[LINK] Sympathy to Brogdens family ...
link at todd.inoz.com
Thu Sep 1 11:23:01 EST 2005
>Brogden was a serial sexual harasser who did it just once, or a
>few times, too many.
David we don't know this.
I've suffered the allegations of Sexual harassment too. They are published
(or were) on the Internet. (I have archives at any rate.)
It was alleged that I had forced an actress to have sex with me during my
first feature film. You know the "Director forces Actor to have sex" line.
It put the most amazing pressure on my wife because the intent of the rumor
was to hurt her, through me. It got to the point we were waiting for the
police to knock on the door and interrogate me - something I'm not
unfamiliar with in relation to false and frivolous or vindictive allegations.
About a week after the peak of the rumor and Tall Poppyism that was
circulating and affecting the entire reach of all my family and friends and
work colleagues, my wife discovered she was pregnant.
My wife was also an actress in the film. So the rumor was quashed very
quickly and we never found out who started it, or who the alleged victim was.
So am I a sexual predator? A pervert? A Rapist?
Just because someone published something on a web site?
Look at the recent CEO's Conference and the Media all taken for a ride by
the hoax that George Bush Senior was coming to town. A web site set up by
the protestors. Just proves how easily everyone can be lead today, to
believe anything someone tells them.
Big Brother is alive and well and telling us every day that He is looking
out for us and He is protecting us and He is making new laws for our benefit.
The reality is, it's far from the truth.
>What the Telegraph was nowhere near as despicable as the SMH's
>hatchet job on the Red Cross a few weeks ago.
Well, I have to admit, the Red Cross isn't exactly doing the right
thing. Some of the people in power there really need to get off the
donation based enormous salaries and get real. Hosting a dinner for
donators, paid by the donations of the donators is a farce. I think that's
despicable and the SMH did a great job revealing it.
If the Heads of the Red Cross took their own salaries, also paid for by the
Donators, and use that money to host a dinner, at least it's not coming
directly out of the donation pool. But they didn't.
>Brogden didn't necessarily get what he deserved, but in a
>position such as his he should learn to behave. Simple really.
But you don't know the circumstances. Gosh, I spent last month kissing and
getting all physical with a dozen girls. Does that mean I'm cheating on my
wife or sexually harassing them?
Hardly - my wife was directing the actions so we could find the right feel
for the scene itself. But someone who "observed" this might decide I was a
pervert or something alike this, especially in this day and age.
>He stuffed up and the when he got caught he didn't cope.
Well it's all nice to accuse someone of something, but isn't it our
obligation as humans in our society to assist those who might be doing the
wrong thing to understand the wrong and help them make amends? Or change?
Publishing a series of rumors and calling them fact doesn't make them facts
and it doesn't help the problem.
Did the Telegraph go to Brogden FIRST and ask him about the events and get
his side? No.
But in the case of the SMH and the Red Cross, the SMH went to the Red Cross
to get a statement before running the story.
Lets get real. Lets not just accuse people and publish details and kill
them, then spend our lives in remorse for making a mistake.
Remember, in the UK last month an Australian Man was murdered because
someone mistakenly identified him as a peadophile against a published photo.
Did anyone bother to approach him - or the authorites - and have any kind
of due diligence done to ensure they had the right person - no. Near
enough is good enough.
Hitler's rules - shoot first, and if it still moves afterwards, asking a
few questions then finish it off.
I'm sorry, we claim Australia to be an open, free and lucky society, but
today, the more I look, the more I find our freedoms less free that those
the country claims are terrorists.
At least the Terrorists are free in their own countries. We're not even
free to go to the Opera House and take photos any more, or go into a Court
House without having to be just about stripped naked.
No, "Our way of life will not change because of terrorists" is another of
those Big Brother lines pushed to make us all feel we're good.
And now they want bag searches on Trains. <sigh>
Where is the "no change" ??
>End of story.
>--- Deus Ex Machina <vicc at cia.com.au> wrote:
> > Adam Todd [link at todd.inoz.com] wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > Running behind on the schedule today, but sad to see
> > recently former
> > > Opposition Leader John Brogden attempt to take his life last
> > night.
> > >
> > > I've had a few conversations with Mr. Brogden over the last
> > few years, all
> > > somewhat positive, even if there were no outcomes, but then
> > opposition
> > > isn't easy anyway.
> > >
> > > I'll bet however, that Mr. Brogden doesn't end up spending
> > 21 days in a
> > > Psychiatric Hospital for the attempt,
> > you could be wrong.
> > its a classic case of tearing public figure by the media. the
> > telegraph
> > headlines are absolute guilty guilty guilty. they crucified
> > brogden and
> > are as responsible as if they held the razor blade themselves.
> > just the usual tall popy syndrome by the press.
> > Vic
> > _______________________________________________
> > Link mailing list
> > Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> > http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link
>Send instant messages to your online friends http://au.messenger.yahoo.com
More information about the Link