Also In The News

[Alf Bentley]

1 minute ago, Carl the Llama said:

I'm in the same boat, can't work out for the life of me how this isn't a criminal offence of some description.

 

Might also be due to the prospect of conviction, if the Scottish system operates similarly to the English - in England the CPS won't bring a case unless there's a reasonable prospect of conviction.

Of course, his behaviour looks dodgy as hell but could he have argued that he was just complimenting the lad and innocently inviting him to a rugby match etc? Would a court have seen it as sufficient proof of ill intent?

 

@davieG's post is interesting re. England & Wales, but those laws wouldn't apply in Scotland, as I understand it, as they have a different legal system.

[ealingfox]

As the child is over 16 and he didnt attempt to arrange a meeting as far as I can see, I am not sure it would meet the threshold for criminal charges.

[Guest MattP]

2 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

If you want an idea for how morally bankrupt the world has become just remember that that President of the USA, the 'leader of the free world', has just been acquitted of clear abuse of power following a trial where witnesses were blocked from appearing and party members openly talked about screwing due process to impose a verdict before it had even started.  A verdict that was carried by all but one member of the party. That one member was the Republican nominee before Trump, has been a Republican all his career (unlike Trump) and now he's being branded a member of "the resistance" and the President who was just acquitted of abusing his power wants the man expelled because he followed the evidence and his own sense of ethics instead of the party line of closing one's eyes and sticking fingers in one's ears.

 

Meanwhile people are saying it's hard to see which side is worse because Nancy Pelosi tore up a piece of paper.

If you go back a few months on here you'll see a post from me to Mac saying this case looks like a smoking gun but it will get nowhere because it was obvious they were out to get him from the start.

 

They've just never accepted the fact he won the Presidency, from the early marches to the Russian stuff to eventually even having elected representatives shouting "impeach the mother****er" they've turned from a normal political party into the opposite side of the coin to what they hate.

 

Even The Times today (who backed them in 2016) is referring to the Democrats with words like "pathological demogogues" and "obsession". They have completely lose their minds.

 

At the minute they are behaving even more stupidly than the peoples vote campaign did over here when it comes to trying to achieve their desired result.

 

Trump must be absolutely pissing himself.

 

1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said:

The bigger question is why he only appears to be getting a slap on the wrist instead of being hauled in front of a magistrate on grooming charges.

Can you actually be charged for grooming someone of a legal sexual age?

[twoleftfeet]

You have to question his judgement, I don't believe that the publics view would be any more tolerant of a 42 year old MP making similar comments to a girl, I think sexual orientation is not relevant in the story, would it have made any difference if the headline had read "Derek Mackay: Scottish finance secretary quits over messages to Child" rather than Boy surely this is where for all the pushing of gender equality by the WOKE BBC that they fall short on the message they are working to push that sexual orientation doesn't matter that being what some would consider being a  Peodo is the problem not that he is gay. 

[ealingfox]

Can you still be a paedo if the object of your desires is 16? Genuinely asking.

 

In this case it certainly feels as such and I have to admit my reading of the story and his reaction is almost tantamount to him admitting to being one - but I'm open to being advised that that is unreasonable of me, if not incorrect.

Edited 6 February 2020 by ealingfox

[Guest MattP]

37 minutes ago, ealingfox said:

Can you still be a paedo if the object of your desires is 16? Genuinely asking.

 

In this case it certainly feels as such and I have to admit my reading of the story and his reaction is almost tantamount to him admitting to being one - but I'm open to being advised that that is unreasonable of me, if not incorrect.

The definition of the word paedo has become far too vast.

 

I've always seen a paedo or a nonce as someone who actually has a sexual desire for children. Not teenagers who are post puberty.

 

A randy old jock wanting to get off with a twink is a bit seedy and his abuse of power is appalling but it certainly doesn't make him a peadophile.

[ealingfox]

14 minutes ago, MattP said:

The definition of the word paedo has become far too vast.

 

I've always seen a paedo or a nonce as someone who actually has a sexual desire for children. Not teenagers who are post puberty.

 

A randy old jock wanting to get off with a twink is a bit seedy and his abuse of power is appalling but it certainly doesn't make him a peadophile.

