Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

N&P: Discuss governments, nations, politics and recent related news here.

Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital

User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by The Romulan Republic »

https://globalnews.ca/news/6605199/albe ... erg-image/
An Alberta woman says she has complained to the RCMP about a decal bearing an energy services company’s logo below a cartoon depicting what appears to be the sexual assault of 17-year-old Swedish climate activist Greta Thunberg.

The sticker has a black-and-white drawing of a female figure’s bare back with hands pulling on her braided pigtails. The name “Greta” is written below. Under the drawing is the logo of X-Site Energy Services.

The company’s general manager, Doug Sparrow, did not return messages seeking comment from The Canadian Press, but has denied having anything to do with the stickers to other media outlets.

Michelle Narang of Rocky Mountain House, Alta., said a friend who works in the oil and gas industry texted her a photo of the decal and told her an X-Site employee was handing them out.

Narang, who has two teenage daughters, said as soon as she saw the image, she sat down in a chair and cried.

“The visual is jarring,” Narang said Thursday. “It hurt. It hurt on so many levels.”

Narang said she called the RCMP to report the decal as child pornography.

RCMP Cpl. Ron Bumbry said officers are aware of the image and “will be following up.”

A torrent of online outrage was sparked when Narang posted the image on social media Wednesday night.

Sparrow told Calgary radio station CFFR that he has since received hundreds of complaints, but his company wasn’t involved.

“It’s not from X-Site or any employee. Someone has done this. That’s all I know,” he told the radio station.

Sparrow’s voicemail at X-Site was full on Thursday and an email to him bounced back as undeliverable. Messages left with other employees and an email sent through X-Site’s website were not immediately returned. Calls to 24-hour dispatch numbers went to voicemail.

A sales contact listed on X-Site’s website said he no longer works with the company, but that Sparrow had told him earlier Thursday that the stickers did not come from Sparrow.

Alberta’s minister for the status of women, Leela Aheer, called the graphic “completely deplorable, unacceptable and degrading.”

“This is not what our province stands for. Whoever is responsible should be ashamed and apologize immediately. I stand with Albertans against this horrendous image,” she wrote on Twitter.

Premier Jason Kenney tweeted in response: “Thank-you for denouncing this odious image and the message it sends.”

Thunberg has made headlines for her passionate pleas to world leaders to take tougher action on cutting greenhouse gas emissions and for inspiring large climate marches around the world.

She joined thousands in a march through downtown Edmonton in October. Oil-and-gas industry supporters showed up, but they were vastly outnumbered by the climate marchers.

Narang said she was reluctant to share the Greta image because she didn’t want to give the energy sector another black eye as environmental opposition stalls development in an economically vital industry.

“In Alberta, especially, we are fighting so hard for an industry that means so much to us and to have that sort of sabotage from within – you can’t do that.”

Narang said she has been heartened by industry workers speaking out against the Greta image.

“People have this picture of an oil-and-gas worker and what they think the industry is and what they think the industry represents – and this is not it.”

Our Morning Update and Evening Update newsletters are written by Globe editors, giving you a concise summary of the day’s most important headlines. Sign up today.
The Global News article includes some more details, including this:
She didn’t feel the sticker could be ignored so she said she called X-Site Energy Services general manager Doug Sparrow to ask him if they had made the stickers.

“His response when I asked him if he was aware that there are stickers circulating with his logo depicting the rape of Greta Thunberg. He said yes, that he is aware,” Narang said.

“And I said, ‘So you are fine with an image that your company condones the rape of children?’ And he said, ‘She is not a child, she is 17.'”
However, I have elected not to link to it because said article includes a (partially blurred) image of the sticker, and I do not wish to be a party to distributing it in any form.

Note that Canadian law defines child pornography to include any visual depiction of someone under 18 engaged in sexual activity.

