the part of Dunlap, Zahra and Charles is the understanding that these speakers are members of the public, but are not “the public.” They have been chosen by nobody but themselves, and represent nobody but themselves. Some of them are driven by some inner impulse to share their mental gyrations about something or other and, if given 180 seconds, will use them all.
But, hey, wait just a second. Why must all the other members of the public in attendance, or watching online be subjected to 180 seconds of the same nonsense over and over again? Why can’t everybody else enjoy shorter, better run meetings?
No one is claiming that the right to speak at a meeting be eliminated, or that “engagement” be ended. But why not make these folk distill their comments into something more concise, more relevant and more intelligent? My own attitude is that if you can’t express a general observation, complaint, or even irrelevant philosophizing into two minutes, then there’s something wrong with you.
Why write about news when you can try to make your own! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)
By now FFFF readers know that the truth and the Fullerton Observer, run by Kennedy Sisters Skaskia and Sharon, are often at odds. These two dimwits seem to think their editorializing and narrative peddling go hand in hand with reporting news.
Well, they’ve done it again.
Thoughts and prayers…
While alerting their readers of the upcoming “Walk on Wilshire” vote on Tuesday, they lead off with this gem:
The city council is set to determine the fate of Walk On Wilshire on Tuesday, January 21, with a session at 5:30pm at Fullerton City Hall, 303 W. Commonwealth Ave. The recommendation is to accept a proposed motion to permanently close W. Wilshire from Harbor to Malden to vehicular traffic, thereby expanding Walk on Wilshire or to open the entire street to traffic by February 2025.
I seen the light!
This is not only completely backwards, but it omits the most important part of the agenda staff report, to wit: closing the whole block is not recommended; rather opening the street back up in February 2025 is the proposed action. There is a back up option to close the street, among several others should the Council decide not to follow the recommended action.
Giving honesty the middle finger…
This statement is tantamount to a lie, and at best can be considered intentional disinformation, the scrofulitic handmaiden that closely follows the Kennedy Sisters where ever they go. It’s clear they want to drum up support for the stupid boondoggle they have come to cherish, and are willing to mislead their fellow travelers into thinking that staff has actually recommended the street closure for the whole block. No, now that I think about it, this isn’t “tantamount” to a lie. It is a lie.
Hmm. Did we lay an egg recently?
But the standard of objective honesty among Fullerton Observer readers seems to be so consistently low and the casual acceptance of subjective ideology so high, that this sort of bullshit passes as journalism among them.
Yes, Friends, the so-called Walk on Wilshire is coming back to the City Council this Tuesday. For the fourth or fifth time this annoying street closure is being reconsidered. I really don’t know how often this mess has been rehashed. But I do know that City staff has turned this temporary remedy for COVID relief into a stupid, near permanent boondoggle. The bureaucrats in City Hall love them some Walk on Wilshire. It offers an opportunity for them to program things there, to collect what little rent comes in, and hide it all under the nonsensical concept of “business development.”
Of course it has nothing to do with business development. No one in City Hall has ever presented a comprehensive cost or budget analysis on this nonsense, and its adherents in the community who want to claim the street and block off cars don’t care. It’s another liberal gesture in which misplaced feelings are ever so more important than cost/benefit study.
One step ahead?
Last fall Mayor Fred Jung added a caveat to a Shana Charles proposal for another three month extension to do even more studying. Jung proposed to take the street closure all the way from Harbor to Malden – the whole damn block. To anybody with any sort of brains this was a non-starter idea meant to spike the 200ft closure one and for all. Naturally, the dopes Charles and Ahmad Zahra greedily went for it, the love the anti-auto gesture so much.
Tuesday’s staff report includes traffic crap bought from consultants by staff (our money, of course) to make the closure seem plausible, one conclusion being that impacts to traffic would be minimal. This is pure bullshit, of course. The comparison numbers between the 100 W. blocks of Amerige and Wilshire are based on the current Wilshire closure, the analogy being that botched surgery has already so weakened the patient that a little more cutting won’t make much difference anyhow.
Did City Manager Levitt see the light?
Fortunately, the City Manager seems to have brought some commonsense to the project. Citing staff’s inability to guarantee there won’t be a traffic impact, and noting the problem of access to businesses and residences on Wilshire, the recommendation is to drop the whole thing. There is also the potential of legal action lurking in the future, so there’s that, too. Staff recommends reopening the whole street to auto traffic and letting businesses on Wilshire pursue the “parklet” option of outdoor dining, a fairly reasonable approach.
