Similar Posts

10 Comments

  1. Look here! Golriz was convicted of shoplifting and Jago was convicted of sexual assault, but these crimes were committed by entirely different people.
    Golriz is a woman, she is brown skinned, foreign, middle eastern young and idealistic as well as being a smart arse lawyer. NOT WHITE
    So she was actually convicted of shoplifting and being brown skinned, foreign, middle eastern young and idealistic and a smart arse lawyer( in the court of redneck opinion ).
    She stole stuff worth money which in the court of property and business owners is shocking.
    Jago is a man, (not a woman)he is a member of a right wing political party worshipped by all right thinking property and business owners. he is a solid businessman( not a smart arse female lawyer), AND HE DID NOT STEAL PROPERTY. WHITEE MAN.
    He only supplied liquor to some young fellers and got up them will they were lying around boozed – I mean who has not done that? All a bit of good fun really and nothing worth money was taken.
    I mean, sure, the young fellers were a bit miffed when Jago rogered them but as all who went grammar schools and private schools know these things are par for the course. This business about being scarred for life is all a bit thick. I mean I got over being bummed by my woodwork teacher in only about ten years.
    So Jago was sentenced as a surf lifesaver( kiss of life anyone?)solid businessman( not a smart arse female lawyer), white man not some slippery middle eastern female with no respect for property.
    Hope that clears that up. Now off to offer a few fortified fruit drinks to the school boy mowing my lawn.

  2. Surely during the last election Jago had not been found guilty so how could anyone have talked about it . My understanding is even the 2 people involved could not talk about it.
    Funny how Act are slated because of Jago being involved with them when other parties are not held to the same level .
    I am not a great supporter of Act but those that support them have a valid opinion.

    1. I would’ve liked to know before the election if a party who was campaigning on being “tough on crime” knowingly had a rapist as their president and didn’t immediately go to the police about it, but if you’re cool with ignoring that sort of thing Trevor, that seems like a you problem.

  3. As noted previously, it’s ironic that David Seymour’s school lunch program is a such a disaster when his party president was known for offering meat and two veg.

  4. When the matter is emotional then sticking to the facts and putting them plainly makes all the impact that it is possible to make I think. Otherwise the whole thing just veers sideways away from the main issue. That’s a really well thought out point which I must remember myself. We all need to at times.

Comments are closed.