PIK Posted November 20, 2014 Author Report Posted November 20, 2014 Most small business do not report shop lifting because it would be a waste of time. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Smallc Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 He had a bruised face and lost a few hundred bucks. He just didn't think the cops would do anything of value which outweighed all the hassle he'd go through if he reported it. Well they would have done something even though such a thing is unlikely to be resolved. Quote
overthere Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 She happened to be there at the same time as he was so came forward to complain about harassment. No one in officialdom that I have seen, ie, either party, has declared it was 'sexual' harassment. I am not willing just yet to accept your assumption that 'she happened to be there at the same time'. And of course, we don't know who reported what .... so if you assume it was pure chance, I'm assuming that it was sexual harassment given the genders involved and the very strong and immiediate response by Trudeau. Is that fair? Quote Science too hard for you? Try religion!
PIK Posted November 20, 2014 Author Report Posted November 20, 2014 It would be nice to know was it touching or he said nice ass or something like that. Quote Toronto, like a roach motel in the middle of a pretty living room.
Argus Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 It would be nice to know was it touching or he said nice ass or something like that. Or he just called her a stupid socialist or something. Quote "A liberal is someone who claims to be open to all points of view — and then is surprised and offended to find there are other points of view.” William F Buckley
jacee Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 Yes definitely. You'd think it would be in place already. The Liberal Party has been around for what? a hundred years or so now? It's parliament that needs a process, ALL parties. . Quote
jacee Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 It would be nice to know was it touching or he said nice ass or something like that. Touching is sexual assault, a criminal matter. Sexual harassment is repeated and unwelcome comment. . Quote
jacee Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 Or he just called her a stupid socialist or something. That's not SEXUAL harassment. . Quote
jacee Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 No one in officialdom that I have seen, ie, either party, has declared it was 'sexual' harassment. It's known to be. -trudeau-mulcair-distrust-deepens-amid-sexual-harassment-scandal Quote
jacee Posted November 20, 2014 Report Posted November 20, 2014 So you're willing to believe that a woman has never, ever lied about being sexually harassed or assaulted in the history of the world. Wow, that's amazing. So it wasn't really George Washington who could never tell a lie at all was it? We're asking you to provide some evidence. Can you? . Quote
Hal 9000 Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 That's not SEXUAL harassment. . But saying stupid woman would be, so would "get me some coffee sweetheart". Quote The trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant; it's just that they know so much that isn't so. - Ronald Reagan I have said that the Western world is just as violent as the Islamic world - Dialamah Europe seems to excel at fooling people to immigrate there from the ME only to chew them up and spit them back. - Eyeball Unfortunately our policies have contributed to retarding and limiting their (Muslim's) society's natural progression towards the same enlightened state we take for granted. - Eyeball
Topaz Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 IF the women aren't willing to come forward and if they don't think THEY feel they should, then we have to have a mind set as "it didn't happen". Bring the MP's back and let life go on BUT the House has to put in place a third party for the next complaint. Quote
The_Squid Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 IF the women aren't willing to come forward and if they don't think THEY feel they should, then we have to have a mind set as "it didn't happen". Bring the MP's back and let life go on BUT the House has to put in place a third party for the next complaint. No, actually we don't. If there isn't a formal complaint made public, JT can still look at all the available evidence and take action himself. Why would they need to come out publicly? Quote
Big Guy Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 So there is no evidence provided by anybody except for a statement made by one person to JT. He is now supposed play the part of prosecutor, defense attorney, judge and jury - and take the "appropriate" action? It appears that Mulcair has far more information, far easier access to the accusers and has been sitting on this information for months. How about if Mulcair looks at the available evidence and take action? BTW, the Harper government is supposed to be leading this parliament. They have a majority. They can pass any legislation required to unravel this mess. Why doesn't Harper look at the available evidence and take action? Quote Note - For those expecting a response from Big Guy: I generally do not read or respond to posts longer then 300 words nor to parsed comments.