Anyone displaying, manufacturing, or distributing that sticker ought to face child pornography charges. In my opinion, terrorism charges would not be out of line, either, given the implied threat, and obvious political motives.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
User avatar
B5B7
Jedi Knight
Posts: 782
Joined: 2005-10-22 02:02am
Location: Perth Western Australia
Contact:

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by B5B7 »

I would think that even if a person depicted was fully adult (18+ or 21+), if without their consent they were depicted being sexually assaulted or indeed subject to any other illegal act, that a sticker doing so would be illegal.
TVWP: "Janeway says archly, "Sometimes it's the female of the species that initiates mating." Is the female of the species trying to initiate mating now? Janeway accepts Paris's apology and tells him she's putting him in for a commendation. The salamander sex was that good."
"Not bad - for a human"-Bishop to Ripley
GALACTIC DOMINATION Empire Board Game visit link below:
GALACTIC DOMINATION
User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4396
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by Jub »

I think the legal issue here will be proving that this Greta is meant to depict the real-life Greta Thunberg. That could be tricky even with the comments made by Doug 'I should keep my mouth shut and lawyer up' Sparrow.
User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4260
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by loomer »

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 01:34am Anyone displaying, manufacturing, or distributing that sticker ought to face child pornography charges. In my opinion, terrorism charges would not be out of line, either, given the implied threat, and obvious political motives.
On what basis do you think the laws prohibiting terrorism offences can be stretched to meet this incident? Does Canadian law allow for the enhanced powers of anti-terrorism legislation to be used so liberally?
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by The Romulan Republic »

loomer wrote: 2020-02-28 05:06am
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 01:34am Anyone displaying, manufacturing, or distributing that sticker ought to face child pornography charges. In my opinion, terrorism charges would not be out of line, either, given the implied threat, and obvious political motives.
On what basis do you think the laws prohibiting terrorism offences can be stretched to meet this incident? Does Canadian law allow for the enhanced powers of anti-terrorism legislation to be used so liberally?
No, I don't think it would. But there are times I wish it did. Like when fossil fuel scum who are literally destroying the entire planetary ecosystem for profit distribute child porn threatening sexual violence against teenage activists who dare to stand up to them.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4260
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by loomer »

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 05:17am
loomer wrote: 2020-02-28 05:06am
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 01:34am Anyone displaying, manufacturing, or distributing that sticker ought to face child pornography charges. In my opinion, terrorism charges would not be out of line, either, given the implied threat, and obvious political motives.
On what basis do you think the laws prohibiting terrorism offences can be stretched to meet this incident? Does Canadian law allow for the enhanced powers of anti-terrorism legislation to be used so liberally?
No, I don't think it would. But there are times I wish it did. Like when fossil fuel scum who are literally destroying the entire planetary ecosystem for profit distribute child porn threatening sexual violence against teenage activists who dare to stand up to them.
In that case, terrorism charges would be grossly inappropriate and an abuse of the system. Don't go around wishing for the improper application of extremely serious laws, no matter how morally repugnant the opposition may be.
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A
User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4396
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by Jub »

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 05:17am
loomer wrote: 2020-02-28 05:06am
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 01:34am Anyone displaying, manufacturing, or distributing that sticker ought to face child pornography charges. In my opinion, terrorism charges would not be out of line, either, given the implied threat, and obvious political motives.
On what basis do you think the laws prohibiting terrorism offences can be stretched to meet this incident? Does Canadian law allow for the enhanced powers of anti-terrorism legislation to be used so liberally?
No, I don't think it would. But there are times I wish it did. Like when fossil fuel scum who are literally destroying the entire planetary ecosystem for profit distribute child porn threatening sexual violence against teenage activists who dare to stand up to them.
Isn't this the same sort of heavy-handed behaviour that you call the other side of the political aisle fascists for using?
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by The Romulan Republic »

Jub wrote: 2020-02-28 05:39am
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 05:17am
loomer wrote: 2020-02-28 05:06am
On what basis do you think the laws prohibiting terrorism offences can be stretched to meet this incident? Does Canadian law allow for the enhanced powers of anti-terrorism legislation to be used so liberally?
No, I don't think it would. But there are times I wish it did. Like when fossil fuel scum who are literally destroying the entire planetary ecosystem for profit distribute child porn threatening sexual violence against teenage activists who dare to stand up to them.
Isn't this the same sort of heavy-handed behaviour that you call the other side of the political aisle fascists for using?
Well, there is the little difference where I say it because they distribute child porn to target teenage activists, and they toss terrorism/treason accusations at anyone who disagrees with them and/or is guilty of living while black/brown/gay. But I'll concede that it was an ill-considered comment on my part, made out of anger at the fact that, again, they distributed child porn to target teenage activists.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4260
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by loomer »

