Scotty Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 The issue is actually did a go thinking that this was a place where sexual acts were performed, or expected (wanted) sexual acts to be performed on it. The evidence available makes it very clear that, when asked "do you know this is a bawdy house", his answer was "no". Period. Are you thinking he would have said yes? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 I've never been to a massage ... place. The closest would be a physiotherapist last summer for my back. This place was like a medical office, very brightly lit, very professional, people in white coats, wide open area, storefront windows, with male and female physiotherapists. Yes, there were private rooms, much like medical clinic rooms. I was in a couple during visits - with not particularly handsome male physiotherapists, and these rooms do have tables for massage and other purposes. Nobody I saw was ever naked, though, and none of the staff were particularly attractive, and they paired males with males and females with females. The place had all the luster of a dentists office. This is the sort of place I would expect to find if I needed a massage. It doesn't sound very similar to the place smiling Jack went. Feel free to show us a physical description of the place Layton went to. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 Are you thinking he would have said yes? Are you thinking he lied? If you do, back it up with actual evidence. Until proven otherwise (and I won't even asked the proof to be beyond a doubt, just credible), Jack Layton did not engage in any illegal or sexual act at that location. Anything argument otherwise is, at best, politically motivated gossip. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 Are you thinking he would have said yes? No, but I'm thinking the police would have arrested anyone engaged in illegal activities. Arresting someone is not the same thing as the prosecutors charging someone. The fact that they didn't even arrest him, if only to drop the charges later, tells you something about the cops' findings. The only thing they found was a councillor they didn't particularly like getting a massage. Not exactly shocking stuff here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 So, give me the meaning of "premature" allegation! That's two of you who've used that word....I never heard of that. So what does it means? Ummmm. No. I have never "used it." I'm just not so obtuse as to pretend to not know what the person who did use it meant. In my view, this is not a sex scandal! I've explained my position...but I couldn't help the pun on the premature-thingy! Noted, and am confident that you will similarly find humor in such remarks directed at Harper. Are you a priest? Are you in politics? You asked a hypothetical question in regards to if I were in politics, and I simply answered the question, so not sure where these questions are coming from. Why of course! That's why you need to know the reputtation of the establishment or the person giving you the massage! And if the reputation of the establishment is known only to the police involved in the investigation, and it is licensed by the city, how does one get to "know" the reputation? Should he have engaged in a full investigation, hiring a private detective, before making an appointment for a massage? Seriously. What more when you're in politics! Being in politics doesn't automatically result in one having all the information in the world at their fingertips. Who was that US politician (or was he a celebrity) just recently who got allegedly exposed by a massage-lady who met him at a hotel? I can't remember his name! Not sure what you're getting at here. Are you saying that anyone in politics should never have a massage? Or that because someone was rightfully (I'm assuming this is fact) exposed by a masseuse, everyone who gets a massage is guilty of something sinister? Seriously. I have no idea what this has to do with Layton. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 The issue is actually did a go thinking that this was a place where sexual acts were performed, or expected (wanted) sexual acts to be performed on it. The evidence available makes it very clear that, when asked "do you know this is a bawdy house", his answer was "no". Period. According to the report, he was asked if he knew sex-acts were being performed... and of course he answered no. But that doesn't answer the question I want answered. Which is, when he said "no", is that believable? I want to know if it's believable or if it that answer would require a degree of naivete that's past the point of credibility. Feel free to show us a physical description of the place Layton went to. That's what I'm asking for. Surely somebody familiar with Toronto's Chinatown can provide some information about the place and its reputation. -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 No, but I'm thinking the police would have arrested anyone engaged in illegal activities. I for one would think that the police in this kind of situation would get anybody to the station first, but well I have never been to a bwdy house or any place that someone could think is a bawdy house That the police didn't do that is more telling than anything else. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 According to the report, he was asked if he knew sex-acts were being performed... and of course he answered no. But that doesn't answer the question I want answered. Which is, when he said "no", is that believable? I want to know if it's believable or if it that answer would require a degree of naivete that's past the point of credibility. Until someone comes with actual facts that would prove his response is not believable, what we have is what was reported. Which is enough for me to conclude that he was not engaged in a sexual act. