Not exact matches
Not much love lost
between them, though they keep the
discussion civil.
(22 May 2014)
Discussions on the draft «Principles for Responsible Investments in Agriculture» highlight the diverging positions
between governments, the private sector,
civil society and farming communities.
For what it's worth, amid trying to distribute equal screen time to both Lyndon B. Johnson and John F. Kennedy, the script and direction does find a solid focus by always keeping the
Civil Rights Act at the center of the
discussion between various characters.
But much to my surprise yesterday's paper had a great article about our
civil justice system tucked in
between a recipe for minimalist tacos and the
discussion of dry Rieslings.
Far from trying to «silence the alleged victims or suppress the investigation of non-consensual acts», I'd much rather that they be talking to the police, and that the police be investigating the alleged acts (using the considerable tools at their disposal — including the threat of criminal charges for those making false allegations — to get to the truth), then to have this drama play out in private
discussions between the complainants and the CBC, Mr. Ghomeshi's friends or the Toronto Star, and in
civil and labour disputes
between the CBC and Mr. Ghomeshi, and whomever else he might choose to sue down the road.
October 19, 2016 — «Judges from along the Eastern seaboard convene at Fordham University School of Law Wednesday night for a
discussion on the intersection
between civil and criminal access to justice and how to better handle the overlapping deficiencies in both systems.
There's a fundamental incongruency
between being pro «free speech» and operating a global social network for
civil public
discussion.