Well, Fullerton BooHoo will be out in force on Tuesday to moan and wail about the absolute criticality of the Walk on Wilshire, despite the fact that except for a few silly events planned in desperation, the place is empty most of the time; and the Downtown Plaza, perfectly suitable for this sort of thing, is only a few hundred feet away.
Why write about news when you can try to make your own! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)
But appreciation of facts and deployment of common sense can’t be listed among the skillset of people like the Kennedy Sisters and their ilk. But things aren’t looking good for The Walk. Nick Dunlap will recuse himself again, leaving four councilmembers to provide the three votes necessary to keep the boondoggle on life support.
I don’t have the answer. Not yet anyway. But I know that the “I Can’t Believe It’s a Law Firm” of Jones and Mayer has been making bank on Fullerton for over 25 years as City Attorney. And I know that that the dismal legal counsel has impoverished the taxpayers of Fullerton plenty over the two and a half decades. I’m not going to recite the litany of legal failures we can lay at Jones’s doorstep – not yet anyway; we’ve already been doing that for years.
For reasons that escape Council watchers, Dick Jones somehow managed to escape getting the boot between 2020 and 2024, and I can’t think of anybody outside the Council who knows exactly why. Generally we can conclude that at least one member of the Whitaker, Dunlap, Jung triumvirate was protecting Jones and his minions, since it is incomprehensible that either Ahmad Zahra or Shana Charles would dump this chump.
Jail is for the little people…
Dick Jones is nothing if not a politician, playing the angles to keep at least three council persons happy at any one time, even alongside legal debacle after legal debacle. It’s worked through 4 different decades thanks to Fullerton being Fullerton. The Old Guard didn’t care and didn’t want to cause trouble; they were easy to push and persuade without too much trouble. The lamebrains like Leland Wilson and Mike Clesceri were afraid of their own shadows. Norby, I’m told, was just happy that the job was outsourced. The other dopes like Pam Keller, Sharon Quirk and Jesus Quirk-Silva could not have conceived of anybody holding Jones responsible for the legal advice he dispensed. For a fixer like Jennifer Fitzgerald he was the perfect running buddy, trying to accommodate anything she wanted.
Is Jones & Mayer still have a pulse?
Well, now Whitaker is gone, and if he was the fly in the ointment for the past 4 years, we may soon find out. Will Council newcomer Jamie Valencia take an independent stand and actually review Jones and Mayer’s record of failure? I sure hope so. It’s time that the City Attorney started giving out advice that avoids lawsuits instead of getting into them, with the result that he gets paid even more for failure.
I don’t know if Ms. Valencia reads this blog, but if so I sure hope she follows that link, above. She would find stories of Jones & Mayer’s incompetence, self-service, and ghastly legal decisions that have harassed Fullerton citizens, given away public resources and cost the taxpayers millions going back 25 years.
I’m sure Jonesy has already tried hard to wheedle himself into Valencia’s good graces, because that’s what he has always done. Will she go for it?
Hanging on to Fullerton should be a big deal to Jones and Mayer in terms of the future legal partnership. And I’m sure Jones figures that the loss of Fullerton could jeopardize his jobs in other cities like Westminster, La Habra, and Costa Mesa. True, Jones is 75 years old and may not even care anymore. Still, the firm must go on, and the junior partners such as the terrier-like Kim Barlow and the obnoxious hand-job lawyer, Gregory Palmer may still have a few years of legal bungling ahead of them.
One thing you can always count on in Fullerton elections is that concrete, real issues will never be discussed. You’ll hear mostly generalities about this or that topic. Even roads and taxes melt away in general promises and vague hand-wringing. But, when it comes to specific projects with all sorts of facts and figures involved, you can forget it. A charming characteristic of all local elections, and especially in Fullerton, is that people aren’t elected on their knowledge of anything, but, rather on their acceptability as wise people who will do the right thing given the opportunity.
This is all nonsense, of course. The electeds, knowing nothing are in no intellectual position to push back on the lamest of lame ideas that percolate through the “experts” in the bureaucracy. Not knowing and not learning and not working are the natural siblings of the councilmember’s natural tendency to acquiesce to City Hall staff anyhow. It’s easier just to attend ribbon cuttings and golden shovel ceremonies, I suppose.
Enhanced with genuine brick veneer!
And so it is that zero attention has been given by anybody (except FFFF) to various nonsense projects, the worst of which is the so-called boutique hotel project that started out as an idiotic scheme and naturally morphed into the worst kind of Redevelopment boondoggle. It even has a stupid name: It’s called The Tracks at Fullerton Station.