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cybercoma Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 Oh FFS. That wasn't the implication. We all know that "Chinatown massage parlor" has a certain connotation. -k I respectfully apologize if I put words in your mouth. However, saying the implication isn't that Asian masseuses are prostitutes in one sentence, then saying "Chinatown massage parlor" has a certain connotation in the next seems like a contradiction to me though. If it's not that they're Asian, what is it? The part of town? The only thing particular about Chinatown is that it's Asian. Look, I get that, in practical terms, it has a connotation. That's why the news story is so disgusting. It infers that Jack Layton was with an Asian prostitute without saying it. If they have evidence of wrong-doing, then produce it. Instead, they have the notes, not even the police report, of a cop that was scorned by Layton's stance as a councillor. It's all very spurious. Nonetheless, it provides the seed for people to jump to that connotation you're talking about. It's a massage parlour in Chinatown. He must have been looking for a "happy ending", since that's the only kind of massage parlours that Asians run. It's a stereotype and a touch racist at that. Alternative medicine is very big in Chinese culture, so it does not suprise me at all that this is where the massage parlours are located. I'm biased though. I admit that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 (edited) Ummmm. No. I have never "used it." I'm just not so obtuse as to pretend to not know what the person who did use it meant. Noted, and am confident that you will similarly find humor in such remarks directed at Harper. You asked a hypothetical question in regards to if I were in politics, and I simply answered the question, so not sure where these questions are coming from. And if the reputation of the establishment is known only to the police involved in the investigation, and it is licensed by the city, how does one get to "know" the reputation? Should he have engaged in a full investigation, hiring a private detective, before making an appointment for a massage? Seriously. Being in politics doesn't automatically result in one having all the information in the world at their fingertips. Not sure what you're getting at here. Are you saying that anyone in politics should never have a massage? Or that because someone was rightfully (I'm assuming this is fact) exposed by a masseuse, everyone who gets a massage is guilty of something sinister? Seriously. I have no idea what this has to do with Layton. The onus is on people who are in politics to be more cautious! That, or be prepared to face whatever consequence(s) arise from reckless or ignorant decisions. Edited April 30, 2011 by betsy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 (edited) . Look, I get that, in practical terms, it has a connotation. That's why the news story is so disgusting. The connotation is not in the news story, but in how some choose to misinterpret the facts. It is still disgusting. Instead, they have the notes, not even the police report, of a cop that was scorned by Layton's stance as a councillor. And it would have been so easy for the cops in question to break Layton's career right there. Bring everyone at the station for questioning, then discreetly inform a journalist that it would be a good idea to bring a photographer to the station at a given time... That it didn't happen tells me two things. That these cops acted professionally, and that they didn't find anything illegal in what Layton was doing there. Edited April 30, 2011 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BC_chick Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 I'm in no position to say whether this massage was legitimate or not. And even if it wasn't, it's a matter of opinion whether or not Jack did anything wrong by having a "Chinatown massage"... I am curious though why this cop never said anything over all the years that Jack was leader of the NDP, and only came forward when Jack's popularity hit the 30% mark. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scribblet Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 You do know that according to newscasts, it was 9:30 at night, in a place that had been raided before, a councillor would know that, wouldn't he ? Also, since when do massages take place on a bed, aren't they usually on a table ? suspected bawdy house at 787 Dundas St. W. where Jack Layton was found was one of 26 raided by Toronto Police in Project Cobra in the mid-1990s.Asian crime gangs were feeding off the bawdy houses that stretched across Toronto from Chinatown East to Parkdale . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 I really hope Ezra Levant can be sued for something: http://twitter.com/#!/ezralevant Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lukin Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 I really hope Ezra Levant can be sued for something: http://twitter.com/#!/ezralevant You really are a sissy, aren't you? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 (edited) You do know that according to newscasts, it was 9:30 at night, in a place that had been raided before, a councillor would know that, wouldn't he ? Does police issue the details of each and every raid they conduct to the public? Are concillors informed of details of police operations? As for the fact the place in question was suspected of being a bawdy house. How many arrests have been made there? As was pointed out by other people, plenty of legitimate massage therapy locations are raided. Edited April 30, 2011 by CANADIEN Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
