# MeToo

[big mervyn]

Secondly unless you're the Virgin Mary there's something in everyone's past life that can be held up as demonstrating that one is not fit for Office.

Indeed I think the world would be a far better place if we had a rule that only virgins who are also named Mary are allowed to hold public office. Even if someone was named Maria I would advise that they should only be allowed to act in an advisory role.

I suspect we'd see the transgender numbers rise significantly once this rule was established.

I wonder if Mary down the road who has a child but claims to be a virgin would be accepted.

We tried something similar with mothers (who aren't actually mothers) and are called Theresa but it's not working out ...

[WeeWorld]

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/09/ ... h-is-lying

I read through a good bit of that article before giving up. IMO the author reveals a bias early on when he uses schtick to describe Kavanaugh's testimony. He nitpicks, Kavanaugh saying he was never at a party like the one Ford describes is given as firm evidence of a lie when it's clearly a matter of interpretation as to what he means by that, etc, etc.
He's totally overreaching and then coming to a firm conclusion about Kavanaugh beyond what the evidence supports.
It's a hit job and the press are not neutral they are all campaigning on one side or the other on this issue.
I didn't read the other articles.
This morning on radio 4, some commentator gave as evidence of Kavanaugh's unsuitability, the fact that his opinion piece was in today's WSJ, "a conservative newspaper".

Your second point is entirely irrelevant. I've conceded that is doesn't particularly matter whether he is guilty of underage drinking, boisterous laddish behavior or potentially even attempted rape. You are right there is probably no one in the world who hasn't done something stupid in the past - that is entirely beside the point.

You've conceded that but like in the case of the rugby players even the tiniest admission would be used by the mob to try to make his appointment impossible.

What you seem to fail to acknowledge is that the lynchpin of western legal systems is the duty of everyone to answer honestly under oath. As a judge he should recognize that and value that and he should realise that he cannot be seen to be above that.

the lynchpin?
What about when people are free to ask you questions that would/should be ruled out of order in a real court so that the mob can lynch you. If someone fights dirty with you, then you'd be fool to not do the same.

Instead he shows contempt for the office he wishes to hold.

Now you're trying to put the judges of the supreme court on a pedestal, no one belongs on a pedestal because no one is worthy of it.

[WeeWorld]

Indeed I think the world would be a far better place if we had a rule that only virgins who are also named Mary are allowed to hold public office.

The only question for me about your excellent proposal is whether our public servants would known as Virgin Marys or Virgins Mary?

[pwrmoore]

I guess we disagree. I want people in such positions to be of the highest integrity and think they should be held to a higher standard that those in ordinary life. You obviously don't see a problem a senior judge failing to respect the institution he wants to have joint custody of.

By the way. Which questions were inadmissible? And on what grounds?

[WeeWorld]

I guess we disagree. I want people in such positions to be of the highest integrity and think they should be held to a higher standard that those in ordinary life. You obviously don't see a problem a senior judge failing to respect the institution he wants to have joint custody of.

By the way. Which questions were inadmissible? And on what grounds?

We're all entitled to the presumption of integrity I think, unless we're convicted of something.

They weren't interested in answers. The questions were purely of the "are you still beating your wife variety", because the allegations were totally unsubstantiated. Everything to do with the Ford allegations needed to be dealt with somewhere else and long ago.

[BaggyTrousers]

You were on here bragging about how drunk you (a pensioner) were last Saturday and now you're calling Brett Kavanaugh, "drunken Brett" because he drank beer as a teenager, 30 years ago.

Who put a hair up your hole you infantile Warren Gatland? I am a "soon to be pensioner" who has led a life full to the brim of misery, attempting to eek out a few years of relative pleasure before I shake off my mortal coil and, like a Norwegian Blue, cease to be.

Drunken Brett, on the other hand, is applying, after nomination from a fu@king monster, to become one of the most important people in one of the largest countries in the world. Only a stupid Kunt would draw the attempted correlation as you attempt to give your stupidity relevance where none exists.

