Posts by Rustyoldgoat

    Or kept it as some sort of treasured memento.

    Maybe you didn't know that Lewinsky did not want the affair made public, she was betrayed by Linda Tripp who she thought was her friend but was secretly recording their discussions and ratted on her.

    If the fridge story is true I'm inclined to think said claim is bogus. Her supposed mate might have backed her into a corner when Clinton's political opponents sensed an opportunity, but I can't get over the need to store rather than wash the garment. That screams she had an agenda, be it as part of a political sting (future backmail perhaps? - who knows)

    It’s exactly the point .

    That is what the police get paid for to apply the law .

    This man was not breaking any law.

    There is no law saying Jewish people cannot walk the streets of London .

    Ridiculous application of logic.

    Next you're be saying you're being oppressed if a fireman stopped you running into a burning building for no other reason than having a right to go in there

    He only posted that BS to try and divert from his ridiculous Sharia post.

    I can't be arsed to get into circular arguments about religion or debate league tables when it comes to crimes supposedly committed in it's name at the best of times and certainly not with certain people so I haven't been paying much attention to what's been posted in this thread, but am pretty confident I could guess how it's going

    It wasn't properly covered at the time because their focus was on the lurid details. The media really didn't pick up on how Clinton's behaviour with Lewinsky undermined his defence in the Paula Jones case.

    As I said it wasn't something I paid a great deal of attention to. My interest in overseas politics was minimal back then. I recall hearing that Lewinsky kept the dress she was wearing in the fridge. My first thought hearing that was, if true, it was an orchestrated sting operation, because any willing participant on the receiving end of a pearl necklace would have put the jizz stained garment in the washing machine.

    The Met Police apply the law - they don't make the law.

    Pretty sure if you were free to walk around London in your KKK costume during a BLM march the police response would be near identical - "err excuse me sir, you can't go down there because you look 'flagrantly' racist."

    They also have a duty of care they need to extend to everyone - a duty which is being willfully overlooked in order to play the victim card as and when it suits - another reason why I'm inclined to think they guy at the centre of this particular story had an agenda.

    With democracy comes the need to employ a bit of common sense. it's really that simple to my mind.

    No it’s about freedom and equality .

    You can’t have a bunch of thugs given presidency over a minority of innocent citizens .

    This is known as APPEASEMENT .

    It's about employing a bit of common sense if the society you want to live in has to cater to all groups (ie equality)

    As the saying goes - you can please all of the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but not all of the people all of the time.

    You can't have it both ways and start slagging off the democratic system you claim to be in favour of whenever you disagree with how a third party might want to employ their self same rights.

    It's a disturbing case but the court decision on the very specific point they had to rule on is right. A father does not own a daughter especially an adult daughter.

    That Canada law apparently allows assisted dying for depression is IMHO disturbing but then I guess only people with her level of depression could understand how intolerable her life is. (Again) IMHO assisted dying should only be for cases where there is absolutely no hope of the condition improving.

    Can't comment on the specifics of this story, but can comment on the subject of assisted dying in general. Having watched 1 too many friends succumb to diseases like MND I'd welcome the assist if the time I'd decided I'd have enough followed the time where my limbs had become totally non functional and I was effectively trapped inside dead body being forced to exist because of a third parties beliefs and sensitivities.

    Why not ?
    This is a DEMOCRACY.

    Ok - let's assume the police turned a blind eye and a group of Jews innocently "out for a walk" got set upon by the thug element that frequently hi-jacks marches such as this one.

    What's worse... increasing the odds of that to happen or telling said group of Jews they'd be advised to take a different route?

    If people want to abandon common sense and doggedly stick with a belligerent "what about me? I've go rights to walk down this street too" argument, they'll get very little sympathy from me should said belligerence backfire on them. Pretty sure that if it did, they'd blame the Police rather than take a hard look in the mirror and question their own stupidity.

    That's the thing about living in a democracy - it's not all about you 100% of the time

    I just watched a clip of Trump from earlier in the week walking out of court to make one of his usual "witch hunt" statements to the media - a statement which could quite easily be used by the prosecution as evidence against him. Confessing to the crime the entire case is built around and then doubling down on it probably wasn't the smartest thing to do.... but no-one (other than Trump himself) has ever accused him of being particularly smart.


    My guess is that it went that way deliberately to incite trouble.

    In the social media people manufacture situations all the time

    That is why I’m asking the question

    If it a Muslim in traditional dress at a pro Isreal rally I’d ask the same question

    Trouble? Not so sure about that - but by hanging around and being argumentative rather than doing what most sane risk averse people would do (which would be to avoid such a demonstration because they can attract an element that's there looking for any excuse to kick off) and effectively presenting the police with a no-win situation, I think it's fair to assume he went there with an agenda.

    If he didn't and was simply "just out for a walk" why hang around and film it?


    Did he fraudulently push said payment through the books claiming it was a legitimate legal expense?

    Trump's not in court for being immoral so unless Clinton tried funnelling the payment through the books in a similar fashion, the 'morality' of their supposed respective deeds is the only comparison... but deep down you know that don't you.

    Sad but not surprising.

    Not with the percentage burns his body would have suffered it isn't.

    A friend of mine committed suicide by setting fire to himself in his car right outside the pub we all drank in (fortunately I wasn't there that night so didn't have to witness it). By the time they dragged him out of the car he'd suffered severe burns to more than 85% of his body and that's key to your chances of survival apparently. He lasted about 10-12 more hours being succumbing to his injuries.