There’s no doubt that Virginia Giuffre was a troubled soul; it would be amazing if she wasn’t after her traumatic childhood and teen years.
However, her account of abuse and sex trafficking at the hands of Epstein and Maxwell is substantiated by so many other victims.
As for the cannibalism, she shared some dodgy QAnon posts that claimed that Taco was leading a campaign against cannibals - just standard MAGA delusions.
Lij Hollands and Derksen will be outs ... unless we make early calls with our SSP selection(s).
You would think that Lucas Camporeale will come in for Ben, unless the MC decides that it wants to see more of Ben with AFL opposition. Frankie Evans should get a run, but who does he replace, Lij? Byrne can't dropped after his efforts. Crippa for Cerra is easy. Playing with a rib fracture won't do any harm but we don't need to play Weiters into form and giving him another week off may be best.
I guess it depends on whether we're treating this as a dress rehearsal for Opening Round or an opportunity to try different combinations and give newbies a taste of AFL.
I'd leave Harry, Pitto, Skull and Reidy as our forward/ruck combination, give Newey more game time in the VFL and bring Charleson and Ison in for limited game time.
Sounds like they're doing the 'Al Capone' on Andrew (the b.s. artist formerly known as Prince.) Get him for 'tax evasion' rather than organised participation in trafficking.
Something isn't quite right about all the Epstein suff if you ask me. The Aussie woman who claimed she was trafficked and committed suicide was a pathological liar so I couldnt trust a word she muttered. The story about emails relating to Gates getting an STD and and requesting medication (or something like that) from Epstein is weird. Turns out the incriminating email was from Epstein to Epstein. WTF is that? So I could send am email to myself saying Lods needs cocaine and that's mean to incriminate Lods? Something aint right with that whole story.
Yes, something ain't right but Virginia Giuffre's version of events is backed up by documentary evidence and other witnesses, including more than 200 abuse survivors. There's no question about her being abused as a young teenager by a sex trafficker who was later convicted or her recruitment from Mar-a-Lago by Maxwell as a 17 year old and living with her and Epstein until 2005. She became involved in FBI investigations into Maxwell and Epstein after complaints from the parents of 14 year old girl and that prompted Giuffre to spill the beans. She initially resisted but agreed to cooperate only after the AFP got involved.
She sued ex-Prince Andrew and he settled, paying her an undisclosed amount, donating to her charity, but denying wrongdoing. Maxwell also settled when Giuffre sued her for defamation after she called Giuffre a liar. While there wasn't a verdict in either case, the fact that the defendants settled indicates that Giuffre must have had the means to back up her version of events.
Thames Valley Police advised that the arrest of Mountbatten-Windsor followed "a complaint over the alleged sharing of confidential material by the former prince with late sex offender Jeffrey Epstein". This occurred when Mountbatten-Windsor was a UK trade envoy.
Not claiming that the UK government and police are perfect but what a difference between the UK’s response to the Epstein files and the obfuscation and inaction in the USA?
Writing an article about scientific papers BEFORE they are peer reviewed should be banned.
Someone makes a bold claim to cure cancer, invents teleportation, solves world hunger and finds proof of intelligent life oustide our own little rock.......it gets talked about, everyone goes crazy!
Then....it gets peer reviewed and found that all is bunk.
......but you never get an article saying as much so people continue to believe those things.
Then there is a conspiracy about it all....etc...
That’s not how peer review works (but see my last sentence 🙏)
Peer reviewed journals like Science, Nature, the Lancet, etc will not publish articles without peer review.
The authors submit their paper to the journal and the journal sends it off to peers for review. The paper may then go back to the authors for revision or clarification before it is accepted for publication.
Journals like Quadrant (where I have published a couple of articles) aren’t peer reviewed and that’s where the scenario you describe can occur. In that case, it’s not peer reviewed but a rebuttal, correction or confirmation.
Of course, peer reviewed articles may also be subjected to rebuttals or different interpretations of data. In my field recently, a peer reviewed paper proposed a slightly more recent time of arrival for the first Australians based on the presence Neanderthal and Denisovan DNA. The next issue contained an article questioning the analysis and conclusions of the paper and a response from the authors of the first paper.
Most ordinary punters may not know which journals/publications are peer reviewed or how the peer review process works. Cookers often claim that peer reviewers are paid to tick off papers despite the fact that the peers are anonymous.
Then there’s that process of post publication debate, challenge, testing, revision, disproving and/or confirmation; how our knowledge grows and improves.
Just read your post again and you mean a popular press “expose” of research results that haven’t yet been published in a peer reviewed journal.
The Victorian and Federal Governments appear untouchable despite fark up after fark up. Locally I'd like to think Wilson will give it a good shake leading up to November but once Labour start with the playing the man (or woman) muck raking tactics, the Victoria public seem just lap it up.
I know that senior Liberals don't give Wilson much chance, but is that more about the boys' club than reality?