Incidentally, I was not "bragging", I was purely descriptive. I suggest the best part of you slid down your mother's arsecrack many years ago. Where your parents stupid too? It doesn't always follow of course, but my guess is your capacity for feeble cognitive processes is inherited. Maybe your milkman was a Warren Gatland and your mother had the blood up on her one morning? I suppose I don't really care.

[WeeWorld]

You were on here bragging about how drunk you (a pensioner) were last Saturday and now you're calling Brett Kavanaugh, "drunken Brett" because he drank beer as a teenager, 30 years ago.

Who put a hair up your hole you infantile Warren Gatland? I am a "soon to be pensioner" who has led a life full to the brim of misery, attempting to eek out a few years of relative pleasure before I shake off my mortal coil and, like a Norwegian Blue, cease to be.

Drunken Brett, on the other hand, is applying, after nomination from a fu@king monster, to become one of the most important people in one of the largest countries in the world. Only a stupid Kunt would draw the attempted correlation as you attempt to give your stupidity relevance where none exists.

Incidentally, I was not "bragging", I was purely descriptive. I suggest the best part of you slid down your mother's arsecrack many years ago. Where your parents stupid too? It doesn't always follow of course, but my guess is your capacity for feeble cognitive processes is inherited. Maybe your milkman was a Warren Gatland and your mother had the blood up on her one morning? I suppose I don't really care.

Internet bigmouth

[Dave]

Hey Brettfans,

Feminists are building a gay mosque in Larne with NHS funds.

You better go set fire to yourselves or murder an MP.

#freetommy

[BaggyTrousers]

You would imagine the basis of any investigation would be to speak to the complainant. Not for the FBI it appears.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Maybe if the complainant actually went to the police rather than to CNN and the Democrats

Let's face it, the Democrats didn't give a feck about her sexual assault. They only wanted to use her for the political aims

Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk

Oh dear, some truth in there but you can help putting in crap as well. Give me one credible piece of evidence that she went to CNN. She actually went to her local congresswoman, rather like you or I going to our local MP.

From there, there is no denying that some in the Democratic Party has been less than good for her, though unless you can prove otherwise I believe the ranking member when she says to the committee that she neither leaked Prof Fords information/letter and has asked her staff to confirm they didn't either.

Whilst acknowledging that, think about it Toryboy, your opposition wishes to appoint someone to, not only an incredibly high office, but one for as much of his lifetime as he cares to do it, you gain information which appears credible to suggest he is unfit for the job. Would you us it?

The issue is that the information is now in the public arena, neither party really give a stuff about the Prof, who in doing this has ruined her own life and that of her family. The issue is bigger than her, she is merely the spark that lit this particular fire. Amongst the fallout, the question is, is Drunken Brett suitable for the public office for perhaps the next 30 years, maybe more?

Side issue has to be, why when this throws huge doubt on Kavanaugh, given not one Republican at the hearing directly attacked the prof as a liar such was her credibility, whether some make an issue of her gentle voice is immaterial, she was 100% credible, does the POTUS not only press on, backing his nominee, but publicly mock Prof Ford and come out with utter nonsense about the perils of being a young man when it is beyond dispute that statistically men are infinitesimally less likely to be accused maliciously of sexual attack than a young woman has of being sexually attacked.

Could it be that Trump has an agenda given he has head well over a dozen sexual assault accusations, one from a young lady, 13 at the time she alleges Trump and his convicted paedo friend assaulted her? Kavanaugh's conviction that a POTUS should be above the law seems a rather good fit in Trump's world, where conviction is a fear rather than a quality.

[BaggyTrousers]

You were on here bragging about how drunk you (a pensioner) were last Saturday and now you're calling Brett Kavanaugh, "drunken Brett" because he drank beer as a teenager, 30 years ago.

Who put a hair up your hole you infantile Warren Gatland? I am a "soon to be pensioner" who has led a life full to the brim of misery, attempting to eek out a few years of relative pleasure before I shake off my mortal coil and, like a Norwegian Blue, cease to be.

