Labourlist brought up "the Assange affair" in this post and mentioned comments by Ken Clarke and George Galloway.
Now i am not saying it was done on purpose but they seemed to forget this politicians comments on the subject
Listen from 2.45-3.45.
Stop trying to make out one party holds the moral high ground on this.
I will also say this, in all the Assange stuff not much is ever said of his alleged victims.
Dear Billy Botty x x
ReplyDeleteSorry to hear bout ur childhood , darlin :-(
Ppl thinks loads of diffrent things bout all sorts of stuff , don't they ?? It's nice x .
I quite likes thinkin , I spose .
Them alleged victims is guilty till proved innocent , ain't they babes ??
Jules don't wanna go there coz he knows he get bounced strait off to America where they seems to hold a bit of a grudge against him for somethin or other .
I got nothin against the guy an , equally , I got no feelins for him neither . He jus seem a bit geeky to Ewa :P
He does seem to be on side of free speech tho an that quite cool by me x .
These alleged victims does seem to pop outta nowhere at a most inconvenient/convenient moment tho , didn't they honey ???
For that reason alone , they probly lyin .
Luv E x .
Goose/gander. Simples.
ReplyDeleteIf we are supposed to believe anyone who claims they have been raped, then let's define what rape IS (a sexual act which, at the actual moment it is performed, is not consented to), and stick by it, FFS! A little bit of Ralph Waldo Emerson's consistency won't go amiss here-- because it ISN'T foolish to demand that rape be defined the same for Julian Assange as anyone else. It is perfectly conceivable (and no pun, later) that the same someone could be a whistleblower to be lauded for that act and a pervert to be condemned for the other act. People are funny that way. Feet of clay and all that.
The Member of Congress was apparently trying to make the point that if you have an exception for rape in anti-abortion laws, the number of women who will seek abortions claiming rape will rise-- no shit, Sherlock! Of course, someone needs to tread very lightly when dealing with this sort of subject, and this mong was wearing hobnailed boots. He's a bit confused in his understanding of the pH balance of the vaginal secretions being able to keep the fertilisation from taking place when a forcible rape has occurred. But his point was that abortion would probably be sought by women who never reported a rape at the time of the conception because the act in question wasn't a rape. He doesn't want "retroactive rape." Which is all the more reason these Bible Thumpers need to mind their own business and let the woman deal with her own conscience on the issue of abortion. There are no winners in this debate, and only access to abortion provides a solution to a problem which doesn't continue to beset anyone else but the woman, but refusal of abortion would create problems for more than just her.