I’m not telling the truth and you can’t make me…
You may recall that the hare-brained idea was hatched by your former Mayor-for-Hire, Jennifer Fitzgerald who pushed a non-competitive agreement with some local dude who couldn’t build a birdhouse. Because the City had to declare the land on which the thing was supposed to sit as “surplus property” a deadline had to met to dodge a State law requiring first right of refusal to low-income housing “developers.”
Rather than shit-canning the whole thing, boobs Bruce Whitaker, Ahmad Zahra and Shana Charles approved of the project and the City actually deeded over the land before any agreements were in place. Pretty amazing, huh? Their convoluted reasoning was so dumb it doesn’t even deserve a description. That was December 2022.
They had me at boutique…
The even bigger problem was that by then the original guy (now deceased) had been pushed out and a whole new partnership had taken over. The new players were a pair of bums – Johnny Lu and Larry Liu who had a record of fraud, embezzlement, and bankruptcies in their wake, and creditors foreclosing on them. Why Fullerton’s crack economic development team and City Attorney failed to pursue even the slightest investigation of Lu/Liu’s record like FFFF did, has never been discussed. And it never will be, Fullerton being Fullerton.
I don’t know the current situation with this project. Two years have passed. Johnny Lu and Larry Liu had many milestones to accomplish certain actions per the agreement they finally signed. Did they? Who knows? Not the public, that’s for sure. Obviously, no one in City Hall wants to talk about this vast embarrassment, and an insecure council isn’t making them. And naturally, the Fullerton electoral process doesn’t discuss such things – bad form to discuss City failures, you see.
But the public has a right to know the whole story, because in the end, the entitlements granted to Lu and Liu are worth a fortune; even worse, the sales price of 1.4 million, less site clearance, is a tenth of the market value the City created with those entitlements. And the new density with hotel and with the new apartments Liu suckered the City into approving, just to keep the mess alive, is two and a half times the density the Transportation Center Specific Plan allows for housing. Go figure.
The mileage is terrible and the wheels are bald…
It’s also critical to remember that in Fullerton projects take on a life of their own through institutional inertia and the human instinct to dodge responsibility whenever possible. The Fullerton Clown Car has never had a rear-view mirror.
Thanks to the AI software employed by the Fullerton Observer we have a more or less accurate written account of the statement made by Fullerton resident George Bushala that caused all the fuss at the December 17th Fullerton City Council meeting. Included are the interruptions by Sharon Kennedy and her sister Skaskia in violation of rules of public behavior in the chambers.
Giving free speech the middle finger…
There may be additions or subtraction of which I am unaware, but the whole thing has the ring of truth – meaning minimal Observer opinion masquerading as fact – links to Observer articles should be followed with skepticism. I notice Sharon Kennedy is referred to as the current Editor of the Observer. I have no idea who “Erin” is. And of course the Observer ever accurate, identifies the wrong Bushala.
George Bushala Jr. stated, “Here are eight reasons why I don’t believe Zahra should represent our City Council members as mayor and why he undermines voter rights.
1. In 2018, after being elected to represent District 5, Mr. Zahra voted against allowing the voters of Fullerton to elect a replacement for an at-large seat vacated by Jesus Silva. Despite initially supporting a special election, he later opposed it, citing the cost. This contradicts his support for other questionable expenditures that far exceeded the projected costs of the election, raising concerns about his commitment to democratic processes and fiscal responsibility. (Click here to read the Fullerton Observer article) (Click here to read the Voice of OC article)
2. Mr. Zahra appointed himself to the Orange County Water District (OCWD), playing a key role in the appointment of Jan Flory to the City Council, which subsequently led to his own appointment to the OC WD Board. This raises concerns about a potential quid pro quo arrangement. Mr. Zahra seemed to support Flory’s appointment to the City Council in exchange for her backing his appointment to the OCWD Board. Such actions give the appearance of self-serving political maneuvering and erode public trust. (Click here to read the Daily Titan article) (Click here to read the Fullerton Observer article)
3. Mr. Zahra wasted public funds on a baseless lawsuit, supporting the expenditure of over $1,000,000 of taxpayer money to sue two local bloggers who downloaded a publicly available file from the city’s website. This lawsuit, which sought to suppress free speech and punish journalists for exposing city government missteps, was an unnecessary waste of public funds and a troubling attack on the press. (Click here to read the Fullerton Observer article) (Click here to read the Voice of OC article)
4. Mr. Zahra was involved in plagiarism and deceptive behavior. He falsely claimed authorship of an article in the Fullerton Observer that was actually written by staff at the Orange County Water District. This misrepresentation caused embarrassment for the newspaper.”