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 05:51am
Jub wrote: 2020-02-28 05:39am
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 05:17am

No, I don't think it would. But there are times I wish it did. Like when fossil fuel scum who are literally destroying the entire planetary ecosystem for profit distribute child porn threatening sexual violence against teenage activists who dare to stand up to them.
Isn't this the same sort of heavy-handed behaviour that you call the other side of the political aisle fascists for using?
Well, there is the little difference where I say it because they distribute child porn to target teenage activists, and they toss terrorism/treason accusations at anyone who disagrees with them and/or is guilty of living while black/brown/gay. But I'll concede that it was an ill-considered comment on my part, made out of anger at the fact that, again, they distributed child porn to target teenage activists.
They distributed an incredibly distasteful sticker that does not, in fact, constitute child pornography from my understanding. While I am obviously not a Canadian lawyer, my recollection is that Canadian law requires it to be explicit or to advocate/counsel engaging in such conduct. Is that not the case?
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by The Romulan Republic »

loomer wrote: 2020-02-28 06:04am
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 05:51am
Jub wrote: 2020-02-28 05:39am

Isn't this the same sort of heavy-handed behaviour that you call the other side of the political aisle fascists for using?
Well, there is the little difference where I say it because they distribute child porn to target teenage activists, and they toss terrorism/treason accusations at anyone who disagrees with them and/or is guilty of living while black/brown/gay. But I'll concede that it was an ill-considered comment on my part, made out of anger at the fact that, again, they distributed child porn to target teenage activists.
They distributed an incredibly distasteful sticker that does not, in fact, constitute child pornography from my understanding. While I am obviously not a Canadian lawyer, my recollection is that Canadian law requires it to be explicit or to advocate/counsel engaging in such conduct. Is that not the case?
Not a lawyer, but...

I'm going off a Huffington Post article which included the following:
Under the Criminal Code, child pornography is any visual representation of a person under the age of 18 engaged or depicted to be engaged in a sexual activity.
I won't link to it because, again, it included a (blurred) photo of the image. However, some quick Googling turned up this:

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/act ... 163.1.html

I've taken the liberty of underlying what seemed to me to be the most relevant sections:
Definition of child pornography

163.1 (1) In this section, child pornography means

(a) a photographic, film, video or other visual representation, whether or not it was made by electronic or mechanical means,

(i) that shows a person who is or is depicted as being under the age of eighteen years and is engaged in or is depicted as engaged in explicit sexual activity,
or

(ii) the dominant characteristic of which is the depiction, for a sexual purpose, of a sexual organ or the anal region of a person under the age of eighteen years;

(b) any written material, visual representation or audio recording that advocates or counsels sexual activity with a person under the age of eighteen years that would be an offence under this Act;

(c) any written material whose dominant characteristic is the description, for a sexual purpose, of sexual activity with a person under the age of eighteen years that would be an offence under this Act; or

(d) any audio recording that has as its dominant characteristic the description, presentation or representation, for a sexual purpose, of sexual activity with a person under the age of eighteen years that would be an offence under this Act.

Marginal note:Making child pornography

(2) Every person who makes, prints, publishes or possesses for the purpose of publication any child pornography is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 14 years and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of one year.

Marginal note:Distribution, etc. of child pornography

(3) Every person who transmits, makes available, distributes, sells, advertises, imports, exports or possesses for the purpose of transmission, making available, distribution, sale, advertising or exportation any child pornography is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 14 years and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of one year.

Marginal note:Possession of child pornography

(4) Every person who possesses any child pornography is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of one year; or

(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years less a day and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of six months.

Marginal note:Accessing child pornography

(4.1) Every person who accesses any child pornography is guilty of

(a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than 10 years and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of one year; or

(b) an offence punishable on summary conviction and is liable to imprisonment for a term of not more than two years less a day and to a minimum punishment of imprisonment for a term of six months.


Marginal note:Interpretation

(4.2) For the purposes of subsection (4.1), a person accesses child pornography who knowingly causes child pornography to be viewed by, or transmitted to, himself or herself.

Marginal note:Aggravating factor

(4.3) If a person is convicted of an offence under this section, the court that imposes the sentence shall consider as an aggravating factor the fact that the person committed the offence with intent to make a profit.

