|
|
Post by Admin on Nov 16, 2014 6:04:30 GMT -5
Peter was released from jail by an angle, wasn't he? Hey partaker, which angle do you think could be used to save the skins of those Australian overseers? admin  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 16, 2014 7:31:11 GMT -5
Peter was released from jail by an angle, wasn't he? Hey partaker, which angle do you think could be used to save the skins of those Australian overseers? admin I don't know, but we could put names in a hat and draw one out.  On second thought, maybe the angel that blocked the path of Balaam's donkey and made him talk to Balaam to warn him of the danger ahead, might be able to help in some way to resolve this matter of the danger of the dark clouds looming ahead. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 16, 2014 8:47:22 GMT -5
Could it be because they are using a different definition of 'known' than the one you are using? No, their 'known' number was at least 6 for sure, as Ernie confessed to that number. While cooperating with the authorities, the senior worker wore a wire to gather information to help the investigation. Later, workers cold called on some victim's and intimidated them in regard to making any statements to the authorities. Having the data to charge, arrest, convict, and sentence may well be different than knowing about something. If the victims are not willing to come forward and press the charges there is little that can be done. And, as stated, if anyone is trying to impede justice why are they not themselves charged with that crime? You makes little sense to blame the workers with sweeping crimes under the rug when the members are doing the same thing. Was the evidence obtained from the 'wire' not sufficient for the target to be charged with a crime? |
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Nov 16, 2014 12:57:06 GMT -5
No, their 'known' number was at least 6 for sure, as Ernie confessed to that number. While cooperating with the authorities, the senior worker wore a wire to gather information to help the investigation. Later, workers cold called on some victim's and intimidated them in regard to making any statements to the authorities. Having the data to charge, arrest, convict, and sentence may well be different than knowing about something. If the victims are not willing to come forward and press the charges there is little that can be done. And, as stated, if anyone is trying to impede justice why are they not themselves charged with that crime? You makes little sense to blame the workers with sweeping crimes under the rug when the members are doing the same thing. Was the evidence obtained from the 'wire' not sufficient for the target to be charged with a crime? A confession without a victim is pretty hard to prosecute. And, there is only obstruction of justice when someone comes forward to report it, which is the same situation again. It is all recorded, and the investigator has all this information. Plus, I am pretty sure that Task Force Argos has a lot of information recorded about how things have been handled in the past. With pending legislation, I would guess that there will be some changes mandated by law in regard to reporting and handling of such matters in the future. We have seen senior workers convicted in the US for failure to follow the law, and will probably see others in the future. One would think that senior Workers would want to deal with issues prior to being forced to by mandate from the authorities. |
|
|
|
Post by slowtosee on Nov 16, 2014 13:40:04 GMT -5
I don't consider it of great integrity to admit or even be, "so sorry" to obvious sin, such as csa,only after being "found out", or being forced to somehow comply to a law of the land. Integrity with godly convictions would cause a sincere desire to repent, long before an imposed law or somehow being "found out "? Is there really a sincere desire to do what's right or only a slight reluctant obedience to "right " imposed by "outside" forces.?Alvin
|
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Nov 16, 2014 21:27:44 GMT -5
I don't consider it of great integrity to admit or even be, "so sorry" to obvious sin, such as csa,only after being "found out", or being forced to somehow comply to a law of the land. Integrity with godly convictions would cause a sincere desire to repent, long before an imposed law or somehow being "found out "? Is there really a sincere desire to do what's right or only a slight reluctant obedience to "right " imposed by "outside" forces.?Alvin Very true. That's why it is important for me to hear the workers apologize and take full responsibility for past mistakes - so I can trust their sincerity and so I can trust them in the future. While we have heard admissions of past mistakes (only because we already knew about them and they couldn't be denied), along with admissions came "explanations" of why mistakes happened, as if the mistakes could be excused. Overseers don't realize how irrational and bizarre these "explanations" sound. "They didn't realize the damage to the child that CSA causes." "The overseers are so pure, they couldn't deal with the problem." "They used to think that the problem was in the child or woman, so they would move the offender away from the child or woman." "They used to think that it was the sin of the flesh, not of the spirit." Some reasons given to us as to why an immoral/sexually abusive person was not removed from the work are that there were "many who thought highly of him, and would have objected to his removal" and that some behaviors reported "are things people commonly say and do" (kissing, touching, complimenting the looks) and are not wrong in and of themselves. Just the other day, I heard that the reason why they "can't" right a certain wrong (not CSA but adult sexual abuse/harassment related) is that "because most have heard one thing, if we were to go back and tell them something different, it would cause a lot of confusion." The "thing" most have heard is the lie that certain people were in the wrong, and the confusion would be caused by acknowledging that it was in fact the ministry that was in the wrong. It is obvious that the ministry does not apologize and has no intention of apologizing, because they are not really sorry for the victims and because all they care about is their own reputation even if it is based on deceit. How much better it would be for their own souls and for the fellowship if they had the humility and sincerity to apologize and correct the mistakes they've made. |
