derkomai
no hubris intended
...Jessica Rabbit sure was hot... but Betty Rubble was hotter... lol... cheers.
[video=youtube;3ArNyHPd3Tc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ArNyHPd3Tc[/video]
-
Welcome to the discussion forums. To get posting, register an account.
The Jimmy Savile case - Gary Glitter arrrested
- Thread starter pecan
- Start date
[video=youtube;3ArNyHPd3Tc]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ArNyHPd3Tc[/video]
eliza
Active Member
UK comedian Tarbuck arrested: reports
BRITISH comedian Jimmy Tarbuck has reportedly been arrested and questioned about alleged child abuse - the latest in a long list of UK entertainers to face sex crime allegations.
The BBC, the Press Association and others say 73-year-old Tarbuck was arrested on April 26 and later released on bail.
Police in Britain do not usually name suspects who have not been charged. North Yorkshire Police said on Tuesday "a 73-year-old man has been arrested in connection with a historic child sex abuse investigation". The force said the alleged victim was a young boy in the 1970s. A comedian and quiz show host, Tarbuck has been a fixture on British television since the 1960s.
The arrest is not part of Operation Yewtree, the sex abuse investigation focused on late entertainer Jimmy Savile.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/...tarbuck-arrested/story-e6frea7u-1226636925911
BRITISH comedian Jimmy Tarbuck has reportedly been arrested and questioned about alleged child abuse - the latest in a long list of UK entertainers to face sex crime allegations.
The BBC, the Press Association and others say 73-year-old Tarbuck was arrested on April 26 and later released on bail.
Police in Britain do not usually name suspects who have not been charged. North Yorkshire Police said on Tuesday "a 73-year-old man has been arrested in connection with a historic child sex abuse investigation". The force said the alleged victim was a young boy in the 1970s. A comedian and quiz show host, Tarbuck has been a fixture on British television since the 1960s.
The arrest is not part of Operation Yewtree, the sex abuse investigation focused on late entertainer Jimmy Savile.
http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/...tarbuck-arrested/story-e6frea7u-1226636925911
UK barrister wants age of consent lowered to 13 and victim anonymity removed:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ld-men-abuse-persecutions-says-barrister.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ld-men-abuse-persecutions-says-barrister.html
W
wynter
Guest
I am gobsmacked at that. Totally gobsmacked.
...I am too wynter... how can she possibly think like that?... lowering the age of consent to 13 years of age?... surely she doesn't have a young daughter of her own otherwise she wouldn't be saying crap like that... amazing... cheers.
lols @ the response to being confronted with the reality and (presumed) unintended consequences that one's chosen religion spawns.
Anyhoo, what does your subjectively arrived at morality think it should be and why ?
What/which benchmark should be used and why ?
Oh, and for the record, I'm neither gobsmacked nor supportive of the "want" expressed by that female barrister, especially considering there is also 'what is good for the goose is good for the gander' aspect never far behind.
I reckon we reap what we sow and the much of the world seems to be in a race for the bottom.
Woe on a generation who call evil good and good evil and all that ... and we see here that barrister trying to do that very thing by calling for a lowering of the bar so to speak so that something that is now rightfully (AFAI&YAC) a crime, ceases to be one ... a bit like the Macquarie dictionary chosing to redefining words at a time that proved useful for the ALP to weasel a linguistic escape from a cage they had put themselves in.
I reckon things are rapidly becoming just as the ancient texts promised would be the case prior to you-know-what and you-know-who and all that.
... and making like a gold-fish ain't going to change that.
How could you think that such things wouldn't happen once you took up subjective morality over objective morality ?
Who are you to say your subjectively arrived at morality is superior to the subjectively arrived morality of that female barrister calling for it to be made legal for the youngest possible teen to get jiggy with somebody old enough to be their grand-father ?
What is your benchmark and why should anyone else, let alone everyone else in the world, deem it to be valid and correct, wynter ?
... and while you're not answering that, how are you going with coming up with a logically coherent explanation to that other problem or twin horned dilemma you created for yourself years back re: species and required numbers of breeding pairs and all that ?
Here's something to listen to while you meditate on that.
