Printable View
I watched some of this guys academy award winning performance today and one of the things he went on about is how brothels are supposed to keep their video surveillance for 6 years. Is this true? If it is, it stinks of big brother. From now on, every time I visit an establishment I make sure I have a cap on and look at the ground.
And then they wont let you in. What you worried about? it's legal, do you do fuck up shit at brothels? if not, then would have no interest in showing your pics to anyone, media or your misses. What stinks is you seem to be planning on cheating on your wife for the next 6 years..
you are rigth mancolover
I watched Thomson and seriously, anyone who believes his story has a rock in their brain
Video surveillance i suppose i can understand, although 6 years seems excessive
Having to show / leave details of drivers license is an invasion of privacy and does not sit well with me!
This CT is gonna bring down the labour government if it still has any leg left, any politician who used prostitutes will never recover especially using union funded credit card......WTF
CCTV footage can be stored on those trillion GB external drive so can be kept forever.....haha
Cheers
I actually don't believe him, however unions have done much worse and stitched up and destroyed people, and usually they just go quietly because they don't have a Govt with a balance of power issue. If you know unions and the shit they're capable of, kneecappings/murder, you'd also know this is plausible.
It's irrelevant whether you believe him or not. Our system of government relies on the basic principle of the separation of powers. The parliament is not a court. The one person in all of this who has endangered democracy and transparency is Tony Abbott. His behaviour should be referred to the Priveleges Committee for deliberately undermining the tenet of our system. Just imagine a society in which parliamentarians prosecute, judge and convict their political opponets. Oh, we have an example: China. If there is anyone who is not fit to sit in the Australian parliament it is Abbott.
+1. After Libs win next election, they will go down as the most hated Govt ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by 426
LOL at any anyone preaching about infidelity on a forum about hookers.Quote:
Originally Posted by mancolover
Are you fucking for real ? http://msnsmileys.net/r/smileys/ROFL/Rofl_4b.gif
Its called parliamentary democracy, deal with it.
Abbot is doing his job by subjecting craig thomson's obviously corrupt behaviour to closer scrutiny
Quote:
Originally Posted by 426
Actually what Abbott is doing is digging up dirt in Thomson and Slipper's personal lives in an attempt to force an election due to the fragile numbers in the house.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie123
It's dirty politics by the mad monk.
How is abbott digging up dirt?? Thomsons speech yesterday was in response to the release of the fairwork report which was initiated by the labor government itself!
Abbott has done his best to keep this issue in the media spotlight, and so he should. All the dirty politics has been from the government's side, who turned a blind eye to thomsons corrupt behavior until it was no longer convenient to do so.
Let's not be so naive to think that the Thomson investigation occurred organically and without political involvement.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie123
Kathy Jackson (the union whilstleblower) has caused the union movement untold damage and brought the Federal Government to the brink of collapse. One vital piece of information that is not widely known about her is that her partner is a man named Michael Lawler.
Who is Michael Lawler?
For starters, Michael Lawler is friends with a man named Tony Abbott. Apparently, the two of them socialise regularly. Conveniently, Tony Abbott is also the leader of the political party making so much ground out of the claims Michael’s partner is making.
Smell a rat ?
The moral of the story is don't use your credit card when you go to a brothel.
Sounds far-fetched, i suppose we'll see
Quote:
Originally Posted by Flyerr221
No it's not bro. How about this transcript from the 7.30 Report about her legal bills. They are pro bono (meaning that they are free) AND it so happens that it's the same Legal firm representing both her and the bloke suing Slipper. Also pro bono.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie123
Smell a rat yet ?
Quote:
CHRIS UHLMANN: You mentioned the HR Nicholls society, who is saying your legal bills?
KATHY JACKSON: I'm paying my legal bills. Um ... I've got a $40,000 debt already. That the union won't pay for. And Brett Shields for Reid Zafp are doing all the work pro-bono and so is Stewart Ward.
CHRIS UHLMANN: Are you still using Harmers workplace lawyers?
KATHY JACKSON: Yes I am.
CHRIS UHLMANN: Why?
KATHY JACKSON: Well, cause I went to every Labor law firm in town and they couldn't represent me, they're all conflicted.
CHRIS UHLMANN: And are they doing that work pro-bono?
KATHY JACKSON: Yes they are.
CHRIS UHLMANN: Are you aware that it's the same law firm that's representing James Ashby the man who has accused the Speaker of sexual harassment.
KATHY JACKSON: I am now.
CHRIS UHLMANN: Doesn't it seem odd to you?
KATHY JACKSON: No, well, why... it seems odd to me that Maurice Blackburn is representing Peter Slipper when he they are an employment law firm, why isn't that strange?
Yeah i saw that.
None of this suggests that the allegations themselves are not true, or excuses the labor government for failing to act sooner.
Quite right. However none of this would have occurred without the coalition underwriting the legal bills.Quote:
Originally Posted by Charlie123
As Tony Abbott once said to Tony Windsor "Tony, I would do anything for this job. The only thing I wouldn't do is sell my arse - but I'd have to give it serious thought..."
We all know politics is dirty Labour would do the same thing if they were in the same situation.