|
|
|
Post by fixit on Nov 16, 2014 23:17:39 GMT -5
I don't consider it of great integrity to admit or even be, "so sorry" to obvious sin, such as csa,only after being "found out", or being forced to somehow comply to a law of the land. Integrity with godly convictions would cause a sincere desire to repent, long before an imposed law or somehow being "found out "? Is there really a sincere desire to do what's right or only a slight reluctant obedience to "right " imposed by "outside" forces.?Alvin Very true. That's why it is important for me to hear the workers apologize and take full responsibility for past mistakes - so I can trust their sincerity and so I can trust them in the future. While we have heard admissions of past mistakes (only because we already knew about them and they couldn't be denied), along with admissions came "explanations" of why mistakes happened, as if the mistakes could be excused. Overseers don't realize how irrational and bizarre these "explanations" sound. "They didn't realize the damage to the child that CSA causes." "The overseers are so pure, they couldn't deal with the problem." "They used to think that the problem was in the child or woman, so they would move the offender away from the child or woman." "They used to think that it was the sin of the flesh, not of the spirit." Some reasons given to us as to why an immoral/sexually abusive person was not removed from the work are that there were "many who thought highly of him, and would have objected to his removal" and that some behaviors reported "are things people commonly say and do" (kissing, touching, complimenting the looks) and are not wrong in and of themselves. Just the other day, I heard that the reason why they "can't" right a certain wrong (not CSA but adult sexual abuse/harassment related) is that "because most have heard one thing, if we were to go back and tell them something different, it would cause a lot of confusion." The "thing" most have heard is the lie that certain people were in the wrong, and the confusion would be caused by acknowledging that it was in fact the ministry that was in the wrong. It is obvious that the ministry does not apologize and has no intention of apologizing, because they are not really sorry for the victims and because all they care about is their own reputation even if it is based on deceit. How much better it would be for their own souls and for the fellowship if they had the humility and sincerity to apologize and correct the mistakes they've made. Maja, what came to mind when I read your post was: |
|
|
|
Post by dmmichgood on Nov 16, 2014 23:42:00 GMT -5
Peter was released from jail by an angle, wasn't he? Hey partaker, which angle do you think could be used to save the skins of those Australian overseers? admin
Wasn't it because he stated that he was a Roman citizen?
Sorry partaker, I couldn't resist that one.
Never mind that spelling trips up a lot of us at times. 
My husband got a real kick out of seeing it once mispelled on a tomb stone.
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 17, 2014 1:18:16 GMT -5
Having the data to charge, arrest, convict, and sentence may well be different than knowing about something. If the victims are not willing to come forward and press the charges there is little that can be done. And, as stated, if anyone is trying to impede justice why are they not themselves charged with that crime? You makes little sense to blame the workers with sweeping crimes under the rug when the members are doing the same thing. Was the evidence obtained from the 'wire' not sufficient for the target to be charged with a crime? A confession without a victim is pretty hard to prosecute. And, there is only obstruction of justice when someone comes forward to report it, which is the same situation again. It is all recorded, and the investigator has all this information. Plus, I am pretty sure that Task Force Argos has a lot of information recorded about how things have been handled in the past. With pending legislation, I would guess that there will be some changes mandated by law in regard to reporting and handling of such matters in the future. We have seen senior workers convicted in the US for failure to follow the law, and will probably see others in the future. One would think that senior Workers would want to deal with issues prior to being forced to by mandate from the authorities. I would think it is time for everyone to take responsibility for their in-actions/actions. It is clear that in the past these incidents were not handled as they should have been. It seems that this behavior continues to this day. But it is hard to place the blame for not reporting on any one group when no one did the right thing. It is time to move forward. No exceptions. Zero tolerance. No scape goats. |
|
|
|
Post by magpie on Nov 18, 2014 17:37:55 GMT -5
So we all think paedophile workers should take up so much wasted time? Yes reveal them,the wolves in sheeps clothing, protect our children and Grand children.............try this for a change..................................................... rlprayerbulletin.blogspot.com.au ...... elizabethkendal.blogspot.com.au ............
