Forum

 
  Back to OzPolitic.com   Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
  Forum Home Album HelpSearch Recent Rules LoginRegister  
 

Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print
question for longy (Read 3623 times)
Johnsmith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 4716
Gender: male
Re: question for longy
Reply #15 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 9:37am
 
bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 9:35am:
Quote:
It must be embararssing for you to support a party which has such a long and appalling record of pedophilia, embezzlement and corruption.

Coming from a guy who supports the church?
The biggest paedophile sex club in history, embezzlement and corruption capital of the world.


God spoke to them ....
Back to top
 

When politicians offer you something for nothing, or something that sounds too good to be true, it's always worth taking a careful second look.
(Malcolm Turncoat)
 
IP Logged
 
bobbythefap1
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 7026
Listen now to the rain
Re: question for longy
Reply #16 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 9:38am
 
Johnsmith wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 9:37am:
bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 9:35am:
Quote:
It must be embararssing for you to support a party which has such a long and appalling record of pedophilia, embezzlement and corruption.

Coming from a guy who supports the church?
The biggest paedophile sex club in history, embezzlement and corruption capital of the world.


God spoke to them ....
The best part is he actually believes that.

Back to top
 

A day without sunshine is like night.
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: question for longy
Reply #17 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 9:46am
 
Johnsmith wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 8:52am:
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 8:31am:
Johnsmith wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 8:18am:
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 8:01am:
Johnsmith wrote on Apr 5th, 2012 at 8:53pm:
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 5th, 2012 at 7:28pm:
Im not sure what I'm supposed to reply to. An untested and unproven allegation is hardly the same as a conviction. PLus my point is about liberal or labor child sex offenders no any other segment of society.

So while I am sure this was mean to be some kind of attack on the Libs but it came across as an

EPIC FAIL


A bit of a double standard haven't you longstupidtwat .... as far as I'm aware allegations against Thompson are untested and unproven and yet you and some of your other lynch mob mates are out there baying for blood .....gotta love the hypocrisy .....


the discussion was about liberal versus labor sex offenders. There are dozens on the labor side and zero on the liberal side - and that is just on the basis of convictions. Try and stay on topic, wil you?


the response for when you have no response ... a bit of a cop out isn't it?... so your statement 'An untested and unproven allegation is hardly the same as a conviction' only applies to sex offenders?  even more hypocrisy .... your on a roll longstupidtwat, keep up the good work .....


sigh... 'context is king' in literary interpretaion and you shoudl try it sometime. the debate at hand was a COMPARATIVE one and I used convictions because the data is freely available and indisputable( except to skippy). An untested and unproven allegation is quite inferior to a conviction, but that does not mean it lacks any merit. There was a SA Labor MP whose child sex allegations remain untested because he offed himself before court but few doubt his guilt - even in the ALP. If the argument were about convicted felons then Thomson would not ne part of the discussion. But if the discussion is about dodgy pollies and those who shoudl be charged then he is very much part of the mix.

It must be embararssing for you to support a party which has such a long and appalling record of pedophilia, embezzlement and corruption.


You hypocrisy has no limits .... no one in the liberal party has been guilty of any of those? Is Palmer donating to the LNP in exchange for favourable outcomes any less corrupt? just because he hasn't een charged with anything doesn't make him any less guilty of corruption, get over yourself ... all parties are subject to their members, and personally i think that all politicians are scum, therefore more likely to embezell or corrupt ... as far as pedohiles go, I don't have time for any of them and for you to try and link them in any way to party politics is shameful .... thats low even for a liberal


well if you want to play the blame game then dont come to the fight with no weapons. the FACTS are that dozens of labor MPs and officials have done time in jail for major crimes including child sex crimes. that is indisputable and the ration is massively one-sided towards labor. You can argue the reson but you cannot dispute the facts.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
bobbythefap1
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 7026
Listen now to the rain
Re: question for longy
Reply #18 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 9:57am
 
Longy, why do you support a pedo sex club?
Back to top
 

A day without sunshine is like night.
 