[youtubevid]nQUHL8AvXdM[/youtubevid]
Who says I don't throw out a life-line now and then.
regarDS
W
wynter
Guest
Psst derspatz., I dont care what you say, god still doesn't exist.
eliza
Active Member
lols @ the response to being confronted with the reality and (presumed) unintended consequences that one's chosen religion spawns.
Anyhoo, what does your subjectively arrived at morality think it should be and why ?
What/which benchmark should be used and why ?
Oh, and for the record, I'm neither gobsmacked nor supportive of the "want" expressed by that female barrister, especially considering there is also 'what is good for the goose is good for the gander' aspect never far behind.
I reckon we reap what we sow and the much of the world seems to be in a race for the bottom.
Woe on a generation who call evil good and good evil and all that ... and we see here that barrister trying to do that very thing by calling for a lowering of the bar so to speak so that something that is now rightfully (AFAI&YAC) a crime, ceases to be one ... a bit like the Macquarie dictionary chosing to redefining words at a time that proved useful for the ALP to weasel a linguistic escape from a cage they had put themselves in.
I reckon things are rapidly becoming just as the ancient texts promised would be the case prior to you-know-what and you-know-who and all that.
... and making like a gold-fish ain't going to change that.
How could you think that such things wouldn't happen once you took up subjective morality over objective morality ?
Who are you to say your subjectively arrived at morality is superior to the subjectively arrived morality of that female barrister calling for it to be made legal for the youngest possible teen to get jiggy with somebody old enough to be their grand-father ?
What is your benchmark and why should anyone else, let alone everyone else in the world, deem it to be valid and correct, wynter ?
... and while you're not answering that, how are you going with coming up with a logically coherent explanation to that other problem or twin horned dilemma you created for yourself years back re: species and required numbers of breeding pairs and all that ?
Here's something to listen to while you meditate on that.
vid]
Who says I don't throw out a life-line now and then.
regarDS
The debate around the age of consent has been going for centuries and for the last couple of hundred years there have been age of consent laws in one form or another. Around the world the age of consent has differed and still does but in the England and Australia it was originally based around the average age of puberty and menstruation.
However as people learnt more about the mind, it was realised that physical maturity and psychological maturity were two different things and a 12 year old who may be menstruating does not have the psychological maturity to make the decision about having sex.
Last edited:
Your life, your choice ...
Yet we both know that your chosen stance is flimsier than a house of cards and is unable to withstand the slightest puff of wind examination of it.
[youtubevid]Lyh3oiRO1ls[/youtubevid]
Anyhoo, I reckon folk who choose to cling to the unsustainable if not indefensible provide gobsmacking living examples and echos of the oldest sin in the book.
Millenia even ... and I wonder how much of it was basically attempts by the righteous/those whose morality is objectively determined to protect the young and vulnerable from the wicked whose subjectively determined morality was out to excuse and permit anything and everything ?
OTOH, if I were a young bedouin girl 1000 or so years ago, or a young Koori lass from 300 hundred years ago (etc, etc, etc), perhaps I would be eagerly looking forward to "becoming a woman" as signified/determined by menstruation. Perhaps if I had been brought up in/totally immersed in a time and culture where everyone expected females to be married off and begin breeding as soon as they were able, I would not only not think there to be anything wrong with it but also think it couldn't happen soon enough ?
Similarly, if I were a little girl or boy in France in 1791 where the Napoleonic code established an age of consent of 11 years, it prolly wouldn't be gobsmaking for me to both think and expect to find myself married off / in some sort of sexual relationship at that age, yes ?
No, I'm not in the slightest suggesting that *I* think it ok; I don't actually want to think about it at all and would rather we had a world and culture where kids were encouraged to remain AS kids until WAY past puberty as opposed to the apparently increasing modern "1st world" custom of kids now HAVING kids.
I would be happy for the age of consent for boys be lowered to the age they start menstruating and the age of consent for girls to be raised to the age they stop menstruating. It would soon solve a whole world of problems, yes.