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 18, 2014 22:25:34 GMT -5
So we all think paedophile workers should take up so much wasted time? Yes reveal them,the wolves in sheeps clothing, protect our children and Grand children.............try this for a change..................................................... rlprayerbulletin.blogspot.com.au ...... elizabethkendal.blogspot.com.au ............ No, they should not take up this much time. They should have been reported to the authorities when the crime was committed/discovered. But the past is past and it was a different time. Workers abused people. It was covered up. It was wrong. Isn't it time to look in the other direction, forward, and, learning from the mistakes made in the past, move forward? BTW - Have any of the workers, charged with a crime or not, been diagnosed as pedophiles? |
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Nov 19, 2014 10:51:28 GMT -5
So we all think paedophile workers should take up so much wasted time? Yes reveal them,the wolves in sheeps clothing, protect our children and Grand children.............try this for a change..................................................... rlprayerbulletin.blogspot.com.au ...... elizabethkendal.blogspot.com.au ............ No, they should not take up this much time. They should have been reported to the authorities when the crime was committed/discovered. But the past is past and it was a different time. Workers abused people. It was covered up. It was wrong. Isn't it time to look in the other direction, forward, and, learning from the mistakes made in the past, move forward? BTW - Have any of the workers, charged with a crime or not, been diagnosed as pedophiles? The problem is that it's not 'past.' Abuse committed by workers is still covered up whenever possible. We are still waiting for the ministry to openly acknowledge their past and present mistakes and inform us of how they are going to prevent them from happening in the future. My husband and I spent a year trying to find out if there is willingness on the part of the ministry to be transparent and accountable to the church regarding the issue of abuse. As a result, we are not in this church any more. Other churches have guidelines and practices that give assurance that abuse is taken seriously and that it will be handled appropriately in the future. F&W's church does not. The "one true church" is not willing to deal with the issue of abuse except as forced to by secular laws and outside pressure. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 20, 2014 0:02:01 GMT -5
The problem is that it's not 'past.' Abuse committed by workers is still covered up whenever possible. The members, the ones who are the victims, still need to be educated and be willing to report the abuse to the authorities. If a person stands in the sun day after day and complains of a sunburn it is difficult to take them seriously. Why focus on the past? Why focus on the ministry? It is the membership, for the most part, that is being abused. As such, they have all the power. Report abuse to the authorities. You seem to be waiting around to hear a “Mea culpa!” from the workers. Will that really benefit anyone? It makes about as much sense as parents forcing their toddler to say "I'm sorry" to a playmate after they have deliberately thrown sand in their face. These guidelines are great as long as you assume that the criminals will follow the guidelines. There is no point in complicating the process. Report abuse to authorities outside the organization immediately. It is the membership that needs to take abuse seriously.Secular laws and outside pressure is what is at the bottom of all of the guidelines and rules put onto place. The essence of guidelines is reporting abuse to the authorities. |
|
|
|
Post by Scott Ross on Nov 20, 2014 1:25:05 GMT -5
The problem is that it's not 'past.' Abuse committed by workers is still covered up whenever possible. The members, the ones who are the victims, still need to be educated and be willing to report the abuse to the authorities. If a person stands in the sun day after day and complains of a sunburn it is difficult to take them seriously. Why focus on the past? Why focus on the ministry? It is the membership, for the most part, that is being abused. As such, they have all the power. Report abuse to the authorities. You seem to be waiting around to hear a “Mea culpa!” from the workers. Will that really benefit anyone? It makes about as much sense as parents forcing their toddler to say "I'm sorry" to a playmate after they have deliberately thrown sand in their face. These guidelines are great as long as you assume that the criminals will follow the guidelines. There is no point in complicating the process. Report abuse to authorities outside the organization immediately. It is the membership that needs to take abuse seriously.Secular laws and outside pressure is what is at the bottom of all of the guidelines and rules put onto place. The essence of guidelines is reporting abuse to the authorities. Yep. Having guidelines which the church publishes and follows is a great way to educate the members isn't it? If the members understand the stance of the church, then they too will understand their part in following prescribed guidelines. Why focus on the past? Why focus on the ministry? It is the membership, for the most part, that is being abused. As such, they have all the power. Report abuse to the authorities.
