ChatterBank7 mins ago
Has our George got a point?
44 Answers
http://
I never thought a 'far left' MP such as George Galloway would come out in support of such a person as Julian Assange.
I never thought a 'far left' MP such as George Galloway would come out in support of such a person as Julian Assange.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
No, your George does not have a point - except to underline his credentials as an idiot who likes to say controversial, but stupid things for his own agradaisement.
If a woman has sex with a man willingly, that is consensual. If she wakes to find him having sex with her again, it is clearly not, and that is not within my definition of 'bad manners' as though he sneezed without using a hankie!
Galloway does no favours for our gender with the neanderthal statement - rape and bad manners are hardly confuseable, even by a congenital self-serving idiot.
If a woman has sex with a man willingly, that is consensual. If she wakes to find him having sex with her again, it is clearly not, and that is not within my definition of 'bad manners' as though he sneezed without using a hankie!
Galloway does no favours for our gender with the neanderthal statement - rape and bad manners are hardly confuseable, even by a congenital self-serving idiot.
I don't think we have all the information here - there are some rather suspect things arround these allegations.
Rape is a very emotive subject and people are very prone to jumping to conclusions and filling in the gaps from their own imaginations.
Note for example that the Swedes intially issue a warrent for his arrest and then withdraw it the next day saying "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape,"
There is also the timing - this all happened a few months after Assange said it had video footage of a massacre of civilians in Afghanistan by the US military which they were preparing to release.
Normally the identity of rape victims is a very sensitive subject in this case I'd suggest their background might turn out to be pertinant.
I can quite see this as a piece of blackmail contrived to stop publication of something the US didn't want published.
The background of the women might add weight to or refute that hypothesis.
Rape is a very emotive subject and people are very prone to jumping to conclusions and filling in the gaps from their own imaginations.
Note for example that the Swedes intially issue a warrent for his arrest and then withdraw it the next day saying "I don't think there is reason to suspect that he has committed rape,"
There is also the timing - this all happened a few months after Assange said it had video footage of a massacre of civilians in Afghanistan by the US military which they were preparing to release.
Normally the identity of rape victims is a very sensitive subject in this case I'd suggest their background might turn out to be pertinant.
I can quite see this as a piece of blackmail contrived to stop publication of something the US didn't want published.
The background of the women might add weight to or refute that hypothesis.
jake - the background of the women is of absoutely no relavence what so ever, unless you are heading into the notion that the women may have bee sex workers, in which case, the roles still apply.
A sex worker made to have sex against her will has still been raped.
Would you argue that a boxer cannot be assaulted because he hits people, and is hit for a living, therefore he is 'in the game' to use slimy George's defencelss logic?
A sex worker made to have sex against her will has still been raped.
Would you argue that a boxer cannot be assaulted because he hits people, and is hit for a living, therefore he is 'in the game' to use slimy George's defencelss logic?
Galloway has not been in the papers recently so I suppose he had to jump on the bandwagon, as I understand it Assange is being charged with rape and sexual assault. The rape because he did not seek consent for the act and assault because he did not wear a rubber.
The law in Sweden is not the same as British law and Assange has explored all avenues to stop being sent to Sweden to answer charges.
All this smoke is to keep the story in the press and prevent his deportation which imo cannot come soon enough.
The law in Sweden is not the same as British law and Assange has explored all avenues to stop being sent to Sweden to answer charges.
All this smoke is to keep the story in the press and prevent his deportation which imo cannot come soon enough.
This is kind of the whole point about why the Swedish authorities are so keen to extradite him and charge him. Dismissing what happened as "bad sexual etiquette" shows just how potentially serious crimes are trivialised by mostly ill-informed speculation.
George Galloway might be a canny political operator, but I wouldn't rely on him for guidance on anything except perhaps what the best brand of cigar might be........
George Galloway might be a canny political operator, but I wouldn't rely on him for guidance on anything except perhaps what the best brand of cigar might be........
I think Andy, your imagination is letting you down.
If it were to come out that say the women had been associated with American consular goings on - perhaps had been regular visitors to the US Embassy you think that would have "absolutely no bearing" on this?
You are misinterpreting my answer and then criticising me for it!
