Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
@pete wrote:
I have heard the name Gwendoline on here before under shall we say questionable circumstances :-k
Well I don’t recall this.
For the record, I simply invented the name and location to make a point. I could just have easily called her Lulubelle Snodgrass of Acacia Avenue, Somewhereville – simply chose that name at random to avoid any possible suggestion of a connection with a member here.
@pete wrote:
Ok devils advocate only was she actually raped or did she just claim that to escape Saudi law hopefully ?
This is the point isn’t it. We don’t have all the ‘facts’ from the Daily Fascist – only their highly emotive (and I suspect biased) account of the general circumstances.
But my point is that this ‘story’ wouldn’t be so inflammatory were the woman simply convicted of adultery etc etc. What makes it work as a “Media Shock Horror” type story is the addition of her claim to have been raped.
It is precisely this element (the Media possibly mis-reporting) that makes me wonder if all the facts, as presented to us, are in fact true.
@reason wrote:
@forumhostpb wrote:
@reason wrote:
Ay the end of the day and i don’t give shyte what anyone says,the woman done nowt wrong and the sick bastads that did it want stringin up :evil:
Sorry to have to, once again, play the Devil’s advocate. This entire matter is emotive because of the allegation (made by her) that she was raped (by four men).
If there was no rape allegation and it was simply that she had gone out after dark; got into a car driven by a man that she didn’t know (contrary to local law) ; spent the night having intercourse with him and / or his mates (again contrary to local law); chances are that very few eyebrows would be raised if the Saudi Courts punished her.
I’m sure she wasn’t the first to be punished for this “crime” and she won’t be the last either. It certainly wouldn’t have made the headlines in the “Daily Fascist” without the rape allegation being a part of the equation.
The whole rape thing came about when it transpired that she was pregnant. so what evidence is there that she was actually raped? As far as Saudi law is concerned – none whatsoever. Simply the unsupported word of a female and an allegation made some long time after the alleged offences took place.
You forgot to mention that she was found guilty of adultery although she was unmarried :shock:
Sorry, I thought that this was completely self-evident – what with her being both pregnant and unmarried. Indeed the central thrust of the Media story was that she was being imprisoned and lashed following her conviction for adultery.
I apologise if I wrongly assumed that you realised this.
@reason wrote:
Pardon me for being cynical,but it seems to me that you use third parties opinions to express your own beliefs.
Be as cynical as you like – I usually am – but i don’t see the point that you are trying to make.
If I want to express my own beliefs on a matter, believe me I am more than capable of doing so.
@reason wrote:
Ay the end of the day and i don’t give shyte what anyone says,the woman done nowt wrong and the sick bastads that did it want stringin up :evil:
Sorry to have to, once again, play the Devil’s advocate. This entire matter is emotive because of the allegation (made by her) that she was raped (by four men).
If there was no rape allegation and it was simply that she had gone out after dark; got into a car driven by a man that she didn’t know (contrary to local law) ; spent the night having intercourse with him and / or his mates (again contrary to local law); chances are that very few eyebrows would be raised if the Saudi Courts punished her.
I’m sure she wasn’t the first to be punished for this “crime” and she won’t be the last either. It certainly wouldn’t have made the headlines in the “Daily Fascist” without the rape allegation being a part of the equation.
The whole rape thing came about when it transpired that she was pregnant. so what evidence is there that she was actually raped? As far as Saudi law is concerned – none whatsoever. Simply the unsupported word of a female and an allegation made some long time after the alleged offences took place.
I think that it’s just slightly possible you’ve missed my point:
@reason wrote:
The lass obviously hasn’t got an IQ much higher than that of Goldfish – so can you blame her for wanting to make a few quid out of being in the public eye ? I for one would do the same,so hey call me mercenary :shock: …… and me thinks the very same people that are having a go at her on here for doing it would probably do the same themselves.
I don’t see the connection between her being as thick as two short planks and her making a public spectacle of herself – whether for money or not. Many people are as thick as she so obviously is, some even more so, but nevertheless they somehow manage to behave with a modicum of dignity.
@reason wrote:
I think the harms way comment is kak to put it blunt,so what she’s had a few fellas,the way ya talkin you’d think she’d shagged her way through half the male population of Britain.
Actually I wasn’t referring to her lifestyle choices at all. The comment was aimed at those who, for example are heavy drug users or chronic alchoholics. Some of them put themselves in harms way and become terminally ill as a result of their choices. In point of fact I don’t believe she did anything that millions of other women wouldn’t do, however in her particular case it all went wrong for her – through no fault of her own.
@reason wrote:
As for the readers of the Times and such like,well most of the readers of that sort of paper are so far up their own ar/ses anyway I’m sure they actually take delight in seeing the downfall of a lass that made a few honest quid from being herself,summat they would never dare do in public,they’d rather stab ya in the back if they knew a bit of insider dealing was up for grabs,fine upstanding folk they are all of em i’m sure….. all hiding in their many guises.
I just love the way you both damn and write off a substantial section of the population in one fell (and highly prejudiced) swoop. Just because a sector of the population is capable of reading a whole paragraph, without sub headers and pictures, doesn’t mean that they are incapable of feeling some sympathy for Ms. Goody’s predicament. Nor does it imply that they would necessarily “take delight in seeing her downfall”.
My inner cynic tells me that if you’re single then Valentine’s Day is an opportunity to lay the groundwork for a ‘relationship’ ….. if you’re married, you don’t need to.
That said, I shall be presenting the usual annual Valentine’s Day card to Mrs PB so as to avoid several months of silent recrimination.
She on the other hand will probably forget – on the basis that women only fart once you’ve married them.
Will, I don’t think that anybody “deserves” an awful illness – although some people certainly put themselves in harm’s way, perhaps due to their lifestyle choices.
It strikes me with Ms Goody that she was for a long time the subject of a public vilification campaign, generally in the tabloid Media. You don’t see a whole page (or even a small column) devoted to her in The Times, The Daily Telegraph; The Observer; etc etc. However The Sun; The Mirror; and so on, slaver and gloat with ever increasing glee at every misfortune that befalls her.
They seem to revel in her obvious stupidity; in the spectacle she makes of herself with every public utterance and so on. They refer to her ugly and coarse features; her dreadful accent; her apparent lack of any sort of education; her seeming inability to behave with any sort of decorum either in public or in private etc.
Does she “deserve” this – probably not. Does she secretly revel in all the attention she gets – probably she does. Does she “deserve” to have terminal cancer – no she doesn’t. Will she die of it – apparently she will.
The bottom line here seems to me to be that we are only watching this “car crash” out of a sense of awful fascination, waiting to see what on earth she will get up to next, rather than with any real sense of compassion for a terminally ill woman.
If it was, say, Mrs Gwendoline Fitzherbert-Snodgrass of Chipping Sodbury aged 45 with a husband and three children – nobody would really notice (other than her family and friends of course).
Unfortunately (for her), watching Jade Goody is like watching a car crash. She exemplifies awfullness.
This has to be a fake story ….. because if it was an Irish pub (presumably with an Irish barman) then he would have prefaced his reply with “Sure an Begorrah ……” wouldn’t he?
Then of course it could have been an /Irish pub in, say, Cricklewood Broadway – in which case the barman would have added “innit” to his reply.
The plain fact is that it wasn’t a lion with a twin at all – it was an unemployed actor (they’re always unemployed) dressed up as a lion, trying to cadge free drinks from a simpleton.
Anyway lions can’t speak English (or Polish for that matter).
