Bush Admin - Indifferent to Rape

spendius wrote:

A Christian would never rape any woman.

While I'm sure you WISH this to be true....in actuality I truly doubt it.

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

map wrote-

Quote:
I guess that could be said about all rape cases then huh spendius?

"She shouldn't have been wearing revealing clothing."
"She shouldn't have been on a date with that guy."
"She shouldn't have been walking home."
"She shouldn't have had such large breasts."
"She shouldn't have blond hair."
"She shouldn't have...."

You have over egged your pudding map. Do you not understand why I quoted that pilot?

A young woman in that milieux knows that all eyes are upon her. If she unbuttons a button or two and puts herself about unchaperoned in a semi-lawless setting and doesn't think she is risking that happening to her she should have been weeded out in the recruitment process for stupidity.

Judges here make allowance in sentencing rapists for the provocation the victim showed. And so do the cops in their investigations. It's nothing new. Trying going into court on a woman's allegations and defence lawyers keen to rip her testimony to shreds with your legal reputation at stake.

A Christian would never rape any woman.

To suggest I was justifying rape is ridiculous. I was merely explaining how Commanders-in-Chief take it as a part of the war situation and have more important things on their minds. That's what the thread is about not the "alleged" rape. It's in War and Peace. And Tolstoy was a Christian of sorts.

Like I said--get real. Enough of this cosy "folks back home" sanctimony.

She shouldn't have been there in the first place. Only complete idiots would put women in such situations.

None of that justifies rape.

Here in the US, 'provocation' is not taken into account. Not heavily, anyways. See, we actually expect men to control their impulses. You say :

Quote:

If she unbuttons a button or two and puts herself about unchaperoned in a semi-lawless setting and doesn't think she is risking that happening to her she should have been weeded out in the recruitment process for stupidity.

So what if she's stupid? It's still a heinous crime, one that merits investigation, and one that should be prosecuted.

Your attitude is revolting.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Quote:

Only complete idiots would put women in such situations.

Well, it was Bush that put her there. Laughing

Seriously though, if one of the men got raped / assualted what would your reasoning be?

0 Replies

spendius wrote:

map wrote-

Quote:
I guess that could be said about all rape cases then huh spendius?

"She shouldn't have been wearing revealing clothing."
"She shouldn't have been on a date with that guy."
"She shouldn't have been walking home."
"She shouldn't have had such large breasts."
"She shouldn't have blond hair."
"She shouldn't have...."

You have over egged your pudding map. Do you not understand why I quoted that pilot?

A young woman in that milieux knows that all eyes are upon her. If she unbuttons a button or two and puts herself about unchaperoned in a semi-lawless setting and doesn't think she is risking that happening to her she should have been weeded out in the recruitment process for stupidity.

Judges here make allowance in sentencing rapists for the provocation the victim showed. And so do the cops in their investigations. It's nothing new. Trying going into court on a woman's allegations and defence lawyers keen to rip her testimony to shreds with your legal reputation at stake.

A Christian would never rape any woman.

To suggest I was justifying rape is ridiculous. I was merely explaining how Commanders-in-Chief take it as a part of the war situation and have more important things on their minds. That's what the thread is about not the "alleged" rape. It's in War and Peace. And Tolstoy was a Christian of sorts.

Like I said--get real. Enough of this cosy "folks back home" sanctimony.

She shouldn't have been there in the first place. Only complete idiots would put women in such situations.

This is just unbelievable I have a hard time believing you are serious. "have more important things on their minds?" Rape is a real crime; gang rape is reprehensible. It don't matter if the woman walked naked down the halls. The ones who have been accused of committing the crime if found guilty are the one(s) to blame; not the victim of the rape.

This is a US private company contracted out by the state department. Our government is responsible for the actions of this company. It is their duty to prosecute this case.

I think the reason they are trying to avoid it despite the state investigators thinking is should be prosecuted is just to avoid bad press about it. After all; I haven't too much about it even though it happened two years ago.

0 Replies

Iraq sexual assault Tracy BaArker
Tracy Barker was held against her will two times kept in a living container and food brought to her the first time when she reported her supervisor abusing her and the Iraqi women the second time when she was almost raped by State Department Ali employee after being there 12 months and abused doesn't she deserve justice? And didn't it say somewhere that when Barker tried to go for help the first time from Basra that Halliburton dropped her off in Iraq in the desert out of their hard car and she had to find a ride with a food truck ??? Why isn't anyone calling for Justice for this women???

0 Replies

You've all been reading the Agony Aunts. You are all very sweet.

As I said- A Christian would never rape a woman. That is a statement which ignores people who just say they are Christians.

Anybody seriously against rape, including the category Ms Greer had in mind, would be in favour of the inculcation of Christian values.

Obviously Media, and its customers, love a juicy rape case for some reason or other. They fill up a lot of white space cheaply, they sell papers and viewer time and they provide opportunities for talking about rape in a virtuous, outraged manner.

revel wrote-

Quote:

It don't matter if the woman walked naked down the halls.

Oh- I think it does from a defence lawyer's point of view.

Quote:

It is their duty to prosecute this case.

They don't seem to be doing and I doubt that fear of a bad press (asserted by revel) is the reason. Maybe they know their juries better than you do.

squinney wrote-

Quote:

Seriously though, if one of the men got raped / assualted what would your reasoning be?

Just the same. Fact based.

Cyclo wrote-

Quote:

None of that justifies rape.

I never said it did.

Quote:

Here in the US, 'provocation' is not taken into account. Not heavily, anyways. See, we actually expect men to control their impulses

That's a bit woozie. "Not" and then it turns into "not heavily". Everybody expects men to control their impulses. Since when have expectations been a factor?

You reading capacities and reasoning powers must reduce your Secretary of State for Education to despair however revolting I am.

Go and read up on these matters in serious works.

0 Replies

Do Christian's not steal either?

Do they not commit adultry?

Do they not murder?

Do they not lie?

Do they not cheat?

0 Replies

Spendi,

Quote:

They don't seem to be doing and I doubt that fear of a bad press (asserted by revel) is the reason. Maybe they know their juries better than you do.

Perhaps they don't care about justice, when it concerns their political allies and support in Iraq? You are making moronic statements, though that's about par for the course for you.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

If it suits you to think that Cyclo be my guest.

You have probably never been confronted with overwhelming and confusing data about which you had to do something. It is a luxury Mr Bush can't even allow himself to fantasise about.

0 Replies

Caligula once said-- "Oh- if only the Romans had but one neck".

0 Replies

Bush Admin - Indifferent to Rape

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know