And that is the purpose of having guidelines in place. They clearly define the role of each member of the church, and what the church can expect in regard to appropriate behavior by the ministry. If the guidelines are not followed, then members clearly understand their role. The ministry needs to acknowledge openly that they have made mistakes in the past, explain clearly what they are currently doing to deal with any OLD and new issues, and THEN focus on current and any future issues in an open and honest manner. A no-brainer really. Any organization does this in order to move forward. If past mistakes aren't rectified, then how can progress be measured? You seem to be waiting around to hear a “Mea culpa!” from the workers. Will that really benefit anyone? It makes about as much sense as parents forcing their toddler to say "I'm sorry" to a playmate after they have deliberately thrown sand in their face.
Of course it would benefit everyone! Right now, the senior workers are held in low regard concerning their past actions. When a child acts up, they shouldn't be forced to say "I'm sorry". It needs to be explained to a child the inappropriateness of their action, the need to rectify their bad behavior, the consequences of not doing so, and the benefits from acknowledging their bad behavior. At that point, the child can reach a decision on their own whether a sincere and heartfelt "I'm sorry" would be appropriate. Interesting that you would use a misbehaving child as an example of how the senior workers should be treated.....  |
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Nov 20, 2014 1:36:45 GMT -5
So we all think paedophile workers should take up so much wasted time? Yes reveal them,the wolves in sheeps clothing, protect our children and Grand children.............try this for a change..................................................... rlprayerbulletin.blogspot.com.au ...... elizabethkendal.blogspot.com.au ............ No, they should not take up this much time. They should have been reported to the authorities when the crime was committed/discovered. But the past is past and it was a different time. Workers abused people. It was covered up. It was wrong. Isn't it time to look in the other direction, forward, and, learning from the mistakes made in the past, move forward? BTW - Have any of the workers, charged with a crime or not, been diagnosed as pedophiles? Rational, have you got any hairs left to split? |
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Nov 20, 2014 9:47:31 GMT -5
The problem is that it's not 'past.' Abuse committed by workers is still covered up whenever possible. The members, the ones who are the victims, still need to be educated and be willing to report the abuse to the authorities. If a person stands in the sun day after day and complains of a sunburn it is difficult to take them seriously. Why focus on the past? Why focus on the ministry? It is the membership, for the most part, that is being abused. As such, they have all the power. Report abuse to the authorities. You seem to be waiting around to hear a “Mea culpa!” from the workers. Will that really benefit anyone? It makes about as much sense as parents forcing their toddler to say "I'm sorry" to a playmate after they have deliberately thrown sand in their face. These guidelines are great as long as you assume that the criminals will follow the guidelines. There is no point in complicating the process. Report abuse to authorities outside the organization immediately. It is the membership that needs to take abuse seriously.Secular laws and outside pressure is what is at the bottom of all of the guidelines and rules put onto place. The essence of guidelines is reporting abuse to the authorities. Scott Ross' observation summes it all up: "Interesting that you would use a misbehaving child as an example of how the senior workers should be treated." When people are being hurt over and over again because of overseers' unwillingness to deal with abuse appropriately, of course they need to apologize and more. Well, I personally would need them to apologize and more in order to trust them. Most F&W do not, that's why things will not change any time soon. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 20, 2014 21:50:57 GMT -5
The members, the ones who are the victims, still need to be educated and be willing to report the abuse to the authorities.Yep. Having guidelines which the church publishes and follows is a great way to educate the members isn't it? If the members understand the stance of the church, then they too will understand their part in following prescribed guidelines. The stance of the church is not the issue. Child abuse is a criminal issue. This is over complicating the issue. The responsibility of everyone is to report abuse to the authorities. The role of everyone is to report abuse to the authorities. You cannot rectify abuse and mistakes made in the past. There is nothing to be gained by requiring the acknowledgement of past crimes. There is much to be gained in moving forward with all members understanding that abuse is a crime and crimes, without exception, are reported to the proper authorities. Perhaps you can explain the benefit of a person who has abused a child saying "I'm sorry". Again, the behavior cannot be rectified - it is over and done with. The offender knows what happened and the victim