Another solution ? How about we develop avatars to send out into the big bad world to interact with one another while the Real us stays safely tucked away and plugged in somewhere ? That we put on whatever gender, colour, apparent age, features etc we like as budget allows on a daily basis ? The kind of idea examined in the Bruce Willis movie "Surrogates" as per:
[youtubevid]X7siyq9Z6yU[/youtubevid]
Oh hang on, here is an idea. Perhaps we all are ALREADY surrogates ... genderless souls driving gendered flesh/bodies and all that.
Wow, if that is really the case, then what is gender all about ? To pro-create new bodies so that yet more genderless souls can get the opportunity to partake in and explore this particular aspect of creation ?
Meh, too early in the morning for this sort of stuff, eh ?
Here is some light comedy instead
[youtubevid]oF14OZKOI68[/youtubevid]
Deem "the sleepers must awaken" included.
Now, where to find the cheat-sheet/walkthought to get me to that BTL fabled "planet of the nymphomaniacs".
regarDS
Last edited:
Don't feel bad, neither does he.
Perhaps you should try reading (out loud if you think it might help) what is actually/literally written rather than attempting to read between the lines in the hope you might find something more to your liking ?
In short, I am "trying to say" precisely what I have written in plain English.
Being a man, I can understand "womanish" whether it be written or spoken but I'm sadly not all that skilled at writing it myself. So, my free hint when it comes to reading my posts is that you should lift up the blinkers that are required for "womanish" and turn on the filter of blazing light that is commonly called "The Queens English".
Sure, it may involve you having to extend your language and communications buffering system to be able to take in and process ideas and concepts presented in sentences that are more than 144 characters in length, and it will no doubt also regularly involve sentences encapsulating nested concepts, grammar tortured for the fun of it, and an abundance of commas (often in the wrong, places) but I think you will soon find it is a surprising versatile and easy to understand language that provides a form of communication that is safe for kids to paddle in while also being deep enough for linguistic scholars and poets to drown in.
Try it, you might like it.
To aid in the expansion of your education and understanding re: The Queens English and all that, I'm happy to go through my prior posting with you paragraph by paragraph if you would like.
Which portion of the whole would you like to start with ?
Remember, "The improvement of the mind improves the heart and corrects the understanding" ... so it could be loosly said that "it is for posterity".
[ADIT]
Actually, while on the topic of "posterity", as well as to aid in my own development re: learning to communicate in "womanish" (which is mainly more about "feelings" yes ?), please watch the following.
[youtubevid]BbgyppGqBgg[/youtubevid]
Now, how do you feel ?
regarDS
Last edited:
W
wynter
Guest
I was just thinking the same thing. He's building up a nice little stash of things and people to address in his biannual apology next time his girlfriend starts grating his pills into his weeties again.
eliza
Active Member
Maybe I could help him out with a cut and paste of one of his apologies, actually I think from memory one names me in the sorry list.
W
wynter
Guest
I've been named too. The first time I accepted it for what it looked like - an apology. After that I've accepted it for what it is - total bullshit.
eliza
Active Member
I find reading some of his posts - like those above - quite good. I don't like the political or the religious rants much but those posts are quite entertaining and well written.
Try it, you may be pleasantly surprised
Really.
Yeah no, I guess the time he referred to my daughter as a prostitute kind of turned me off reading his "entertaining" posts.
I guess it's nice for him that someone is reading his posts though.
lols. sorry harpies but this going to have to wait for another time ... I'll be without suitable internut for the next 24hrs so party on !
In the mean time, do feel free to link to an alleged post re: calling your daugher a prostitute ... or should I deem that accusation to be the same as the shameless lies wynter tried on about me to someone else the other month when she prolly thought I wasn't around to notice her sneaking them in ?
IE, yet more baseless accusations from the embittered who lack both the ability and courage to justify their positions with truthfulness and logic.
As I responded then, I'll respond again now.
"was it something I didn't say ?"
regarDS
In the mean time, do feel free to link to an alleged post re: calling your daugher a prostitute ... or should I deem that accusation to be the same as the shameless lies wynter tried on about me to someone else the other month when she prolly thought I wasn't around to notice her sneaking them in ?
IE, yet more baseless accusations from the embittered who lack both the ability and courage to justify their positions with truthfulness and logic.
As I responded then, I'll respond again now.
"was it something I didn't say ?"
regarDS