Marginal note:Defence

(5) It is not a defence to a charge under subsection (2) in respect of a visual representation that the accused believed that a person shown in the representation that is alleged to constitute child pornography was or was depicted as being eighteen years of age or more unless the accused took all reasonable steps to ascertain the age of that person and took all reasonable steps to ensure that, where the person was eighteen years of age or more, the representation did not depict that person as being under the age of eighteen years.

Marginal note:Defence

(6) No person shall be convicted of an offence under this section if the act that is alleged to constitute the offence

(a) has a legitimate purpose related to the administration of justice or to science, medicine, education or art; and

(b) does not pose an undue risk of harm to persons under the age of eighteen years.


Marginal note:Question of law

(7) For greater certainty, for the purposes of this section, it is a question of law whether any written material, visual representation or audio recording advocates or counsels sexual activity with a person under the age of eighteen years that would be an offence under this Act.
The first bit would seem to confirm the definition I quoted from HP.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4260
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by loomer »

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 06:20am
loomer wrote: 2020-02-28 06:04am
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 05:51am

Well, there is the little difference where I say it because they distribute child porn to target teenage activists, and they toss terrorism/treason accusations at anyone who disagrees with them and/or is guilty of living while black/brown/gay. But I'll concede that it was an ill-considered comment on my part, made out of anger at the fact that, again, they distributed child porn to target teenage activists.
They distributed an incredibly distasteful sticker that does not, in fact, constitute child pornography from my understanding. While I am obviously not a Canadian lawyer, my recollection is that Canadian law requires it to be explicit or to advocate/counsel engaging in such conduct. Is that not the case?
Not a lawyer, but...

I'm going off a Huffington Post article which included the following:
Under the Criminal Code, child pornography is any visual representation of a person under the age of 18 engaged or depicted to be engaged in a sexual activity.
I won't link to it because, again, it included a (blurred) photo of the image. However, some quick Googling turned up this:

https://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/act ... 163.1.html

I've taken the liberty of underlying what seemed to me to be the most relevant sections:
SNIP law
The image involved is not an explicit depiction of sexual activity. It's highly implied, but not explicit, which is kind of a huge deal when the law involved specifies explicit sexual activity. It also refrains from depicting sexual organs or the anus. I take it you haven't seen the sticker yourself?
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by The Romulan Republic »

I've seen the blurred or partially-blurred images in a couple of articles, and read their description of it. I didn't Google the uncensored image, no.

I suppose a defense lawyer would argue "not explicit", but... come on. The intent is really, very, horrifyingly clear. I suppose it comes down to how Canadian law defines the word "explicit", which I don't see elaborated on here?

If its not legally child porn, its not child porn in the same, very technical way that Republicans talking about "Second Amendment remedies" isn't incitement of violence. They said just enough that their intent is painfully clear while leaving just enough ambiguity that they can pretend its something else, even when we all know what it really is.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4260
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by loomer »

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 06:36am I've seen the blurred or partially-blurred images in a couple of articles, and read their description of it. I didn't Google the uncensored image, no.

I suppose a defense lawyer would argue "not explicit", but... come on. The intent is really, very, horrifyingly clear. I suppose it comes down to how Canadian law defines the word "explicit", which I don't see elaborated on here?

If its not legally child porn, its not child porn in the same, very technical way that Republicans talking about "Second Amendment remedies" isn't incitement of violence. They said just enough that their intent is painfully clear while leaving just enough ambiguity that they can pretend its something else, even when we all know what it really is.
Case law has established explicit sexual activity as being "acts at the extreme end of the spectrum of sexual activity – acts involving nudity or intimate sexual activity represented in a graphic and unambiguous fashion." The sticker in question does not contain a 'graphic and unambiguous' depiction of intimate sexual activity or nudity, unless the Canadian courts define 'graphic and unambiguous' very loosely. Arguing that something that falls outside the boundaries of a law should be treated as within it is something to do very carefully, especially if you're proposing it without the appropriate statutory reforms. 'Come on' is not a strong legal argument.
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A
User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4396
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by Jub »

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 06:36am I've seen the blurred or partially-blurred images in a couple of articles, and read their description of it. I didn't Google the uncensored image, no.

