cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Messageboards
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Your Views Messageboard
Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"
Name:
Subject:
Boardcode:
B I U S Sub Sup Size Color Spoiler Hide ul ol li left center right Quote Code Img URL  
Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons
B) :( :) :laugh:
:cheer: ;) :P :angry:
:unsure: :ohmy: :huh: :dry:
:lol: :silly: :blink: :blush:
:kiss: :woohoo: :side: :S
More Smilies
 Enter code here   

Topic History of: What my WPC friend told me
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
Author Message
veritas they had to clean up the NSW police from being one of the most corrupt in the western world to now one of the best.

And they don't generaly involve themselves in the pedo hysteria but have fairly sensible views..the less work created by media hysteria the better. They are seething at present over the 'Hey Dad' pedo claims because of the media involvment.

The government had to import the head of the Hendon Training Centre to clean up the crooked cops. He did it but got run out of town by the media and shock jocks for his troubles.

You would think from experience of The Sun he knew he was stepping into the home of the vipers nest !
Innocent Accused So true Emma,we so desperately need to get rid of the current police force,& make a new one based on more commonsense values.
Jim Thanks Emma,

Agreed. Now here is another case where the facts don't fit the picture. The whole thing starts from the culpability of men. Men are sexual agents. Women are passive sexual receptors of male desire. Oh, and, sexual desire is sinful, of course. Err, not sinful, that would be a religious category and we've gone past that. Rather, it is, umm, inappropriate, or something. Oh I know. It's inherently aggressive and therefore leads to abuse if not contained. That's it.

How do you like the picture?

Make sure not to look at the facts if you do.

Jim
Emma Bee Our conversation took the usual detours around various unrelated subjects and at one point came to the introduction of Sarah's Law. She told me how it was mainly to allow women to check up on their new partners. I asked if it also allowed men to check up on any new girlfriends. She gazed at me as though I was simple and said, "Well, no, because women don't commit that kind of offence." I reminded her about recent high profile cases and she shrugged them off as exceptions to the norm. She claims that it's so much easier to believe a man would abuse a child. The nurturing nature of women prevents them from doing so.

I was actually quite shocked at her level of sexism, but more at her inability to think outside of the rather small official box.

If one woman can abuse a child, then any woman can. It's probably true that most won't, but the same can be said of men. The unsettling thing is the seemingly official line that all men must be presumed guilty.