 

It does a bit though.

[twoleftfeet]

although the age of consent is 16 the is the caveat that a person over 18 in a position of trust cannot enter into sexual relations with someone under the age of 18. Is a Scottish Finance secretary  considered to be in a position of trust with regards to the youth involved?

 

[leicsmac]

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-51389540

 

To be fair, he's totally right about the partisanship and how problematic it is. It doesn't take away from the notable differences in policy, however.

[Carl the Llama]

54 minutes ago, twoleftfeet said:

although the age of consent is 16 the is the caveat that a person over 18 in a position of trust cannot enter into sexual relations with someone under the age of 18. Is a Scottish Finance secretary  considered to be in a position of trust with regards to the youth involved?

 

Ah ok well he's a politician so he's probably safe in that respect.

[Carl the Llama]

5 hours ago, MattP said:

If you go back a few months on here you'll see a post from me to Mac saying this case looks like a smoking gun but it will get nowhere because it was obvious they were out to get him from the start.

 

They've just never accepted the fact he won the Presidency, from the early marches to the Russian stuff to eventually even having elected representatives shouting "impeach the mother****er" they've turned from a normal political party into the opposite side of the coin to what they hate.

 

Even The Times today (who backed them in 2016) is referring to the Democrats with words like "pathological demogogues" and "obsession". They have completely lose their minds.

 

At the minute they are behaving even more stupidly than the peoples vote campaign did over here when it comes to trying to achieve their desired result.

 

Trump must be absolutely pissing himself.

 

Can you actually be charged for grooming someone of a legal sexual age?

I'm not sure what your point is here. Dems = bad therefore stop pointing out how utterly corrupt and morally bankrupt the man in actual power is?  Can we not condemn more than one thing at a time? If not should our energies not be focused on the more pressing matter of Trump being hilariously bent and unfit for the role?

[surrifox]

2 hours ago, MattP said:

The definition of the word paedo has become far too vast.

 

I've always seen a paedo or a nonce as someone who actually has a sexual desire for children. Not teenagers who are post puberty.

 

A randy old jock wanting to get off with a twink is a bit seedy and his abuse of power is appalling but it certainly doesn't make him a peadophile.

More than a few of the SNP are total weirdos and misfits however 

[Guest MattP]

1 hour ago, Carl the Llama said:

I'm not sure what your point is here. Dems = bad therefore stop pointing out how utterly corrupt and morally bankrupt the man in actual power is?  Can we not condemn more than one thing at a time? If not should our energies not be focused on the more pressing matter of Trump being hilariously bent and unfit for the role?

The point is whilst the Trump administration is that - so is the Democrat administration. Anti-Democratic, riddled now with left wing bigotry and full of people not fit for office.

 

The last couple of months has been the political equivalent of Gary Glitter dragging Jimmy Savile through the courts to expose his noncing.

 

Macs link is there is good - the whole thing was a farce with no one listening and its rather ironic the person who has come out of this last week looking the most ridiculous is Nancy Pelosi, who instigated it all.

 

9 minutes ago, surrifox said:

More than a few of the SNP are total weirdos and misfits however 

It's one of the strangest political parties of our time.

 

Now overtly pro-EU despite trying to drag Scitland out of it just six years ago whatever the consequence, "anti-austerity" despite tons of cuts instead of raising taxes. Total failure on education and schools because of an obsession with free tuition.

 

Some English people actually see them as a party they want in government as well.

Edited 6 February 2020 by MattP

[yorkie1999]

4 hours ago, ealingfox said:

Can you still be a paedo if the object of your desires is 16? Genuinely asking.

 

In this case it certainly feels as such and I have to admit my reading of the story and his reaction is almost tantamount to him admitting to being one - but I'm open to being advised that that is unreasonable of me, if not incorrect.