History is on Wilson's side, no Premier that assumed the role after an election has won the next election.
We’re veering away from Victorian and Australian governments 😢
What happens in the US affects us, and the rest of the world - and that’s why the Taco thread is generally buzzing.
Our governments’ actions may have negative outcomes but they won’t create another GFC or world war. Those negative outcomes, or positive outcomes, aren’t globally significant but they’re important to us. So let’s keep this thread for them and discuss Taco and global issues elsewhere.
Thats part of what I said, yep its all Democratic but thats not what Shawny was arguing imho, Allan didnt enter the election as Premier and as I suggested a lot of voters often vote for the personalities/leaders rather than knowing too much about the policies. For all Andrews failings as Premier of which there were many, varied and sordid he was an excellent political tactician and salesman and while Labor still would have bolted in to win the election, Labor voters got something different than what they voted for with Allan steering the ship after Andrews did his job and made sure they were re-elected.
Five out of the last ten Victorian Premiers became Premier without leading their party to an election. It's a common, routine practice that was even more common before Henry Bolte took a stranglehold on the job. It's fairly regular at Commonwealth level too with at least a dozen PMs taking on the office of PM without leading their party to an election. The most recent are Fraser, Keating, Gillard, Rudd, Turnbull and Morrison.
Shawny can take heart from the fact the previous four Victorian Premiers who became Premier without leading their party to an election lost the next election.
Off topic posts are the bane of a moderator's existence Shawny, but I'll let that one slide
Isn't that an off topic post!
.....and this one.
This one is too!
As you know Kruddler, the odd off topic post or two are fine, and can often help make a point or enliven a discussion. It becomes a problem when the off topic posts take over the thread
How many pages are we up to for the 'Red Trump' who runs a country on the other side of the world? Sorry DJC i know you get quite annoyed at any reference of the man but the irony is too much to ignore.
Off topic posts are the bane of a moderator's existence Shawny, but I'll let that one slide
Jacinta Allan was democratically elected to Parliament as the member for Bendigo East but became Premier as she was chosen unopposed as Leader of the Labor Party after Andrews stepped down. She wasnt elected as Premier Elect initially which I think is the point Shawny was trying to make.
Once again, all State or Commonwealth leader are elected/appointed by their parties. That's the Westminster democratic process in accordance with all Australian constitutions and conventions. Jess Wilson was elected Leader of the Opposition by the Parliamentary Liberal Party, not the Victorian electorate. That doesn't mean that she's not the democratically elected Leader of the Opposition.
Of course, the Greens take their leadership one step further and all party members get to vote for the leader.
There's plenty to criticise about Jacinta Allan without falsely claiming that she's not the democratically elected premier.
I guess it comes down to what's worth more, a World U/20 gold medal or a Commonwealth Games gold medal? Years ago it would have been the Commonwealth Games gold, now it's probably the U/20 gold medal.
Then there's the fact that it will be Gout Gout's last World U/20 but he should be at the peak of his powers at the next Commonwealth Games ... and his team have always been very selective/conservative with his development.
Probably should have mentioned Gout Gout’s decision to run at the under 20 championships in preference to the Commonwealth Games.
I get that this will be Gout Gout’s last opportunity to compete as a junior but it shows how much the Commonwealth Games have slipped as an elite competition.
But you said that the current State government wasn’t democratically elected.
thats not what i said at all!!
my comment was relating to allan not being elected democratically.
she was elected by her party and i stand by that.
I understand what your saying but dont agree with it.
anyhow we are going in circles
The leader of every government and opposition in Australia is elected by their Party; Sussan Ley was elected by the Liberals in Canberra, now it's Angus Taylor. We had Rudd-Gillard-Rudd, then Abbott-Turnbull-Morrison, all PMs elected by their parties. The Victorian opposition has had Guy-O'Brien-Guy-Pesutto-Battin-Wilson, all elected by the Liberal party room. And we've had Baillieu-Napthine and then Andrews-Allan as Premier. The voters don't have a say in it.
I get that you don't like Allan, or Andrews, but Allan was democratically elected, as was her government, and she is Premier in accordance with the Westminster principles of government that have been in place in Victoria since 1855.
I think you know what i meant. every bit of advertising leafouts hand outs shows the leaders face.
blind freddie knows who the leaders are.
anyhow as usual we have gotten off the subject so thats it from me.
But you said that the current State government wasn’t democratically elected. Despite their many faults, the ALP was democratically elected with a thumping majority - and a weak opposition of any flavour means that we have to rely on the media to keep the government on track, and that’s not good.
And the party leaders’ names are only on the ballot papers for their own electorates. In fact it wasn’t so long ago that party affiliations weren’t permitted on ballot papers - and that’s why how to vote cards came into being.
Sorry DJC i know you get quite annoyed at any reference of the man but the irony is too much to ignore.