Drunken Brett, on the other hand, is applying, after nomination from a fu@king monster, to become one of the most important people in one of the largest countries in the world. Only a stupid Kunt would draw the attempted correlation as you attempt to give your stupidity relevance where none exists.

Incidentally, I was not "bragging", I was purely descriptive. I suggest the best part of you slid down your mother's arsecrack many years ago. Where your parents stupid too? It doesn't always follow of course, but my guess is your capacity for feeble cognitive processes is inherited. Maybe your milkman was a Warren Gatland and your mother had the blood up on her one morning? I suppose I don't really care.

Internet bigmouth

You can do better than that surely.

NB the usual response is, playground bully.

[Shan]

Mt. Baggy is erupting. Everything is right in the world.

[BaggyTrousers]

I guess we disagree. I want people in such positions to be of the highest integrity and think they should be held to a higher standard that those in ordinary life. You obviously don't see a problem a senior judge failing to respect the institution he wants to have joint custody of.

By the way. Which questions were inadmissible? And on what grounds?

We're all entitled to the presumption of integrity I think, unless we're convicted of something.

They weren't interested in answers. The questions were purely of the "are you still beating your wife variety", because the allegations were totally unsubstantiated. Everything to do with the Ford allegations needed to be dealt with somewhere else and long ago.

Allow me to educate you.

It is unlikely that Prof. Ford would have ever publically revealed what she alleges happened to her all these years later unless her attacker resurfaced in a way which she felt was intolerable to her sensibilities.

Many of you will have suffered depression and have found it incredibly hard to talk about, you will quite possibly never have told some very close friends. Imagine how much harder it may have been had you been sexually assaulted with the self-loathing, shame and blame that victims almost routinely attach to themselves.

That, Small Mind, is why many people, both female & male (and I have a male friend who was raped in his late teens) never report rape or sexual assault. That too is why those who do not report it for years or even several decades take as long as they do to make accusations. Nobody wants to be a victim. Many try to lead their lives and put it behind them, more often than not, at the resulting damage it does to their mental health.

I have both a family member and a friend who have been sexually assaulted and raped whilst young. Neither have ever made a legal accusation, both have sought help for their mental health and still do many years later. What makes their mental health problems difficult, more difficult than it should be, is the victim blaming that occurs around a case that reaches the public arena. Morons such as yourself, Small Mind, who immediately and stupidly reach for that old chestnut: "why now, why didn't they say something earlier?"

To a degree, it makes such dickheads lucky, lucky they have not had to deal with the fallout from somebodies actions many years ago, the luck to be stupid enough to have no understanding of what such victims go through, many for a lifetime.

In conclusion, pal, consider yourself very lucky that you have no idea what you are talking about. I hope for your sake your life remains untouched.

[Shan]

A French man caught on camera slapping a young woman on a Paris street after she berated him for making lewd comments has been given a six-month custodial sentence.

The surveillance camera footage of the 25-year-old man attacking Marie Laguerre, a 22-year-old student, outside a cafe in July went viral after she posted the video on social media.

It showed him picking up an ashtray and hurling it at her and then hitting her across the face.

The defendant, who has already served prison time for pimping and violence against his mother, admitted to the physical attack but denied making lewd remarks.

"There's not a man who has not spoken to a woman on the street," he defended, claiming he merely complimented Ms Laguerre on her red dress and accusing the judge of "nitpicking".

It seems that this guy thinks that making lewd comments would be a worse offence that physical assault. That is assuming he did actually make lewd comments of course. Assuming that, one could argue that this is a societal issue because making disagreeable comments of any type these days leads to more "outrage" in the public than even violence in a lot of cases. I tend to think physical violence is worse than casual verbal abuse, though both are ultimately an issue.

[Dave]

Ronaldo's sponsors have expressed concerns.

[Shan]

Ronaldo's sponsors have expressed concerns.

Yes Nike expressing a concern I see. I bet they don't express much concern about the poor feckers who get paid peanuts and treated like sh1te who make the crap they sell at huge profit.


Of course if he is actually guilty even a shower like that would have a valid right to be more than concerned.