IP Logged
 
The Valley Boy
Ex Member


Re: question for longy
Reply #19 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 10:04am
 
a bit more longy

Quote:
The New South Wales Premier has jumped to the defence of his Attorney-General, Greg Smith, who has come under fire over comments he allegedly made about a woman who claims she was sexually abused by a priest when she was a child.

On Wednesday the ABC'S 7.30 program aired allegations that Mr Smith told a different Catholic priest that the woman was only complaining to try to get $1 million from the church.

No charges have been laid and in a statement the Premier, Barry O'Farrell, says he has been assured the Attorney-General did not influence legal authorities regarding the matter.

"The Premier has been assured that neither the Attorney-General nor his office has been involved in the consideration by the state's legal authorities of allegations concerning Father Finian Egan," the statement said.

"Mr O'Farrell has also been assured that this matter has been and will continue to be handled independently by the relevant legal authorities."

Mr Smith says he cannot recall making the comments, but Opposition Leader John Robertson believes he has serious questions to answer.

"Mr Smith has not denied making those comments," he said.

"He needs to give a public explanation firstly why it was appropriate that he met with a priest from the church about that matter while it is being considered by the DPP and how he thinks it is appropriate that he should be making those sorts of comments."

Mr Smith and the accused priest, Father Finian Egan, go back some years, and when Mr Smith was elected to Parliament five years ago he cited Father Egan's influence in his maiden speech to Parliament.

"At St Gerard's, Father Finian Egan charmed us with his Irish wit and his pastoral devotion to his flock," he said in the speech.

Damien Tudehope, now the Attorney-General's chief of staff, also knows Father Egan well, attending the priest's church and, as a solicitor, defending him against sexual abuse allegations.

The ABC does not suggest that either Mr Smith or Mr Tudehope have interfered with the potential prosecution involving Father Egan, but critics argue there is an appearance of a potential conflict which the A-G should address.

'Inappropriate comments'

The latest allegations centre on emails between a priest Mr Smith spoke to and one of Father Egan's alleged victims, Nikki Wells.

Last year Ms Wells spoke to another Catholic priest about her frustration at the delay of a police investigation into Father Egan.

That priest, who the ABC has agreed not to name, says he then met Mr Smith last July.

After that meeting the priest detailed his version of what was said in an email to Ms Wells which the ABC has obtained.

In the email the priest says Mr Smith told him he thought Ms Wells was trying to take money from the church.

"I was with Greg Smith the other day and I raised your case with him. He commented that 'you were just trying to get $1m from the church'," the priest said in the email.

Ms Wells says the conversation was completely inappropriate.

"I was completely horrified that the chief lawmaker in the state could comment on an open criminal case for a start," she said.

"Secondly, that he'd pass judgment on someone he doesn't even know and just disbelief that the whole matter that our Attorney-General could speak so publicly about me and my case and a criminal matter.

The ABC asked Mr Smith if the priest's email description of the meeting and what was said was correct, and in response the Attorney-General issued a statement saying he "recalls no such conversation".

"The Attorney-General recalls no such conversation and notes that 7.30 has failed to provide any detail which would help his recall," the statement said.

"He says he would never suggest any victim of sexual abuse was simply motivated by a desire to claim a financial payout."



http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-04-05/ofarrell-defends-a-g-over-alleged-abuse-co...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
Johnsmith
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 4716
Gender: male
Re: question for longy
Reply #20 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 10:07am
 
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 9:46am:
Johnsmith wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 8:52am:
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 8:31am:
Johnsmith wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 8:18am:
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 8:01am:
Johnsmith wrote on Apr 5th, 2012 at 8:53pm:
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 5th, 2012 at 7:28pm:
Im not sure what I'm supposed to reply to. An untested and unproven allegation is hardly the same as a conviction. PLus my point is about liberal or labor child sex offenders no any other segment of society.

