WestCoastRunner

thanks for the tip.

If they don't but they continue to post statements that are mysogynist or homophobic or racist, why shouldn't they be called out on it? For example, they have been told that gays don't like being called 'homo', but the poster continues to call them 'homo', should they not be called out for being 'homophobic'?

We should serve the interests of Canadians and refugees. We do have room for humanitarian efforts. What a condescending remark. Are you interested in having a civil dialogue or are you just interested in posting your superior intellect?

Not according to your posts.

Is racist a bad word? Is calling someone homophobic, anti-feminist, mysogynist not allowed either?

Canada is dismally failing in accepting these refugees. "When we learn of the origin of the latest drowning victims, it is clear that they are refugees. They are Syrians, Iraqis, Somalis, Afghans, Eritreans, Libyans — fleeing from the horrific civil strife and brutal repression in their homelands. If they reached our refugee hearing rooms, most would be recognized as refugees and granted protection. And for that very reason, the federal government’s focus has been on keeping people from getting here in the first place." "By imposing a visa requirement on anyone coming from a country that has any situation of civil unrest or human rights violations and then refusing to issue visas: This forces refugee claimants into the hands of smugglers." At one time, Canada was recognize as a humanitarian country protecting refugees. Not anymore.

60% of men and 45% of women cheat in a marriage. So should we expose this many people to public exposure when the behaviour is so prevalent? This is my opinion, nothing less and nothing more. I'm not trying to convince you of anything.

I'm not entertained in the least and I am not touched by this at all. I am disturbed. I am by no means in favour of infidelity, however, this information was obtained illegally and was posted for public consumption for nefarious/entertainment reasons. Do you really think these hackers could care less about cheaters? I would think not. Consider for example, the partnerships, where the one partner knows of the affairs but silently turns a blind eye for whatever reason. Well, now that the affair has been exposed for all to see (neighbours, PTA, etc), the partner feels they must leave the relationship, uprooting the family, children etc, just to save face. This is no longer ENTERTAINMENT. It is an invasion of privacy. To think that you are entertained because it doesn't affect you sounds a bit obscene.

Go figure!

I would love to see more input from the regular members here contributing to the new threads. And I don't mean Argus and Bc.

And I agree that he is the scum of the planet, however, he signed up to this site, with fully consenting adults. This isn't about him on a personal level, it's a far wider issue. What about privacy issues? Is there a threshold that we cross to expose individuals to behaviour that we don't approve of? You exposed his behaviour because of his U.S. connections. Where do we draw the line?

What information did he give to the Russians?

I don't think it has anything to do with Kimmy's self righteous insecurities, but I think it does have to do with the general publication of information that we really have no business knowing. We know what a scumbag he was. That was self evident with the information that was presented but to display information that was shared on a site for consenting adults seems really tacky and icky (to quote bc_chick).

Does anyone care about his cc info? Probably not so it doesn't matter that it was redacted.

And of course, I thought of that too Waldo. I sometimes think that Snowden deserves a Pulitzer prize. However, that is far different from what is being uncovered on an Ashley site.

My issue is that information is being reposted from hackers from a legitimate site. It doesn't matter who the member is. The fact you are reposting info from a private member is the issue.

He had to lock it down so he wouldn't have to Go after the true culprits. I saw a debate evolving perfectly fine until certain members wanted to draw attention to themselves. It's certainly not the first time and I bet no warnings were given out.

While I think everyone is in agreement that this guy is bad news, I find it a tad exploitive and kind of paparazzi style to reprint info that was obtained through hackers. It's discerning to view someone's profile on an adult site that was targeted to consenting adults and being copied on a forum. Do we really need to know his turn ons etc. he is not an elected official. Are Canadians just jumping on the bandwagon of American reporting. Do we really need to know about this?

Hey, everyone. This is about the 2016 candidates.

Except you are all forgetting, there is only one female candidate against the remaining male candidates.

And she could see Russia from the Alaskan coastline.

Of course it was. Hands down!

This thread is about who would get the 2016 nomination. Let's focus on that and compare the lone female candidate to the male candidates instead of Derek casting out these wild ass comparisons.

I am no republican fan, but I do like to see unbiased comments on the candidates regardless of the gender.