The_Squid Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 So there is no evidence provided by anybody except for a statement made by one person to JT. He is now supposed play the part of prosecutor, defense attorney, judge and jury - and take the "appropriate" action? It appears that Mulcair has far more information, far easier access to the accusers and has been sitting on this information for months. How about if Mulcair looks at the available evidence and take action? BTW, the Harper government is supposed to be leading this parliament. They have a majority. They can pass any legislation required to unravel this mess. Why doesn't Harper look at the available evidence and take action? No evidence that you know of. So, yes... He is supposed to look at all the available evidence and take action, or not, as he sees fit. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 So there is no evidence provided by anybody except for a statement made by one person to JT. He is now supposed play the part of prosecutor, defense attorney, judge and jury - and take the "appropriate" action? It appears that Mulcair has far more information, far easier access to the accusers and has been sitting on this information for months. How about if Mulcair looks at the available evidence and take action? BTW, the Harper government is supposed to be leading this parliament. They have a majority. They can pass any legislation required to unravel this mess. Why doesn't Harper look at the available evidence and take action? Surely you jest! Harper won't touch this with a barge pole, and from a political point of view I can't say I blame him. He's got the LBC and the NDP at each others throats, he couldn't have asked for such a gift. Also a majority doesn't allow you to pass any legislation you want, it has to go by the SCC, and it is a complicated issue, and the criminal code already has legislation in it. Don't expect much from Harper on this issue an time soon. Quote
jacee Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 Just google it. Tons of examples or false sexual charges dropped. Women arent some perfect beings above lying. They can be devious. I never trust them fully, even though I always have them around. Unh ... no. Your opinion isn't evidence mr canada. And it's limited to women who might have been attracted to you. . Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 Just google it. Tons of examples or false sexual charges dropped. Women arent some perfect beings above lying. They can be devious. I never trust them fully, even though I always have them around. Ya know, ignorance and arrogance are a really sick combination. I bet there aren't a lot of women who trust people with such a heapin' helpin' of both. Quote
cybercoma Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 You're the only person in this thread who keeps saying that nobody would ever falsely accuse someone. Literally no other poster has made that claim. You might want to reel that strawman in, Captain. You got off on this tangent when I asked you to quantify the number of false accusations made in relation to the number of unreported incidents. Quote
jacee Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 /americas_bill_cosby_awakening_why_the_rape_allegations_are_finally_sticking_partner/ But now another conversation is happening: People are beginning to key into the fact that its not normal to want sex with someone who is laying there like a dead fish, crying, or otherwise giving in because she fears she isnt getting out of this situation safely otherwise. In fact, that behavior is not funny or cool, but sad at best, and usually downright violent and predatory. A man who bullies an unwilling woman into bed isnt scoring but a real creep. Quote
cybercoma Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) your asking for a number that's impossible to give. So then you have no idea how many false accusations there are. You're just willing to assume that every woman is a liar, despite the Juristat figures about the number of unreported sexual assaults. Because those numbers are available. They show that only 12% are reported. Meanwhile, you have no clue how many false accusations there are and instead of giving the accusers the benefit of the doubt, considering so many of these crimes go unreported, you'll sit there and call them all liars. Great. Edit: As an aside, I'm not asking you for newspaper source either. This isn't high school. I'm sure you can find something more credible than the newspaper. Edited November 21, 2014 by cybercoma Quote
jacee Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 your asking for a number that's impossible to give. I'm not privy to every single police forces and courts records in this country, I doubt you are either. You cannot even concede that it happens? People are found not guilty everyday, does it always make it into the papers? Of course not, that doesn't mean it isn't happening. I find this constant begging for newspaper sources annoying. Not everything is in the newspaper. Also if something is unreported it's impossible to say how haven't been reported....obviously. I believe that women can lie and have lied. Some others are ready to believe anything a woman says. That's absolutely fine. Everyone can do as they please. Rapists have more reason to lie than victims.They are criminals. Criminals lie. Rapists promote the idea that women lie about rape, on anonymous discussion boards, etc. It isn't appropriate here, but when confronted in person with someone pushing the "women lie" schtick, I'm inclined to ask "Is that what happened to you?" Seriously, what normal person wants to have sex with someone who doesn't want to? Perps used to justify their 'right to rape' saying "But she had sex with x y and z ... " Now that just makes them look like losers ... loser creeps that women don't want to have sex with. . Quote
jacee Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 (edited) No means no. If the woman isn't saying no and is going with it then it would seem that she would be a willing partner. All it takes is one word. NO. Then everything stops. In the heat of the moment when the passion is running high I doubt many women are saying no. I've never heard it and I've been with plenty. No one can read minds is my point. If she doesn't want it then why would she be kissing the guy back while they're both rubbing each other and pulling each others clothes off?I'm not sure what case we're discussing here ... or ... is that what happened to you? ... or ... is that what your buddy said happened to him?Rapists lie, ya know. . . Edited November 21, 2014 by jacee Quote
cybercoma Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 Cybercoma, I think you're misunderstanding I'm not trying to fight with you here. Sex crimes are horrible and I want the people who perpetrate them to be punished severely. However proper evidence must be provided. I am against punishing people based solely on the word of a person, male or female. For any crime. We must have a burden of proof and that burden is on the accuser, should be anyways. No, I don't think every woman is lying, not at all. But people are making it sound as if all men are evil rapists and all women are victims. I do not agree with this thinking at all. Totally absurd. This is not a criminal matter. This isn't something that's before the courts. No one has been sentenced to prison for anything here nor has there been any criminal punishment requiring a hearing. The Liberal Party is free to handle it's affairs as it sees fit. Justin Trudeau unilaterally decided to remove the accused persons from the party. That was his decision to make. You may call it a punishment, but it's his right to do as he pleases with the party as the party's leader. Those MPs are still duly elected MPs and have not been removed from the House. They can't be. They also have every right to run in the next election. So you can call it a punishment that requires evidence "beyond a reasonable doubt," but this is not a criminal punishment. This is not imprisonment. The Liberal Party is free to allow or disallow any members for whatever reason they see fit. The claims were made to Trudeau, claims I might add you know nothing about. Having heard those claims he made his decision. You say there's no evidence. You claim they're liars. Justin Trudeau didn't think so. Justin Trudeau took it seriously enough that he took action to distance himself and the party from the accused. He was well within his rights to do so. Quote
cybercoma Posted November 21, 2014 Report Posted November 21, 2014 Having said that, this doesn't mean you can't criticize Trudeau for the way he handles things. Your argument, Captain, is that these women are liars. You have absolutely no reason to believe so, especially if you claim there is no reason to believe they're telling the truth. The problem I have with Trudeau is that he took something that these women wanted to discuss in private and have resolved and blew it up in the newspapers. He probably figured it would be good press, given the unfolding of the Jian Ghomeshi scandal. Quote
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.