So while I am sure this was mean to be some kind of attack on the Libs but it came across as an

EPIC FAIL


A bit of a double standard haven't you longstupidtwat .... as far as I'm aware allegations against Thompson are untested and unproven and yet you and some of your other lynch mob mates are out there baying for blood .....gotta love the hypocrisy .....


the discussion was about liberal versus labor sex offenders. There are dozens on the labor side and zero on the liberal side - and that is just on the basis of convictions. Try and stay on topic, wil you?


the response for when you have no response ... a bit of a cop out isn't it?... so your statement 'An untested and unproven allegation is hardly the same as a conviction' only applies to sex offenders?  even more hypocrisy .... your on a roll longstupidtwat, keep up the good work .....


sigh... 'context is king' in literary interpretaion and you shoudl try it sometime. the debate at hand was a COMPARATIVE one and I used convictions because the data is freely available and indisputable( except to skippy). An untested and unproven allegation is quite inferior to a conviction, but that does not mean it lacks any merit. There was a SA Labor MP whose child sex allegations remain untested because he offed himself before court but few doubt his guilt - even in the ALP. If the argument were about convicted felons then Thomson would not ne part of the discussion. But if the discussion is about dodgy pollies and those who shoudl be charged then he is very much part of the mix.

It must be embararssing for you to support a party which has such a long and appalling record of pedophilia, embezzlement and corruption.


You hypocrisy has no limits .... no one in the liberal party has been guilty of any of those? Is Palmer donating to the LNP in exchange for favourable outcomes any less corrupt? just because he hasn't een charged with anything doesn't make him any less guilty of corruption, get over yourself ... all parties are subject to their members, and personally i think that all politicians are scum, therefore more likely to embezell or corrupt ... as far as pedohiles go, I don't have time for any of them and for you to try and link them in any way to party politics is shameful .... thats low even for a liberal


well if you want to play the blame game then dont come to the fight with no weapons. the FACTS are that dozens of labor MPs and officials have done time in jail for major crimes including child sex crimes. that is indisputable and the ration is massively one-sided towards labor. You can argue the reson but you cannot dispute the facts.


A bit of embellishment isn't it longstupidtwat .... the FACTS are that TWO former labor MPs have been convicted of child sex offences ... where are the dozens you talk about? Was that one of the other voices in your head again? I suppose if each of the six different voices in your head tells you two, you add them together and get a dozen ... I wasn't playing any blame game .. I was merely pointing out the hypocrisy and double standard of you making a distinction between an untested and unproven allegation, and a conviction (and rightly so) .... when you are so blatantly determined to condemn Thompson .. . I don't care about the pedophiles... defend your hypocrisy if you can or don't,
Back to top
 

When politicians offer you something for nothing, or something that sounds too good to be true, it's always worth taking a careful second look.
(Malcolm Turncoat)
 
IP Logged
 
The Valley Boy
Ex Member


Re: question for longy
Reply #21 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 10:08am
 
The Attorney General as the chief Law Maker of the state should not make any comment on any cases being investigated by the police or any cases before the court, no if or no buts.
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: question for longy
Reply #22 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 11:07am
 
Quote:
The Attorney General as the chief Law Maker of the state should not make any comment on any cases being investigated by the police or any cases before the court, no if or no buts.


actually he is the cheif law ENFORCER - not law MAKER. BIG difference.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
bobbythefap1
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 7026
Listen now to the rain
Re: question for longy
Reply #23 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 11:10am
 
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 11:07am:
Quote:
The Attorney General as the chief Law Maker of the state should not make any comment on any cases being investigated by the police or any cases before the court, no if or no buts.


actually he is the cheif law ENFORCER - not law MAKER. BIG difference.

Right but under the queens authority he has the power to stop laws from being made and impose any law the queen wants, so this is more then just an enforcer
Back to top
 

A day without sunshine is like night.
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: question for longy
Reply #24 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 11:54am
 
bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 11:10am:
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 11:07am:
Quote:
The Attorney General as the chief Law Maker of the state should not make any comment on any cases being investigated by the police or any cases before the court, no if or no buts.


actually he is the cheif law ENFORCER - not law MAKER. BIG difference.

