Hey yall
Yesterday I posted a story that generated a fair bit of debate / research but the mods deleted it for inaccuracies in my headline
there was a lot of good info in the comments thought so go to https://voat.co/v/pizzagate/2662840 to see if you missed it
Anyway, the upshot of that clarifying research is this
back in March, resulting from a 2017 case where a judge 'accepted' an argument that an 11 yr old was 'mature enough ' to consent to sexual intercourse with a 28 yr old, the French govt / judiciary decided AGAINST revising the extant law which states that a judge has discretion to do this, and reduce charges to a sexual misdemeanor. Advocates were hoping they would put in place a minimum age upon whence Rape would be the compulsory official charge, but they were denied
so technically, in France, a Judge could rule a 3 year old 'knew what they were doing' and find a pedo guilty of only a misdemeanor charge, not a felony equivalent rape charge. They had an opportunity to fix this. They failed the children - and France's future.
NeverGiveUp ago
The pedoblackmail system has been established in every country.
Here's a good documentary about what will happen if you fight against it. Sadly only in france and german subtitles.
Bad news my people...U have to go in the underground.
https://youtu.be/9-2v4a-RGfI
carmencita ago
I will be deeply saddened if parents and activists do not go into the streets. This must be heavily protested. If not, they too have failed the children and their future.
heygeorge ago
Technically, a judge would very likely be unable to do what you proposed, and (hopefully) this has never happened. It’s bad enough that an 11YO was considered able to consent.
I don’t want to pick on you, but I have a low tolerance for hyperbole, especially when the facts are more than enough to plead a case.
MolochHunter ago
well, in defense of how I wrote it - and if you've learnt anything in your time on voat/pizzagate: sure you can argue 'no judge would ever in good faith construe a 3 yr old to be 'mature'
but that presumes good faith
the point is that if you have a Judge who is part of the pedostocracy in a court case where the defendant is also an asset of the pedostocracy, the current law as it stand gives Agency to that corruption
heygeorge ago
I am following you here, but again I don’t know of recent cases like this. I don’t know how the appeals process works in a French court. Yet the hyperbole doesn’t help; it only hurts by creating deeper division over would’ve/could’ve.
That being said: This certainly merits further digging.
MolochHunter ago
I dont understand your concerns of hyperbole
a 28 yr old fucked an 11 yr old, the mother desperately wanted justice, she got none. On account of this rule. You're being pensive about 'possibilities' when its already an Actuality
EffYouJohnPodesta ago
It's the same concept as when the cops here decide not to do something to a rapist / domestic abuser / whatever because they don't want to. All they have to do is find some legal "excuse' not to. Judges are the same. if you don't think so then you have zero experience dealing with courts or law enforcement and you're naive.
heygeorge ago
Yes, we are on the same page. There is no need to bring whatif’s to this and extrapolate to a younger age. From what I’ve read, the rape you’re speaking of is what spurred the idea to change the legislation.
What I’m saying is that the raw facts are fucked up. We do not need to head down the slippery slope argument.
MolochHunter ago
dude. The whole point of the post is that the current laws as they stand ALLOW FOR a slide down that slippery slope
a slope that in the current era is greased by:
globalists
islamification
SJW degeneracy 'moral relativity'
pedophile normalisation agenda in high gear
pop culture cashing in on ever more age inappropriately licentious content
show me one contemporary countervailing cultural trend that is INCREASING the sexual security of children in Western society?
heygeorge ago
You are correct in your trend prediction. I am saying that the cause is best served without resorting to slippery slope whenever possible, especially when the current reality is enough to illustrate the point: Remove argument. Remove hyperbole. State fact removed from editorialization.
As an aside, and I’ve been asking this question for years: Name a ‘right-wing’ news source who reports without editorialization. The best I’ve been recommended is mintpress. They still profess from on high and print disinfo, but less so. Yet I never see those links on Voat.
Vindicator ago
This is SO MUCH more effective in persuading people who aren't on board. But people have seen it so infrequently, they just don't understand how effective it can be compared to editorializing. Someone should do a thread showing the difference. Maybe we should have an award flair for posts presented editorial free?
On the other hand, it is also true that Voat is one of the last places people can come to say what they think about the appalling bullshit that has overtaken the world. I suppose the ideal would be: straight reporting in the post body, interpretation and editorializing in the Comments, even for the author.
Imagine how much more hard-hitting our stuff would be! The shills would lose their minds.
heygeorge ago
This is where I’m coming from. Facts in the subject line. Link supported facts in the description. Comments? Run amok!
Obviously this would be not something to enforce at the mod level, but it would certainly make the place shine when mixed with the ‘let’s research x’ posts.
Dig4Dutroux-Holland ago
Your reply is kind of why OP used the phrasing “technically”, I suppose. Not to he a dick but I believe the hyperbole was evident. Good day!
heygeorge ago
Thank you for coming out of hibernation to clarify what someone else meant.
You are correct. There is evident hyperbole in OP. In my mind this does not make you ‘a dick’.