I suppose a defense lawyer would argue "not explicit", but... come on. The intent is really, very, horrifyingly clear. I suppose it comes down to how Canadian law defines the word "explicit", which I don't see elaborated on here?

If its not legally child porn, its not child porn in the same, very technical way that Republicans talking about "Second Amendment remedies" isn't incitement of violence. They said just enough that their intent is painfully clear while leaving just enough ambiguity that they can pretend its something else, even when we all know what it really is.
You mean you haven't even seen the image in question and yet feel qualified to call for charges of both child pornography and terrorism because of it... :wanker: :wanker: :wanker:
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by The Romulan Republic »

I'll note, since this board has a compulsive need to oppose absolutely anything because I say it, that I am far from the only person who felt that this could qualify as child pornography. Which is why I cited multiple sources, and the reasoning they gave. Others are free to dispute them, if you feel the need to give people who distribute images of children being raped the benefit of the doubt.

Ultimately, of course, it would be a question for police, lawyers and the courts to settle.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4260
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by loomer »

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 07:49am I'll note, since this board has a compulsive need to oppose absolutely anything because I say it, that I am far from the only person who felt that this could qualify as child pornography. Which is why I cited multiple sources, and the reasoning they gave. Others are free to dispute them, if you feel the need to give people who distribute images of children being raped the benefit of the doubt.

Ultimately, of course, it would be a question for police, lawyers and the courts to settle.
Yes, TRR, but you're the only one I've seen who's called for terrorism charges. Also, why on earth would other people making the same apparently erroneous suggestion mean that it can't be critiqued when you make it?

Now, as for 'giving people who distribute images of children being raped the benefit of the doubt', no such thing has occurred. I have explained why, from what I can tell, the anti-child pornography laws do not apply to this matter, and questioned whether it could constitute a terrorism offence. This is not giving them the benefit of doubt, but examining whether what people are saying should be done can be done or if an alternative route needs to be found. You're doing that thing again where you try and escalate the rhetoric through - ironic, in this instance - unseemly implications, which is a habit of yours. Are you aware of it?
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by The Romulan Republic »

loomer wrote: 2020-02-28 08:02am
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 07:49am I'll note, since this board has a compulsive need to oppose absolutely anything because I say it, that I am far from the only person who felt that this could qualify as child pornography. Which is why I cited multiple sources, and the reasoning they gave. Others are free to dispute them, if you feel the need to give people who distribute images of children being raped the benefit of the doubt.

Ultimately, of course, it would be a question for police, lawyers and the courts to settle.
Yes, TRR, but you're the only one I've seen who's called for terrorism charges. Also, why on earth would other people making the same apparently erroneous suggestion mean that it can't be critiqued when you make it?

Now, as for 'giving people who distribute images of children being raped the benefit of the doubt', no such thing has occurred. I have explained why, from what I can tell, the anti-child pornography laws do not apply to this matter, and questioned whether it could constitute a terrorism offence. This is not giving them the benefit of doubt, but examining whether what people are saying should be done can be done or if an alternative route needs to be found. You're doing that thing again where you try and escalate the rhetoric through - ironic, in this instance - unseemly implications, which is a habit of yours. Are you aware of it?
You have every right to dispute my position and argue an alternative point of view, backed by evidence. Still, I can't help but feel a bit disgusted that this board seems collectively to care more about lecturing me on my rhetoric than about the actual topic of the thread. Again.

I'd also like you to clarify this remark:
You're doing that thing again where you try to escalate the rhetoric through ironic, in this instance -unseemly implications
In what way are my "implications" ironic?
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4260
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by loomer »

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 08:24am
loomer wrote: 2020-02-28 08:02am
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 07:49am I'll note, since this board has a compulsive need to oppose absolutely anything because I say it, that I am far from the only person who felt that this could qualify as child pornography. Which is why I cited multiple sources, and the reasoning they gave. Others are free to dispute them, if you feel the need to give people who distribute images of children being raped the benefit of the doubt.

Ultimately, of course, it would be a question for police, lawyers and the courts to settle.
Yes, TRR, but you're the only one I've seen who's called for terrorism charges. Also, why on earth would other people making the same apparently erroneous suggestion mean that it can't be critiqued when you make it?