knows what happened. Is it possible that part of the reason for requesting acknowledgement of bad/criminal behavior is revenge? To humiliate before witnesses? If the workers are held in low esteem because of their behavior will that change if they do whatever it is you think they should do? What are the benefits, to the offender, of acknowledging their bad/criminal behavior? What are the benefits for a criminal, who has not been charged with a crime, to acknowledge that they committed a crime? Should a woman who had an affair in the past and who decided that it was wrong tell her husband? What is the benefit? I was pointing out the uselessness of thinking that an offender saying “Mea culpa!” is a solution to anything. Perhaps I should have asked if requiring an offender to wear sackcloth and ashes to express their remorse would solve anything? Or perhaps a hair shirt, just to stick with the biblical theme. Perhaps stocks and pillory. There is a reason why these are not in use today. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 20, 2014 21:58:59 GMT -5
No, they should not take up this much time. They should have been reported to the authorities when the crime was committed/discovered. But the past is past and it was a different time. Workers abused people. It was covered up. It was wrong. Isn't it time to look in the other direction, forward, and, learning from the mistakes made in the past, move forward? BTW - Have any of the workers, charged with a crime or not, been diagnosed as pedophiles? Rational, have you got any hairs left to split? The difference between the truth and some version of the truth has always been an issue with those who wish to ignore the details that do not support their 'big picture' view of things. In this case, the crime is child abuse. Pedophilia is classified as a mental illness. People get away with crimes if they plead they were mentally ill. Do you want to split hairs about the disposition of an offender based on an erroneous classification of the criminal? If you are going to accuse someone of a crime at the very least understand crime you are accusing them of. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 20, 2014 22:18:11 GMT -5
Scott Ross' observation summes it all up: "Interesting that you would use a misbehaving child as an example of how the senior workers should be treated." When people are being hurt over and over again because of overseers' unwillingness to deal with abuse appropriately, of course they need to apologize and more. That is one way to look at it. People are being hurt over and over again because of the victims unwillingness to report the criminals to the authorities. How many criminals that were reported to the authorities by the victims/guardians have abused over and over? What exactly is the 'more' in 'apologize and more'? IH apologized. Repented. ...and continued to abuse. The same for LW. LW was never charged with a crime because the victims chose not to come forward and it is doubtful that the state can make its case based on the testimony of the one person who did come forward. You would trust them is they said "I'm sorry."? Why? They are criminals. They abused children. Some are accused rapists. What, exactly, does an apology do for you? |
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Nov 21, 2014 2:17:08 GMT -5
That's small comfort for a victim. "Hey I was molested but he/she isn't a pedo". Pass me a Tui please!
|
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 21, 2014 7:22:08 GMT -5
That's small comfort for a victim. "Hey I was molested but he/she isn't a pedo"<br>Pass me a Tui please! I see little point in trying to comfort a victim by providing inaccurate information. Are you saying that distorting the circumstances will provide comfort to the victim? The goal should be to report accurate information, have the criminal charged and tried based on the actual/correct evidence, and removed from the possibility of harming others. |
|
|
|
Post by mdm on Nov 21, 2014 10:39:46 GMT -5
Scott Ross' observation summes it all up: "Interesting that you would use a misbehaving child as an example of how the senior workers should be treated." When people are being hurt over and over again because of overseers' unwillingness to deal with abuse appropriately, of course they need to apologize and more. That is one way to look at it. People are being hurt over and over again because of the victims unwillingness to report the criminals to the authorities. How many criminals that were reported to the authorities by the victims/guardians have abused over and over? What exactly is the 'more' in 'apologize and more'? IH apologized. Repented. ...and continued to abuse. The same for LW. LW was never charged with a crime because the victims chose not to come forward and it is doubtful that the state can make its case based on the testimony of the one person who did come forward. You would trust them is they said "I'm sorry."? Why? They are criminals. They abused children. Some are accused rapists. What, exactly, does an apology do for you? I am not asking for apology from IH's but from overseers who allowed them to remain in the work and told people to not report them. "More" means to apologize to victims and their advocates who have been told to "forgive and forget" abuse and if unwilling to do that were vilified and even excommunicated, and to let the fellowship know of their past mistakes and how they are going to address these issues in the future, as well as give clear permission to all to report abuse. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 21, 2014 13:16:34 GMT -5