noahbody Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 There are very few male masseuses, just like there are very few male nurses or dental assistants. It's a profession dominated by women. As I said, it doesn't bother me if Jack got a rub and tug or not. It doesn't sound like she was a RMT. In a place like that they'd likely ask for you to get naked in order to help their sell job (no pun intended) at the end. From what I know about Jack Layton's character, he is the type to want you to know he's a big wheel. He did sign in as "John." If I was a gossip reporter I'd ask him: 1. was this your first time? 2. why did you check in as "John"? 3. How did you pay? 4. Were massages covered by/submitted to your health insurance plan? If he was found to be lying about the incident, the column could be titled, "What a Jerk." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Smallc Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 You really are a sissy, aren't you? It has nothing to do with that. He's accusing Layton of what amount to criminal acts without any proof. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kimmy Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 I for one would think that the police in this kind of situation would get anybody to the station first, but well I have never been to a bwdy house or any place that someone could think is a bawdy house That the police didn't do that is more telling than anything else. All we know for sure is that the police had no evidence that he was doing anything wrong and did not charge him. The stuff about getting everybody to the station first sounds like sheer speculation. I think it's pretty presumptuous for you assume you know how police would handle a given situation. Until someone comes with actual facts that would prove his response is not believable, what we have is what was reported. Which is enough for me to conclude that he was not engaged in a sexual act. I don't believe he was engaged in a sex act either. What I'm wondering is if he was in an establishment where he ought to have suspected young women were being exploited. I respectfully apologize if I put words in your mouth. However, saying the implication isn't that Asian masseuses are prostitutes in one sentence, then saying "Chinatown massage parlor" has a certain connotation in the next seems like a contradiction to me though. If it's not that they're Asian, what is it? The part of town? The only thing particular about Chinatown is that it's Asian. "Asian masseuse" and "Chinatown massage parlor" are not the same thing. If I knew an Asian who happened to be a masseuse, I would not assume she was a prostitute. If somebody told me he was off to a Chinatown massage parlor, I'd probably suspect he was up to no good. (full disclosure: when I was 14 or 15, a fried's mom, who is Asian, worked on my back when I'd hurt myself lifting weights. I was mostly naked. The police didn't burst in. I did not receive a "happy ending". She wasn't even a real masseuse, my friend just assured me that her mom "knows things". I have no idea what that even means. It did seem to help, though.) Look, I get that, in practical terms, it has a connotation. So you "get" that there's a connotation after all. (so who's contradicting themselves?) So is it unreasonable to assume Jack was probably aware of the connotation too? Is it reasonable to wonder if he should have wondered if he was in the wrong place *before* the police showed up? -k Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 The onus is on people who are in politics to be more cautious! That, or be prepared to face whatever consequence(s) arise from reckless or ignorant decisions. I would say that the onus is on people who make allegations out of nothing to behave better. I don't put the blame on the person who did nothing wrong in such situations, and as you yourself has pointed out, there is nothing wrong with getting a massage. There is nothing "reckless" or "ignorant" about the decision to have a massage at a licensed parlor. And those are the facts. The only facts. The rest is all speculation, and I put the onus on those making the allegations/speculations to prove that this parlor had a reputation that Layton should have known about. All sorts of sordid speculations have been made and conclusions drawn -- based on nothing. And somehow Layton is to blame for that? He's the one who should have behaved differently? Unbelievable. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
betsy Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 Does police issue the details of each and every raid they conduct to the public? Are concillors informed of details of police operations? Was he a councillor for that area? If yes, shouldn't he know the pressing issues/problems in his area? Obviously slave trade is a problem, especially with the Triad. Which is worse for a councillor? Getting seen in that bawdy establishment....or being ignorant about the issues/problems in his community? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wyly Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 (edited) You do know that according to newscasts, it was 9:30 at night, in a place that had been raided before, a councillor would know that, wouldn't he ? Also, since when do massages take place on a bed, aren't they usually on a table ? I hear about raids in calgary but I don't keep track of where they take place, who does? if you live or work in the neighbourhood and you're familiar with the place you may, there is Pizza Hut a block away from my home that I ordered from for many years I never had any clue that it was shut down for serious health infractions even though it was published in the local paper ...a neighbour informed me two years after the fact, now I buy elsewhere...I'd have no clue which massage parlor serves double duty or had been raided before...mrs wyly has had a number of massages, in the past tables were more common but it's usually on a table now a days, but beds are still in use...I've been offered free massages on a massage table but I turned them down, the thought of putting my head into that hole scares me, I'd prefer a table... Edited April 30, 2011 by wyly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest American Woman Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 AIf I was a gossip reporter I'd ask him: 2. why did you check in as "John"? His name is "John." That's the name on his birth certificate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CANADIEN Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 His name is "John." That's the name on his birth certificate. Yep. He was trying to conceal his identity, so he used his legal name. Clearly, the guy is not suited for political office. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nittanylionstorm07 Posted April 30, 2011 Report Share Posted April 30, 2011 His name is "John." That's the name on his birth certificate. Further readings for our Tory-supporting friends: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Layton Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.