Now, as for 'giving people who distribute images of children being raped the benefit of the doubt', no such thing has occurred. I have explained why, from what I can tell, the anti-child pornography laws do not apply to this matter, and questioned whether it could constitute a terrorism offence. This is not giving them the benefit of doubt, but examining whether what people are saying should be done can be done or if an alternative route needs to be found. You're doing that thing again where you try and escalate the rhetoric through - ironic, in this instance - unseemly implications, which is a habit of yours. Are you aware of it?
You have every right to dispute my position and argue an alternative point of view, backed by evidence. Still, I can't help but feel a bit disgusted that this board seems collectively to care more about lecturing me on my rhetoric than about the actual topic of the thread. Again.
Open your eyes, dude. Have I not been very clear that I find the sticker reprehensible and objectionable?
I'd also like you to clarify this remark:
You're doing that thing again where you try to escalate the rhetoric through ironic, in this instance -unseemly implications
In what way are my "implications" ironic?
...it's a thread about a sticker with a highly unseemly implication that you object to and you're attempting to create an unseemly implication of your own. Seriously, dude? You're also editing my comments in a way that isn't just trimming for brevity, which is, uh, weird.
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by The Romulan Republic »

loomer wrote: 2020-02-28 08:27am
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 08:24am
loomer wrote: 2020-02-28 08:02am

Yes, TRR, but you're the only one I've seen who's called for terrorism charges. Also, why on earth would other people making the same apparently erroneous suggestion mean that it can't be critiqued when you make it?

Now, as for 'giving people who distribute images of children being raped the benefit of the doubt', no such thing has occurred. I have explained why, from what I can tell, the anti-child pornography laws do not apply to this matter, and questioned whether it could constitute a terrorism offence. This is not giving them the benefit of doubt, but examining whether what people are saying should be done can be done or if an alternative route needs to be found. You're doing that thing again where you try and escalate the rhetoric through - ironic, in this instance - unseemly implications, which is a habit of yours. Are you aware of it?
You have every right to dispute my position and argue an alternative point of view, backed by evidence. Still, I can't help but feel a bit disgusted that this board seems collectively to care more about lecturing me on my rhetoric than about the actual topic of the thread. Again.
Open your eyes, dude. Have I not been very clear that I find the sticker reprehensible and objectionable?
I'd also like you to clarify this remark:
You're doing that thing again where you try to escalate the rhetoric through ironic, in this instance -unseemly implications
In what way are my "implications" ironic?
...it's a thread about a sticker with a highly unseemly implication that you object to and you're attempting to create an unseemly implication of your own. Seriously, dude?
You're going to try to equate my comments in this thread with a company distributing imagery of a 17 year old girl getting raped?

Fuck you. Just, fuck you. No apologies, no compromise, ever. As far as I'm concerned, you are now less than a smear of dried piss in my estimation.

People want to know why I tend to take everything on this board so personally? Maybe because, as this thread makes clear, people on this board have such a pathological hatred for me that they literally equate my posts with images of child rape.
You're also editing my comments in a way that isn't just trimming for brevity, which is, uh, weird.
I quoted your posts in full. Then I re-quoted a specific section of a post that I wanted to draw attention to, and when quoting it the second time, accidentally omitted one dash, and typed the word "to" instead of "and". The former is a typo, the latter sloppy proofreading. Your insinuation that I am deliberately misrepresenting your comments is ridiculous, but knowing this board, I fully expect it will be taken at face value by everyone, including the mods.

Edit: What happened here is simple. I posted a thread. I made a couple exaggerated comments out of (understandable) anger given the subject matter. I subsequently retracted them where they were proven to be incorrect.

