DQ Darwin

Sorry laddie but I can only speak for myself, Canadian or otherwise, and I have not moved him to hero status, but I'll let you know. "Die" oh that is sweet you're on the jury now. Kind of obvious by comments,but you can't speak for all of the US either. Do your homework and come back okay:) Storm Clarence wrote: Then Manning will die a hero in the eyes of a Canadian or two.

What Manning did was correct. Time will tell..... Storm Clarence wrote: Eaglewing Foxtrot wrote: Just clearing something up. Manning was incarcerated and tortured without trial, and the only evidence was an obviously edited text-only log. Assange already fed Manning to the wolves by demanding President Obama release him. Assange asserts that what Manning did was a 'good' thing; worthy of the Nobel Prize. Manning will be tried based on Assange's words, in addition to the evidence that he stole documents. FIFY

@Czari- thanks foir the reminder that was a great movie. @Dillon you promised not to use Granny's picture anymore...she will not be pleased Dillon Levenque wrote: Czari Zenovka wrote: This reminds me of an old, somewhat obscure movie - The Gods Must Be Crazy. It is presented as a documentary but is actually a comedy. A bit of a commentary on materialism. Great movie - higly recommend it. That made me smile just remembering it. You're right—that was a great movie :-)

Boo Maryanne Solo wrote: Voice morphing playing up again ^^? Oooo Storm ric'd his latest fan.

That in fact is what any of these posts are "that my opinion is only my opinion" and that pretty much wraps it up Echo Hermit wrote: Bear in mind that my opinion is only my opinion, and this opinion has been based on basic facts gleaned from this thread, and not what I have read in the media (which has been zilch) or what I might have been presented with in a court room.

that's 2 out of 12 and I agree Echo Hermit wrote: DQ Darwin wrote: I guess my point is we don't agree and that's fine And this is why there are twelve people on a jury. But just imagine if those 12 people on the jury were 12 people involved in this thread? If I was such a light sleeper that I wouldn't feel someone fannying about with my nether regions until they were well and truly embedded in them, I would ensure I took extra precautions, such as wearing three pairs of Bridget Jones style panties after any sexual encounter. I personally find it difficult to believe cries of rape in this case

I guess my point is we don't agree and that's fine Innula Zenovka wrote: I don't understand your point. Do you say she lacked common sense in trusting Assange? Quite possibly so, but that doesn't alter the fact that her complaint, if true, certainly describes rape in English (and, apparently, Swedish) law. As I understand it, initially she and the other complainant, AA, went to the police to see if Assange could be forced to take an AIDS test, so it may be that she didn't realise, either, that his behaviour constituted rape. Not so long ago, I had some professional involvement in a case involving a guy who seemed, quite genuinely, not to understand that the fact someone consents to having sex with him once doesn't necessarily mean that she consents to have sex with him on demand on all future occasions he feels like it. Someone he'd met online eventually complained and, when the police started investigating his online address book, they found three other women who'd had bad experiences with him on the second or third meeting, but, rather than go to the police, had just written it off as a bad experience and wanted to get on with their lives. Despite the fact the jury may wll have thought his victims had been imprudent or naive, it didn't take them very long to convict him of multiple counts of rape and sexual assault, and he's now serving an indefinite sentence for public protection.

Understood and from what I read she consented to sex with the rider that a condom must be worn, which is the sticky part (no pun). What I see here is the lack of an application of "common sense" on the part of SW. This is not sexual abuse, but the call of rape. I see also the need for common sense and that would be the jurys role since she didn't seem to have any.

Yes it is a funny old world. In all honesty, considering my gender, I guess I can only say what my reaction would be. If I was ever dumb enough to open my door to a stranger, hop in bed with him and finally uncross my legs and let him have a go, then allow him to remain in the apartment for a few days, I really have to say WTF. This would be a interesting call *You need to consider what the complainant herself said about her experience and her reaction to it. On this issue the evidence she gave was......*

Innula, well okay in England I have to give way to the ruling and I am not sure about in Canada. There will always be mitigating circumstances to consider, but I find in high profile cases the “rape” tag seems to happen with convenience. It is not for me to say but for a jury if trial ever takes place. You must admit the last sentence does cover it all…. Innula Zenovka wrote: DQ Darwin wrote: I would like to report a robbery…….when did it happen?........well 3 weeks ago…….why didn’t you come in the day it happened?.........well I wasn’t sure. DUH The Specimen Direction on Late Reporting (.pdf, page 358) that English judges are supposed to give when summing up in rape cases is You need to consider what the complainant herself said about her experience and her reaction to it. On this issue the evidence she gave was...... That seems to me a very reasonable way of approaching it.