Not if you're 12

[MC Prussian]

On 05/02/2020 at 16:44, leicsmac said:

Sorry man, I'm not getting there. Trump's approval ratings are currently in the low 40's (which barring a little variance) is where they have been for pretty much a year now, including the time of the impeachment - and if you check RealClearPolitics hypothetical match ups then Sanders is better than Warren or Buttigieg v Trump in a general election (though, interestingly, not as good as Bloomberg and neither of them as good as Biden). If the reasoning you give there is what the punters are placing their bets on then it appears to be erroneous information, but then such trends have been followed before. Still leaves me thinking exactly why Bloomberg and not anyone else when he's not made any kind of waves electorally.

 

I don't agree with what Pelosi did myself but for a different reason - it's an empty gesture whose effort would be better spent on crafting policy that can actually hamstring Trump and run him into the ground this November - like appealing economically to poor white communities who think they've been left behind and who bought into Trumps con artist rhetoric that he actually cares about them as a result. Or perhaps emphasising that he gave a very special civilian award to an avowed racist, homophobe and misogynist last night and that's the kind of company that supports him in large numbers. Or by actually picking a side on gun control - either going for it as much as they can and ignoring the NRA or going in the complete opposite direction and encouraging vulnerable people to arm themselves - flipflopping on the matter doesn't help.

I don't see the use of approval ratings as a an argument here. 40 percent aren't an anomaly in the grand scheme of things. You need to go back to JFK in order to get to 50 percent or more on average.

You also fail to address the divisiveness in US politics. The difference between Democrats and Republicans has increased in the past twenty years in particular.

 

You may argue about "con artist rhetoric". That's just a dud from my point of view, almost anecdotal. Fact is, unemployment is down massively, now at 3.6 percent, which is almost unheard of, as it needs to be seen in the context of a steady population increase. More people than ever have jobs now.

And again, no new wars started.

[MC Prussian]

11 hours ago, Carl the Llama said:

If you want an idea for how morally bankrupt the world has become just remember that that President of the USA, the 'leader of the free world', has just been acquitted of clear abuse of power following a trial where witnesses were blocked from appearing and party members openly talked about screwing due process to impose a verdict before it had even started.  A verdict that was carried by all but one member of the party. That one member was the Republican nominee before Trump, has been a Republican all his career (unlike Trump) and now he's being branded a member of "the resistance" and the President who was just acquitted of abusing his power wants the man expelled because he followed the evidence and his own sense of ethics instead of the party line of closing one's eyes and sticking fingers in one's ears.

 

Meanwhile people are saying it's hard to see which side is worse because Nancy Pelosi tore up a piece of paper.

 

 

First, it was the Russia hoax, now some vague and unproven claims of "clear abuse of power".

What next?

 

The Impeachment, which was based on a lot of hearsay and weak grounds in general, was bound to fail from the get-go, it was never going to pass the Senate.

No word on the amount of manpower, money and time wasted on this farce?

Meanwhile, real-time policies have been held back in the priority lane.

 

As for Romney, shame you fall for the nice-guy looks of a man with a shady past of his own:

https://www.alternet.org/2012/08/7-scandals-reveal-real-mitt-romney/

[Dr The Singh]

If this was in China, Iran or any other nation the west wants to blacken, the British government would get off its fat arse and do something.

 

How is it possible a British citizen has been in a foreign jail for over 2 years, without being charged.

 

https://www.dumbartonreporter.co.uk/news/18216243.appeal-jaggis-family-dumbarton-mans-trial-delayed/

 

Appeal from Jaggi's family as Dumbarton man's trial is delayed

By Gillian Murphy

Family handout photo dated 18/10/17 of Jagtar Singh Johal at his wedding in India, as the British man has been arrested and detained in India, accused of "influencing the youth through social media", a Sikh group said. PRESS ASSOCIATION Photo. I

 

     0 comment

THE long-delayed trial of a Dumbarton man in India has been pushed back by two months at his latest court date.

Jagtar Singh Johal – known as Jaggi – has undergone a series of pre-trial hearings since being detained in November 2017.

The Sikh blogger was arrested around a fortnight after his wedding in the Punjab region and is accused of financing an assassination plot, but no formal charges have been made and his family maintain he has been targeted by authorities there for his nationality, religion and online activism.

On Wednesday, his family appealed to the Westminster Government to help “before it is too late” as a judge pushed proceedings back until the spring.