You and Jub, but mostly you, refused to let it go, because you saw an opportunity to derail yet another thread into "Calling out TRR circlejerk number 10,976", and proceeded accordingly, including suggesting that my posts are equivalent to images of children being raped, and false insinuations of dishonesty. And I know exactly where it goes from here: I take all the blame, because I have a combative personality (I admit it), and I sometimes engage in hyperbole, and therefore I am, in this board's eyes, deemed fair game for any smear or lie or vendetta whatsoever, and any accusation against me will be taken at face value.
Last edited by The Romulan Republic on 2020-02-28 08:51am, edited 1 time in total.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4260
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by loomer »

The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 08:43am
loomer wrote: 2020-02-28 08:27am
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 08:24am

You have every right to dispute my position and argue an alternative point of view, backed by evidence. Still, I can't help but feel a bit disgusted that this board seems collectively to care more about lecturing me on my rhetoric than about the actual topic of the thread. Again.
Open your eyes, dude. Have I not been very clear that I find the sticker reprehensible and objectionable?
I'd also like you to clarify this remark:
In what way are my "implications" ironic?
...it's a thread about a sticker with a highly unseemly implication that you object to and you're attempting to create an unseemly implication of your own. Seriously, dude?
You're going to try to equate my comments in this thread with a company distributing imagery of a 17 year old girl getting raped?

Fuck you. Just, fuck you. No apologies, no compromise, ever. As far as I'm concerned, you are now less than a smear of dried piss in my estimation.

People want to know why I tend to take everything on this board so personally? Maybe because, as this thread makes clear, people on this board have such a pathological hatred for me that they literally equate my posts with images of child rape.
No one is doing that, you lunatic. There is an irony that you attempted to create an unseemly insinuation of your own, and commenting on it is not the same thing as equating your comments to the sticker. Quit your ridiculous overreactions, they're incredibly tiresome to try and deal with. First you make an unseemly implication of your own - that I am in some way 'giving the benefit of the doubt' to the people involved - and then you throw a crybaby shitfit over my commenting on your rhetoric.

Grow the fuck up and stop trying to sling mud if you can't handle people noticing what you're doing.
You're also editing my comments in a way that isn't just trimming for brevity, which is, uh, weird.
I quoted your posts in full. Then I re-quoted a specific section of a post that I wanted to draw attention to, and when quoting it the second time, accidentally omitted one dash, and typed the word "to" instead of "and". The former is a typo, the latter sloppy proofreading. Your insinuation that I am deliberately misrepresenting your comments is ridiculous, but knowing this board, I fully expect it will be taken at face value by everyone, including the mods.
I made no such insinuation. I stated that you were editing my comments in a weird way, which you have admitted to doing. You are a seriously paranoid fuckwit, and unless you have anything meaningful to contribute to the thread, I'm done with you.
Edit: What happened here is simple. I posted a thread. I made a couple exaggerated comments out of (understandable) anger given the subject matter. I subsequently retracted them where they were proven to be incorrect.

You and Jub, but mostly you, refused to let it go, because you saw an opportunity to derail yet another thread into "Calling out TRR circlejerk number 10,976", and proceeded accordingly, including suggesting that my posts are equivalent to images of children being raped, and false insinuations of dishonesty. And I know exactly where it goes from here: I take all the blame, because I have a combative personality (I admit it), and I sometimes engage in hyperbole, and therefore I am, in this board's eyes, deemed fair game for any smear or lie or vendetta whatsoever, and any accusation against me will be taken at face value.
Jesus christ, guy, I was working through the law to examine whether it functioned the way you're suggesting it does and can apply to this matter or not. None of the rest of what you're alleging took place anywhere but in your paranoid head.
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A
User avatar
The Romulan Republic
Emperor's Hand
Posts: 21559
Joined: 2008-10-15 01:37am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by The Romulan Republic »

Believe me, I would be deeply, profoundly happy if I truly believed that you were "done with me", and I never had to deal with you commenting on anything I posted ever again.

Edits: Yeah, I'm a dick. I could apologize for that, but nobody here ever apologizes for being a dick to me. Well, I'm sorry anyway. Believe it or not, I don't actually want every other thread to be a shit show, nor do I want every other thread to end up being about me, and I've tried every way I know how, over the last few years, to make that stop. '

Frankly, I don't fucking matter that much, and my personal defects, real or exaggerated, shouldn't become the topic of every thread. I assure you I know them better than anyone.
"I know its easy to be defeatist here because nothing has seemingly reigned Trump in so far. But I will say this: every asshole succeeds until finally, they don't. Again, 18 months before he resigned, Nixon had a sky-high approval rating of 67%. Harvey Weinstein was winning Oscars until one day, he definitely wasn't."-John Oliver

"The greatest enemy of a good plan is the dream of a perfect plan."-General Von Clauswitz, describing my opinion of Bernie or Busters and third partiers in a nutshell.

