Barbarism at it's worst. The Cosby verdict is a terrible day for Men's Rights but at the same time it should tell us just how essential it is that men band together to overthrow the brutal feminist system of oppression.

It does show though that in America there is still one thing more despised than the evil White Male and that's the evil Black Male!

It's hard to believe he wasn't guilty, reading this:
www.vanityfair.com/news/2016/07/bill-cos...sexual-assault-trial

"He maintains the sexual encounters were consensual. In Ms Constand's case, he said she never said no, though she never said yes either."
www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-36371741

It sounds as if he interpreted her being incapacitated as consent.

But I wouldn't be surprised if some or all of the others who appeared in court were bandwagonners, e.g. the one with the criminal record for false reporting, theft and prostitution.

Did you see the press conference with the (male) district attorney getting tearful? It seems to be compulsory when talking to the public these days.

I have no idea as to detail. But remembering the era very well (and the use of recreational drugs that I hated so much that I abandoned my Bible Two meetings as every time Movie Executives were snorting coke from a huge bowl DURING the meetings, I was giving up millions when they made Mannequin from my adapted novel without credit or payment), many indulged, became happily passive, smiled merrily during (often unsuccessful) attempts at sex and then, a few days later, said "what have I done?".

Those were the days! Ghastly, in my opinion, but both parties continued to indulge. Some now regret the consequences. Others see cash and relish them. Rather as I felt that raping and killing women for entertainment illustrated an odd aspect of James Bond and others, not for me. But a bit much allowing them to be reinvented 40 years later and sending people to prison. "Votes for women? Jail, you bitch; who cares you're now 115 years old?)".

Moor Larkin has tweeted a link to an old blog post of his where he draws parallels between the Savile and Cosby cases.

"Will Bill #Cosby be to #metoo, what Rolf Harris was to #OperationYewtree, I wonder.
jimcannotfixthis.blogspot.be/2016/01/dots-across-sea.html"

twitter.com/moor_facts/status/989742020729057280

The YouTube video about the Cosby allegations he refers to seems to be a three-parter:
www.youtube.com/results?search_query=bombshell+cosby+news

holocaust21 wrote:
Barbarism at it's worst. The Cosby verdict is a terrible day for Men's Rights but at the same time it should tell us just how essential it is that men band together to overthrow the brutal feminist system of oppression.

It does show though that in America there is still one thing more despised than the evil White Male and that's the evil Black Male!

Amen!

These accusations surfaced immediately after Bill Cosby spoke up about black Americans taking responsibility for their own life outcomes. His comments exposed a large race industry that relies on pretending that blacks are held back by white oppression, rather than by their own choices and personal qualities. Ooooh, can't have that, can we? Better arrange for him to be put away.

Now the turn of Tom Brokaw - the NBC news broadcaster.

Oh he was brilliant - No3 after Walter Kronkite and Dan Rather.

JK2006 wrote:
Oh he was brilliant - No3 after Walter Kronkite and Dan Rather.


And Peter Jennings @ ABC?

Cronkite's career was amazing though, covering from the actual locations-

WW2 bombing of London
Normandy landings
Nuremberg trials
Vietnam War

As well as-

JFK assassination
Apollo 11 moon landing
Murder of Lee Harvey Oswald
Watergate scandal

I had the pleasure of sitting next to him at a dinner and party and spent most of the evening chatting to him. Terrific man.

Jo wrote:
It sounds as if he interpreted her being incapacitated as consent.

Incapacitated - after HE drugged her ???

Its RAPE ....

Indeed - do watch out the next time you give Mrs ITK a glass of bolly or a fag before a night of lust.

In The Know wrote:
Jo wrote:
It sounds as if he interpreted her being incapacitated as consent.

Incapacitated - after HE drugged her ???

Its RAPE ....
Yes, but I wonder if he interpreted her taking the drugs he offered her as consent or pretended to himself it was consent (at least afterwards when the whole thing blew up and he had to think about consent; maybe he wasn't too bothered about consent at the time).

What I find hard to believe is that so many adult women would have been suffering from headaches, or whatever, and took medication for the sake of their health from a man they were alone with who wasn't their doctor. Spiking their drinks without their knowledge is one thing, but if they actually took the drugs from him knowingly, I think it's questionable that so many were as naive as we're being expected to believe.

JK2006 wrote:
Indeed - do watch out the next time you give Mrs ITK a glass of bolly or a fag before a night of lust.


My tea has just upchucked...

JK2006 wrote:
[quote]Indeed - do watch out the next time you give Mrs ITK a glass of bolly or a fag before a night of lust.[/quote

indeed but ITK is more likely to plow her with ghastly Sherry or even Port and she may go along thinking she can get an increased shoe allowance.

## it would help if ITK actually read the gist of a story instead of headlines, then he may get some more info.

He'll probably hyperventilate as the right wing media are even now screeching that Labour "activist" has been expelled for antisemitism except..he hasn't..it was for "bringing the party into disrepute" for accusing a Labour MP of colluding with a right wing newspaper.

The fact the media latched onto the claim (true or not) because the Labour MP was Jewish (and she promoted it..a Blairite) is bizarre but that's how it works.

As always dear Hedda (and your first, lost film role as the Mona Lisa has just been unearthed here in England!) we sing from the same page; simplification will bring down our species.

hedda wrote:
it would help if ITK actually read the gist of a story instead of headlines, then he may get some more info


Cronkite (another thread) once said 'in seeking truth, it is important to get the views of both sides'.

ITK reads a random link - and may, or not, make a comment before posting it as gospel. Rarely asking - is this really true?

Then strives to prove his view by posting another link! Facts are chosen selectively - and unpleasant or contradictory one ignored.


With the almost mandatory insults to those who disagree with him. Name calling features frequently in his post; original thought - never.

Jo wrote:
Yes, but I wonder if he interpreted her taking the drugs he offered her as consent or pretended to himself it was consent (at least afterwards when the whole thing blew up and he had to think about consent; maybe he wasn't too bothered about consent at the time).

Then its RAPE !

hedda wrote:
indeed but ITK is more likely to plow her with ghastly Sherry or even Port and she may go along thinking she can get an increased shoe allowance.

(you can see that Hedda doesn't quite understand how the board works, can't you ??? lol !)

Hedda ... which part of "if she has to be drugged so cannot make an informed choice" are you having most difficulty with ?