Jaggi attended his latest pre-trial preliminary hearing via video link.

India’s National Investigations Agency (NIA) was granted further time to prepare its case, with the next hearing set for April 15.

It is understood that the delay relates to the completion of redacted witness statements.

 

The news was another blow for the Johal family, including brother Gurpreet Singh Johal, a solicitor.

In a statement, the #FreeJaggiNow campaign called the situation “astonishing”.

The campaign said: “Surely, if the Indian authorities had any evidence against Jaggi, they would have proceeded to trial as soon as possible. By continuing to delay the proceedings, it is evident that Punjab Police had no evidence and the National Investigation Agency have no evidence.

“The UK Government need to act before it is too late. If they do not act, Jaggi could be languishing in prison, without charge for years.”

The UK Government says it is supporting Jaggi and his family.

However, last month our sister title the Sunday National revealed how Jaggi’s wife Gurpreet Kaur is now locked in her own legal battle with the Home Office over her right to stay in Scotland.

While officials have acknowledged her “unique” circumstances, they have refused the visa she needs to live with her in-laws as she waits for her husband’s release.

The Home Office says the case has been “considered on its individual merits” but Edinburgh immigration law expert Damir Duheric, who is representing Kaur, says there is nothing like it in case law or official guidelines.

An appeal will be heard in her case later this month.

Commenting on her situation, Kaur said she did not understand Westminster’s reasoning. She stated: “The UK Government knows what has happened, the Prime Minister knows, but it’s still been refused.

“I don’t understand. Two years and Jagtar has still not been formally charged. If there was a case against him, it should have been out by now. How long is this going to go on?

“My husband is sitting in a jail. Our lives have been put on hold.”

 

     0 

Child Models Wanted In 

Not Seeing Results At The Gym? Try These 10 min WorkoutsAURO|

SPONSORED 

 

 

This Is Where the Majority of Singles Over 50 Are Finding Love in NottinghamSILVERSINGLES|

SPONSORED 

 

 

Police net £15k drug up with Vale man more 

[Mike Oxlong]

Is there a connection between the ads that pop up on an online article and your internet search history ? 

[Guesty]

3 minutes ago, Mike Oxlong said:

Is there a connection between the ads that pop up on an online article and your internet search history ? 

Yeah, and things you click on online like Facebook ads etc. 

 

I know some one in IT. And he was helping a car dealer. As soon as you phone them a list of all the cars you've searched for online come up on a screen in front of them so they know what you want before you even ask. 

 

That was USA though. It's worrying how they collect your information. 

[Mike Oxlong]

1 hour ago, Guesty said:

Yeah, and things you click on online like Facebook ads etc. 

 

I know some one in IT. And he was helping a car dealer. As soon as you phone them a list of all the cars you've searched for online come up on a screen in front of them so they know what you want before you even ask. 

 

That was USA though. It's worrying how they collect your information. 

Ta. I worry about the Doctor then (see above) 

[bovril]

Not sure I dare find out where the majority of over 50s are finding love in Nottingham. 

[leicsmac]

5 hours ago, MC Prussian said:

I don't see the use of approval ratings as a an argument here. 40 percent aren't an anomaly in the grand scheme of things. You need to go back to JFK in order to get to 50 percent or more on average.

You also fail to address the divisiveness in US politics. The difference between Democrats and Republicans has increased in the past twenty years in particular.

 

You may argue about "con artist rhetoric". That's just a dud from my point of view, almost anecdotal. Fact is, unemployment is down massively, now at 3.6 percent, which is almost unheard of, as it needs to be seen in the context of a steady population increase. More people than ever have jobs now.

And again, no new wars started.

If you take a look back, it was Matt who first postulated the idea that approval ratings were increasing because of the impeachment. I simply responded by saying that it isn't true, and it isn't (again, barring variance) - the reliability of approval ratings as a whole is neither here nor there.

 

I'm pretty sure I've mentioned the partisanship on this very page by posting an article that highlights it, but you do you.