I guess somehow to you it would. All depends on the agenda one has. Oh, your slip is showing:)

I would like to report a robbery…….when did it happen?........well 3 weeks ago…….why didn’t you come in the day it happened?.........well I wasn’t sure. DUH The US, British and other Governments got caught doing some no no’s, there is a surprise. They are pissed and want revenge, much like someone on here. It is not like any adult doesn’t understand that some not so pleasant dealings go on behind the scenes, and we get it. But there are limits! So what better way to cover up, than to confuse what is written proof by opening a sex scandal. Sensationalism will steal the day every time. As you can see here posters are not concerned about the content of the documents, just whether or not removing a condom constitutes rape. My, my Mr. Clarence, you do have problems with nationalities "must be hard to be Canadian", "Australians like stuff like that", not very nice of you.

I must run I must hide......... wooot They would have been wiser to make pick ups every other week and 2 bags - save on gas, equipment and wages....oh well Maryanne Solo wrote: Ecuadorian embassy looking good for you ^~ *points & wags finger... Don't you love it. 22lbs = 9.97 kilograms.

This pertains to SL in what way? Thank you dear! Took you forever to show up;) ETA: read it long ago: Off Topic Content: Please keep your commentary relevant to the discussion and within the format that the forum, board or question and answer area require. (For example, in the Answers section, please follow the Q&A format of the discussion.) Content that is blatantly off topic is not permitted. You may also not post regarding subjects that do not relate to Second Life except in the General forum discussion board.

Some people/governments get to bloody big for their britches, I like to see them called out to face the truth. Maryanne Solo wrote: Assange's exile is akin to rejected SL users I suppose :matte-motes-asleep-2: But people actually listen to him.

Hey Ave whatzzz up ♥

I'm just not sure I want Joe the garbage man to have that kind of control. He could effectively shut down a service paid for in my property taxes, would the next step be the fire department deciding if they will answer a call or not? Control in the wrong spot here. Ima Rang wrote: DQ Darwin wrote: Ima Rang wrote: DQ Darwin wrote: That's the trick Ima SIZE. The weight is limited to 22lbs now that is a lot of garbage, right. Ima Rang wrote: DQ Darwin wrote: Oh cool:smileysurprised: Okay: Our city council is proposing that residents be restricted to a 1 bag limit...yes....1 bag limit for weekly garbage....does anyone have an opinion? Survey or study for SL Hmmm...my only frame of reference is my own garbage. In order to form an opinion, I'm going to need to know how big the bag is. What happens if it is greater that 22 lbs? It's left curbside, sigh I suppose I could cope with the one bag limit, but having to weigh my garbage to ensure compliance and pick up would be off putting.

Ima Rang wrote: DQ Darwin wrote: That's the trick Ima SIZE. The weight is limited to 22lbs now that is a lot of garbage, right. Ima Rang wrote: DQ Darwin wrote: Oh cool:smileysurprised: Okay: Our city council is proposing that residents be restricted to a 1 bag limit...yes....1 bag limit for weekly garbage....does anyone have an opinion? Survey or study for SL Hmmm...my only frame of reference is my own garbage. In order to form an opinion, I'm going to need to know how big the bag is. What happens if it is greater that 22 lbs? It's left curbside, sigh

Did you go for help and comfort Storm? https://my.secondlife.com/storm.clarence/posts/5065883ab43808000200216c When will these two show

That's the trick Ima SIZE. The weight is limited to 22lbs now that is a lot of garbage, right. Ima Rang wrote: DQ Darwin wrote: Oh cool:smileysurprised: Okay: Our city council is proposing that residents be restricted to a 1 bag limit...yes....1 bag limit for weekly garbage....does anyone have an opinion? Survey or study for SL Hmmm...my only frame of reference is my own garbage. In order to form an opinion, I'm going to need to know how big the bag is.

Aaaawww you're keeping score, how sweet. Do you now control what one should say, the number of times they should post? This forum is for SL content not your private rap sheet, stick to the program. No the garbage is not all gone, I normally have 3 bags to toss. Do I really care about what you think of Assange or for that matter anything else. Storm Clarence wrote: DQ Darwin wrote: Okay: Our city council is proposing that residents be restricted to a 1 bag limit...yes....1 bag limit for weekly garbage....does anyone have an opinion? Your 2nd post to SLF in 6 months and this^^ is your contribution to civil discourse? I thought all the garbage was collected already.

Oh cool:smileysurprised: Okay: Our city council is proposing that residents be restricted to a 1 bag limit...yes....1 bag limit for weekly garbage....does anyone have an opinion? Survey or study for SL

This pertains to SL in what way?

Waves to Del hugs and hows life :smileyhappy: Like the verse, lol

He (Rodvik) could be to busy reviewing applicants for his job? Probably just frustrated trying to setup his Linden Home with only 117 prims? Where is Rodvik?