But at the heart of this is a familiar and unresolved issue
A lot of people like to stand on their moral highground and say things like "Rape is always Rape!"
Yes that is true but it is not the point
The point is (even if Assange is guilty of this) you can't compare the severity of this to the sort of rape where a masked stranger grabs a woman in a park and rapes her at knife point.
Here's a challange for you - find me a case in English law where a man has been convicted in similar circumstances
Lets presume the facts of the case are undisputed (and I don't think we know that)
I think that there's a fair argument that the fact that they had consensual sex just before meant that he had at least reasonable grounds to presume that the consent was ongoing at least while they were in bed.
I'm not saying that was right - I'm saying it's a defensible argument
You add that to the behavior afterwards - She threw him a party the next day For Funks Sake!
And I think this is an exceptional possibly unique case (And one that smells odd to me!)
But prove me wrong - find me a similar prosecution
If it were to come out that say the women had been associated with American consular goings on - perhaps had been regular visitors to the US Embassy you think that would have "absolutely no bearing" on this?
You are misinterpreting my answer and then criticising me for it!
But at the heart of this is a familiar and unresolved issue
A lot of people like to stand on their moral highground and say things like "Rape is always Rape!"
Yes that is true but it is not the point
The point is (even if Assange is guilty of this) you can't compare the severity of this to the sort of rape where a masked stranger grabs a woman in a park and rapes her at knife point.
Here's a challange for you - find me a case in English law where a man has been convicted in similar circumstances
Lets presume the facts of the case are undisputed (and I don't think we know that)
I think that there's a fair argument that the fact that they had consensual sex just before meant that he had at least reasonable grounds to presume that the consent was ongoing at least while they were in bed.
I'm not saying that was right - I'm saying it's a defensible argument
You add that to the behavior afterwards - She threw him a party the next day For Funks Sake!
And I think this is an exceptional possibly unique case (And one that smells odd to me!)
But prove me wrong - find me a similar prosecution
jake - I do stand corrected and apologise for my misinterperetation of your point.
However, I think we are on dodgy moral grounds if we start inferring that consent to sex is offered by a woman being in bed with a man, even if sex has already taken place. To my mind, if a woman wishes to say 'No' before sex, or even during, then that is the time for the man to stop. As I understand it, JA was engaging in intercourse without protection with the woman when she woke up. If she is not awake, she is not consenting, and inactive compliance should not be interpereted as consent.
As to the remainder of the facts, we will have to wait and see.
In respect of your request that I locate a similar prosection - given the lamentably small number of women who even report rape, much less expose themselves to the ordeal of a trial, I am afraid I am unable to comply on this occasion.
However, I think we are on dodgy moral grounds if we start inferring that consent to sex is offered by a woman being in bed with a man, even if sex has already taken place. To my mind, if a woman wishes to say 'No' before sex, or even during, then that is the time for the man to stop. As I understand it, JA was engaging in intercourse without protection with the woman when she woke up. If she is not awake, she is not consenting, and inactive compliance should not be interpereted as consent.
As to the remainder of the facts, we will have to wait and see.
In respect of your request that I locate a similar prosection - given the lamentably small number of women who even report rape, much less expose themselves to the ordeal of a trial, I am afraid I am unable to comply on this occasion.
Even the leader of George's own Respect Party says he's wrong:
http://
>> Salma Yaqoob, Respect Party leader, said that while there were "political issues" around the Assange case, this should not "diminish" the serious nature of the allegations against him.
>> "Let me be clear, as a politician and as a woman, rape occurs when a woman has not consented to sex," she said in a statement on her website.
>> "George Galloway's comments on what constitutes rape are deeply disappointing and wrong."
http://
>> Salma Yaqoob, Respect Party leader, said that while there were "political issues" around the Assange case, this should not "diminish" the serious nature of the allegations against him.
>> "Let me be clear, as a politician and as a woman, rape occurs when a woman has not consented to sex," she said in a statement on her website.
>> "George Galloway's comments on what constitutes rape are deeply disappointing and wrong."
George Osborn is a creep of the first order. A completely odious self-seeking head case. If JA knows anything about George he'll know he won't be worth listening to. JA is really in the doodah with America and I believe that this is the reason for this whole charade. Why are we always the soft touch?