Right but under the queens authority he has the power to stop laws from being made and impose any law the queen wants, so this is more then just an enforcer


what rot. prure drivel the AG does not make laws. he is no more than the minister responsib;e for the courts and justice system. He can make no law of his own nor stop any. only parliament can do that.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
FRED.
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 3698
Re: question for longy
Reply #25 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 12:57pm
 
bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 11:10am:
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 11:07am:
Quote:
The Attorney General as the chief Law Maker of the state should not make any comment on any cases being investigated by the police or any cases before the court, no if or no buts.


actually he is the cheif law ENFORCER - not law MAKER. BIG difference.

Right but under the queens authority he has the power to stop laws from being made and impose any law the queen wants, so this is more then just an enforcer

Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin Grin MORON
Back to top
 
FRED.bell58@yahoo.com.au FRED.bell58@yahoo.com.au  
IP Logged
 
bobbythefap1
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 7026
Listen now to the rain
Re: question for longy
Reply #26 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 1:11pm
 
Sorry thought use were talking about the governer general
Back to top
 

A day without sunshine is like night.
 
IP Logged
 
The Valley Boy
Ex Member


Re: question for longy
Reply #27 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 1:44pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 11:07am:
Quote:
The Attorney General as the chief Law Maker of the state should not make any comment on any cases being investigated by the police or any cases before the court, no if or no buts.


actually he is the cheif law ENFORCER - not law MAKER. BIG difference.



you are wrong longy the Attorney general is the chief law maker

Do you know what happens to legislation before it goes to Parliamant. Who adviced Cabinet on Legislation if it is within the Constitution. who does the Governor General get advice from if she/he has any doubt on any legislation.

read this and you might learn something

Quote:
The Office of Attorney-General


The Attorney-General at the Commonwealth and State level occupies in effect two offices: a common law office of Attorney-General and a ministerial office. The incumbent is therefore subject to at least three potentially conflicting responsibilities: as Attorney-General, as a Minister of the Crown and as a
Member of Parliament. The duties and responsibilities of the two latter positions are well known. Less clearly understood are the duties and responsibilities of the
common law office of Attorney-General.

The duties and responsibilities of the Attorney-General derive from both the executive prerogative power at common law and from statute. The most significant prerogative powers include the power to initiate and terminate criminal prosecutions, advise on the grant of a pardon, grant immunities from prosecution, issue a fiat in relator actions, appear as amicus curiae or contradictor, institute proceedings for contempt of court, apply for judicial review, intervene in any
proceedings involving the interpretation of the Commonwealth Constitution, represent the Crown in any legal proceedings, and provide legal advice to the
Parliament, Cabinet and the Executive Council. Hence, the Attorney is often described as the ‘Chief Law Officer of the Crown’. Other law officers assist the Attorney in the performance of these duties: principally, the Solicitor-General, the Director of Prosecutions and the Crown Solicitor. Additionally, the Attorney-
General is the nominal head of the Bar having precedence over all Queen's Counsel and Senior Counsel, advises on judicial appointments and has defended the judiciary from political attacks.



http://epublications.bond.edu.au/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1120&context=blr&se...
Back to top
 
 
IP Logged
 
longweekend58
Gold Member
*****
Offline


Australian Politics

Posts: 45675
Gender: male
Re: question for longy
Reply #28 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 1:59pm
 
bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 1:11pm:
Sorry thought use were talking about the governer general


even then you are wrong. the GG cannot MAKE laws and his power to not declare laws is not used.
Back to top
 

AUSSIE: "Speaking for myself, I could not care less about 298 human beings having their life snuffed out in a nano-second, or what impact that loss has on Members of their family, their parents..."
 
IP Logged
 
bobbythefap1
Gold Member
*****
Offline



Posts: 7026
Listen now to the rain
Re: question for longy
Reply #29 - Apr 6th, 2012 at 3:20pm
 
longweekend58 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 1:59pm:
bobbythefap1 wrote on Apr 6th, 2012 at 1:11pm:
Sorry thought use were talking about the governer general


even then you are wrong. the GG cannot MAKE laws and his power to not declare laws is not used.

He can on behalf of the queen
and on behalf of the queen he can stop laws
Back to top
 

A day without sunshine is like night.
 
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 2 3 4 
Send Topic Print