Rolf Harris found guilty

technodup":28cd4ve9 said:
Quote? Or pish?

Your entire performance on the subject of school meals, or the dole. As you gleefully put it, people starving or going homeless is them "getting what's coming to them".

technodup":28cd4ve9 said:
That cuts both ways, e.g. the recent Oxford union president called a rapist and proved not to be. Without the benefit of a court, evidence and other such triviality how can you justifiably call anyone an evil rapist? Regardless of your beliefs or an alleged victim's circumstances one is innocent until proven otherwise. That guy will have that stigma and suspicion with him forever now, and all for a false claim from some stupid wee boot whose anonymity s protected? f**k that.

Hardly. The chances of John Q Hypothetical having his life ruined are microscopic, given the tremendous difficulty in actually getting a rape case anywhere near a court in the first place.

Besides which, I'd rather not treat traumatised people as if they're guilty of lying until proven innocent. Which is what the system already does. Ho hum.

I'm really quite bored of "what about the men!?!?!" that inevitably comes up in this situation. It's an inherent selfishness, I think. Can't let anything that's (perceived) to be about women stand without trying to focus the spotlight on your own knob again. It's a bit sad when your reaction to a lady stumbling out of an alleyway and into PTSD is to sympathise with her attacker's "rights".
 
Bats":ootjtnme said:
technodup":ootjtnme said:
Quote? Or pish?
Your entire performance on the subject of school meals, or the dole. As you gleefully put it, people starving or going homeless is them "getting what's coming to them".
Quote me or stfu. Paraphrasing from your selective memory is not a quote.

Bats":ootjtnme said:
technodup":ootjtnme said:
That cuts both ways, e.g. the recent Oxford union president called a rapist and proved not to be. Without the benefit of a court, evidence and other such triviality how can you justifiably call anyone an evil rapist? Regardless of your beliefs or an alleged victim's circumstances one is innocent until proven otherwise. That guy will have that stigma and suspicion with him forever now, and all for a false claim from some stupid wee boot whose anonymity s protected? f**k that.
Hardly. The chances of John Q Hypothetical having his life ruined are microscopic,
He was all over the national press being branded a rapist ffs. Not going to help his future relationships or employment prospects is it?
 
Come on guys, lets keep the temperature down :D hes in jail,the courts with all the actual evidence has made its judgment ,which doesnt affect any of us so a 'discussion' should be just that :)
 
technodup":1mj7dfyq said:
Quote me or stfu. Paraphrasing from your selective memory is not a quote.

The exact phrasing you used was "Face it they're getting fvcked either way, and not before time."

No coincidence you said this in a thread you created to express the idea that children below the poverty line should not be fed.

I don't know why you're going to pretend you've never said all the stuff you have said. It's all still here, on this website.

technodup":1mj7dfyq said:
He was all over the national press being branded a rapist ffs. Not going to help his future relationships or employment prospects is it?

Chances of anyone being a celebrity, therefore a person of interest to the media is microscopic.

Hearing about a crime and your first thought being concern for the accused, rather than the victim, generally makes you a nob.

Even disregarding all the hateful, spiteful and cruel things you've spouted on this forum.
 
Bats":2wepnx0j said:
technodup":2wepnx0j said:
Quote? Or pish?
Your entire performance on the subject of school meals, or the dole. As you gleefully put it, people starving or going homeless is them "getting what's coming to them".
I'll help you out here. The full quote...
technodup":2wepnx0j said:
Bats":2wepnx0j said:
It's literally impossible to get the dole without looking and applying for jobs.
They're certainly making it harder to get away with not applying, as it was so easy to bullshit it before.

Trouble is nobody can ensure a claimant gives 100% on a form; CV or interview so we're back to square one.

14 applications minimum per week, for 104 weeks is a minimum of 1456 applications. Therefore 1456 jobs have been available. And not one of them, not one were they deemed suitable for? If that is genuine then why should they be entitled to minimum wage when they clearly don't meet any minimum standard?

And if it isn't genuine then they should get bugger all.

Face it they're getting fvcked either way, and not before time.
Somewhat at odds with your claim, surprise surprise, and I stand by every word. As I have no interest in your views or attempts to misrepresent me I'll bow out here.

I'll let others judge.
 
I don't have to misrepresent you, and indeed I haven't. Your posts are still all over the site.

There's no misrepresentation in pointing out you're a nasty little poison dwarf who hates the idea of school age children being fed.

Quite usefully you've chosen to repost that time you decided that not winning a job means you don't deserve minimum wage, despite people on the dole not getting minimum wage in the first place... A good example of how you're clearly more interested in being cruel than in being lucid.

With that in mind, you've no right to talk about wot to do when it comes to any sort of crime. Only difference between you and Rolf is that he got to put his sick ideas into practice. You have to settle for posting them on a forum for bike geeks.
 
highlandsflyer":3ks8l2vu said:
I object to the use of dwarf here. That is a very pejorative use of that word.

He's very much so a literal poison dwarf. Like in lord of the rings or something.
 
Back
Top