 

And as if unemployment and no actual "boots on the ground" (not the only way to wage a war btw) are the only thing that matters - forget the promises on affordable healthcare, the empty words about protecting the environment (as if he ever would), the nudge-nudge wink-wink attitude towards the white supremacists, the building challenge to Roe v Wade endorsed by the SC judges he put there, and more...because apparently none of that matters if unemployment is low and folks aren't dying in some pointless war (two good things, obviously). Point is, it might not all be con artistry, but at least a fair bit of it is.

 

NB. If you want to talk about real-time policy changes, you might want to have a word with Mitch in the Senate - he's got rather a lot of paperwork building up on his desk that he seems unwilling to look at, for some reason.

[Smudge]

9 hours ago, MattP said:

The point is whilst the Trump administration is that - so is the Democrat administration. Anti-Democratic, riddled now with left wing bigotry and full of people not fit for office.

 

The last couple of months has been the political equivalent of Gary Glitter dragging Jimmy Savile through the courts to expose his noncing.

 

Macs link is there is good - the whole thing was a farce with no one listening and its rather ironic the person who has come out of this last week looking the most ridiculous is Nancy Pelosi, who instigated it all.

 

It's one of the strangest political parties of our time.

 

Now overtly pro-EU despite trying to drag Scitland out of it just six years ago whatever the consequence, "anti-austerity" despite tons of cuts instead of raising taxes. Total failure on education and schools because of an obsession with free tuition.

 

Some English people actually see them as a party they want in government as well.

I have become so tired of whatabout this or that as a counter argument,

Forgetting what she, he or it did, why is the current acceptable?

How anyone can defend a brass faced liar by pointing at the opposition as an excuse is bizarre.

Edited 7 February 2020 by Smudge

[ozleicester]

13 hours ago, ealingfox said:

Can you still be a paedo if the object of your desires is 16? Genuinely asking.

 

In this case it certainly feels as such and I have to admit my reading of the story and his reaction is almost tantamount to him admitting to being one - but I'm open to being advised that that is unreasonable of me, if not incorrect.

Pedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children. Although girls typically begin the process of puberty at age 10 or 11, and boys at age 11 or 12,[3] criteria for pedophilia extend the cut-off point for prepubescence to age 13.
(Infantophilia is a sub-type of pedophilia; it is used to refer to a sexual preference for children under the age of 5)

 

Hebephilia is the strong, persistent sexual interest by adults in pubescent (early adolescent) children

 

Ephebophilia is the primary sexual interest in mid-to-late adolescents, generally ages 15 to 19

[SlaneyLCFC]

On 06/02/2020 at 08:15, Carl the Llama said:

If you want an idea for how morally bankrupt the world has become just remember that that President of the USA, the 'leader of the free world', has just been acquitted of clear abuse of power following a trial where witnesses were blocked from appearing and party members openly talked about screwing due process to impose a verdict before it had even started.  A verdict that was carried by all but one member of the party. That one member was the Republican nominee before Trump, has been a Republican all his career (unlike Trump) and now he's being branded a member of "the resistance" and the President who was just acquitted of abusing his power wants the man expelled because he followed the evidence and his own sense of ethics instead of the party line of closing one's eyes and sticking fingers in one's ears.

 

Meanwhile people are saying it's hard to see which side is worse because Nancy Pelosi tore up a piece of paper.

 

 

It's not the senates job to do the houses work. "Witnesses" used loosely should of been presented at the house stage. Besides, as the Dems so desperately kept saying, if it was such an emergency that he should be removed immediately as thats what the American people deserve why did darth pelosi withhold the papers for so long before passing them on to the senate. She even said it would be unwise to proceed but went along with it anyway due to party pressure. Low and behold, it failed just like the "muh russia" and the Mueller investigation.

 

It's Trump derangement syndrome pure and simple. They still can't accept the result of the 2016 election, just like the Remoaners here in the UK regarding Brexit. As for Romney, he is a RINO. He is still bitter he didn't get the nomination to run for president and Trump did. His saving face by voting not guilty on the second vote to save face still won't do him any favours. Remember when the dems called Romney a disgrace and akin to hitler all those years ago and now is being hailed as "stunning and brave" by the typical left leaning media outlets and dem voters. 

 

Hypocrites and again only shows this is a bias against the president and nothing else.