I SUPPORT A NATIONAL GENERAL STRIKE TO REMOVE TRUMP FROM OFFICE.
User avatar
aerius
Charismatic Cult Leader
Posts: 14792
Joined: 2002-08-18 07:27pm

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by aerius »

I used to screen porn for a living when I worked for Canada Customs to determine its legality in Canada. I saw the uncensored version on my facebook feed yesterday. It's distasteful as fuck but there's nothing illegal about it. It's strongly implied that Greta's getting forcibly doggy styled but good luck proving it in a court of law. You'd get about as far as you would trying to prove that the image below depicts a dude getting sucked off by a minor.

Image
The Romulan Republic wrote: 2020-02-28 08:58am Edits: Yeah, I'm a dick. I could apologize for that, but nobody here ever apologizes for being a dick to me. Well, I'm sorry anyway. Believe it or not, I don't actually want every other thread to be a shit show, nor do I want every other thread to end up being about me, and I've tried every way I know how, over the last few years, to make that stop. '
Holy shit I can't believe I'm reading this. Goddamn I wish this board was still on 2005 rules so that you could see how much you're getting coddled. It's sad that my 5 year old has more self-awareness than you do. Grow the fuck up.
Image
aerius: I'll vote for you if you sleep with me. :)
Lusankya: Deal!
Say, do you want it to be a threesome with your wife? Or a foursome with your wife and sister-in-law? I'm up for either. :P
User avatar
Coop D'etat
Jedi Knight
Posts: 713
Joined: 2007-02-23 01:38pm
Location: UBC Unincorporated land

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by Coop D'etat »

The RCMP went to the step of letting everyone know that they're aware of the thing, looked at it and concluded there wasn't any crime to prosecute. Because there isn't and it would be silly waste of time to lay charges here.

Seriously, I deal with the honest to goodness crimes in this province. They are sticky, messy heartbreaking problems. Nobody got any time for this nonsense.
User avatar
loomer
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4260
Joined: 2005-11-20 07:57am

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by loomer »

Coop D'etat wrote: 2020-02-28 02:50pm The RCMP went to the step of letting everyone know that they're aware of the thing, looked at it and concluded there wasn't any crime to prosecute. Because there isn't and it would be silly waste of time to lay charges here.

Seriously, I deal with the honest to goodness crimes in this province. They are sticky, messy heartbreaking problems. Nobody got any time for this nonsense.
No surprise there. It strikes me that there could still potentially be some form of civil relief but the hassle of obtaining it if it's anything more than an injunction probably isn't something Thunberg's going to bother with, and the social media shitstorm is a pretty effective injunction all its own.
"Doctors keep their scalpels and other instruments handy, for emergencies. Keep your philosophy ready too—ready to understand heaven and earth. In everything you do, even the smallest thing, remember the chain that links them. Nothing earthly succeeds by ignoring heaven, nothing heavenly by ignoring the earth." M.A.A.A
User avatar
Jub
Sith Marauder
Posts: 4396
Joined: 2012-08-06 07:58pm
Location: British Columbia, Canada

Re: Alberta oil company distributes stickers depicting Greta Thunberg (a minor) being sexually assaulted.

Post by Jub »

You would get dog piled nearly as often if you didn't come into every thread as if [insert new issue of the week] was literally the worst thing ever. In the case of the Great sticker you called for charges of terrorism ( :shock: ) and child pornography without even having seen the image in question. This demonstrated a complete ignorance of not only Canadian law but of what the sticker itself depicted.

Then, when people started to explain why your stance was wrong, rather than look at your position you appealed to the authority of the newspapers because "I am far from the only person who felt that this could qualify as child pornography." You know that such appeals to authority go against this boards rules so why do you continue to make them? Why do you always try to justify your own ignorance by pointing out somebody else's?

Lastly, nobody made this thread about you until you did. Everybody who debated you was either debating the topic or a point you raised, nobody mentioned you by name until you admitted to not having seen the image in question. Then loomer went in on you personally after you read his comments in the worst possible light and started to hyperventilate and throw out your usual TRR temper tantrum and pitty-party routine.

Get a clue dipshit.
Post Reply