Sharon Kennedy, the current editor of the Fullerton Observer, shouted that the information being discussed was misinformation and lies as she stormed out Erin yelled at Saskia, calling her a loudmouth and telling her to be quiet.
Mayor Dunlap intervened from the dais, urging the audience to be quiet. “Let the man speak. Excuse me? Okay, you’regoing to take a recess in a minute. If you’re going to keep this up, knock it off,” he said. He then asked the police chief to help control the situation.
Bushala continued, stating, “This misrepresentation has caused Zahra embarrassment for the newspaper and raises doubts about Mr. Zahra’s honesty and transparency. His actions suggest a willingness to mislead the public for political gain.”
Saskia Kennedy shouted that Bushala was lying.
Mayor Dunlap raised concern again from the dais, insisting, “Let the man speak. You know what? We’re going to call a recess. Everyone has the right to talk. Knock it off. Can we behave like adults? If not, I’m trying to figure out if we can conduct ourselves like adults. Can you refrain from heckling? Okay, let’s get back on track.”
Bushala continued, “I’ll skip to point six: manipulating the 2022 election. During his reelection campaign, Mr. Zahra was accused of recruiting a fake candidate, Tony Castro, to split the vote with Oscar Valdez, the leading candidate in District 5. This manipulation of the electoral process undermines the integrity of our democratic system and puts Mr. Zahra’s commitment to fair elections into question. I was interrupted earlier, but I have two more quick points.
Point #7 addresses deceptive actions to gain U.S. citizenship. Mr. Zahra, a self-identified gay man, married a woman from Arkansas shortly after arriving in the United States, presumably to obtain citizenship. This action raises concerns about his ethics and integrity, particularly regarding the use of marriage for immigration benefits. While his sexual orientation is a personal matter, this maneuver to secure citizenship raises serious ethical questions about his character.”
Ahmad Zahra attempted to defend himself against slander and personal attacks but was shouted down by Mayor Dunlap.
Bushala then addressed point #8: the allegation of filing a false police report against Vice Mayor Jung. In 2021, Mr. Zahra was involved in filing a false police report against Vice Mayor Jung. Such actions not only undermine trust in public City Council members but also threaten to damage the public’s confidence in their elected officials. Fabricating accusations against colleagues sets a dangerous precedent and raises significant ethical concerns.
Mayor Dunlap stated, “We’re not going to allow disruptions during meetings, and we won’t tolerate cheering from the audience. If you wish to speak, you have the same right as everyone else to express your view within our democratic process. You can do this her in the chambers or on Zoom. However, we will not accept heckling from the audience. Whether you like me or dislike me, or if you agree or disagree with my views, it’s all in the process. But you veto, do it from the proper venue, which is to come forward to the microphone and allow others their opportunity to speak.”
At the December 17th Council Meeting, Sharon Kennedy, “former publisher” of the Fullerton Observer appeared to go bonkers when a public speaker began enumerating the reasons Ahmad Zahra was unfit to be Mayor of Fullerton.
FFFF artist’s fictional interpretation…
She began screaming from the rear of the council chambers, accusing the speaker of being a liar and disseminating “disinformation” while interrupting both the speaker and the meeting.
Kennedy’s violent outburst continued – she kept interrupting the speaker, who calmly continued to recite the damning bill of indictment against Zahra.
Time to come clean…..
Zahra himself interrupted the proceedings, too, as well he might, given that the list of objections to his mayoralty was so persuasive. Still, it’s bad form to engage public speakers – “chilling” is what County Supervisor Doug “Bud” Chaffee called it in 2012, and it treads upon free speech rights of a citizen, for sure.
Eventually, Kennedy removed herself from the chamber before Mayor Nick Dunlap could ask police Chief Radus to kick her out..
Why write about news when you can try to make your own! (Photo by Julie Leopo/Voice of OC)
Zahra’s supporters like Sharon Kennedy and her sister, fellow Observer Skaskia, continue to ignore his plagiarism, his marriage fraud, his false police report against Fred Jung, his assault and battery guilty plea, his ever-shifting coming out/coming to America tale, and his perpetual victimhood narratives.
Their emotional and psychological investment in Zahra is such that they will never see the real story. That’s the persuasion of the conman when his marks would rather buy into the con than face the truth of their own foolish gullibility. Or they are infinitely hypocritical. Either that or they’re really stupid.