I am not asking for apology from IH's but from overseers who allowed them to remain in the work and told people to not report them. What's the difference between the offender and the enabler? They both carry the same level of guilt. Perhaps the enabler even more so because there was the possibility of stopping the criminal. No one has yet explained how an apology will solve anything. It should be made clear that no one has to seek nor can anyone withhold permission to report a crime to the authorities. The people who can make changes are the members. They do not need permission. They only need to think for themselves. If people are willing to believe that they can be granted or denied eternal salvation by men who either abuse children or enable those who do then there is little hope they will ever do anything but support and protect those who they have set up as people to be worshiped. There are some who will never be able to think for themselves. Hopefully those who do think for themselves will act to protect the rest. |
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Nov 21, 2014 13:51:54 GMT -5
That's small comfort for a victim. "Hey I was molested but he/she isn't a pedo"<br>Pass me a Tui please! I see little point in trying to comfort a victim by providing inaccurate information. Are you saying that distorting the circumstances will provide comfort to the victim? The goal should be to report accurate information, have the criminal charged and tried based on the actual/correct evidence, and removed from the possibility of harming others. You are quite right about accurate information. However, offenders are charged with a crime such as rape or indecency. They are not charged with being a pedophile. The term is used to describe some people who commit offences of a sexual nature against minors. The Tui was to comfort me after reading more of your hair splitting posts. |
|
|
|
Post by rational on Nov 21, 2014 15:21:10 GMT -5
I see little point in trying to comfort a victim by providing inaccurate information. Are you saying that distorting the circumstances will provide comfort to the victim? The goal should be to report accurate information, have the criminal charged and tried based on the actual/correct evidence, and removed from the possibility of harming others. You are quite right about accurate information. However, offenders are charged with a crime such as rape or indecency. You are quite right. And then the defense brings up the point that the defendant is looking for leniency because they have been diagnosed with Code F65.4 from the ICD-10-CM. It is not their fault, they are officially mentally ill.No one said they were. The problem is how the defense can use such a diagnosis to mitigate their sentence.The term is neither a legal or criminal term. It is more frequently used to incorrectly describe people who commit sexual offenses against minors. If there is a need to tag people the terms hebephilia or ephebophilia are frequently more accurate. Everyone needs their fuzzy blanket from time to time. |
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Nov 21, 2014 21:42:07 GMT -5
Your pushing your luck calling a good beer a blanket!
|
|
|
|
Post by curlywurlysammagee on Nov 21, 2014 21:52:17 GMT -5
Your pushing your luck calling a good beer a blanket! Here's a reviewoo5 of what Pass me a Tui actually means. Not sure whether you will get it Tui is promoted through a humorous advertising campaign which uses stereotypes, heavy irony and the phrase Yeah Right. These advertisements have caused some controversy, such as a billboard in Wellington stating 'Camilla for Queen? Yeah Right' and one stating 'Aucklanders are people too. Yeah Right'. Others to have made the news include "Dad's new husband seems nice - Yeah right" (after New Zealand legalised same-sex marriage);[5] "I nvr txt whl drvn - yeah right";[6] "When Winston says no, he means no - Yeah right";[7] "Captain, I know a short cut to the port – Yeah right" (after MV Rena ran aground near Tauranga);[8] "Our father in Heaven, Tamaki be your name – Yeah right";[9] "She clearly married Dotcom for his body – Yeah right".[10] In 2010 a church was threatened with legal action after parodying the Tui billboard campaign with the slogan, "Atheists have nothing to worry about - Yeah Right".[11] I like the last one and you may too. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 22, 2014 0:35:55 GMT -5
I see little point in trying to comfort a victim by providing inaccurate information. Are you saying that distorting the circumstances will provide comfort to the victim? The goal should be to report accurate information, have the criminal charged and tried based on the actual/correct evidence, and removed from the possibility of harming others. You are quite right about accurate information. However, offenders are charged with a crime such as rape or indecency. They are not charged with being a pedophile. The term is used to describe some people who commit offences of a sexual nature against minors. The Tui was to comfort me after reading more of your hair splitting posts. you need more than a tui girl |
|
