A looter's insincere apology.
PublicAnimalNo9 @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 10:42 am
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
PublicAnimalNo9 PublicAnimalNo9:
My response to Ms. Looter:...
This is my favourite part
Camille Camille:
As many of you already know, I am majoring in Conservation Biology at UBC. I strongly belirve in ecological conservation and sustainability. That night, I saw a few people that were trying to knock trees down. So what did I do? I yelled at them, saying “Pleaaseee, not the treees!!!!” And what did they do? They stopped. And I felt like a hero.
Adn here's a gem:
Camille Camille:
Here’s another thing that bothers me: why is everybody so surprised that a female partook in the riot? What is with this attitude that females are incapable of doing what men can do? Maybe it takes an event like this to show you misogynists that woman are fully capable of anything you can do. And if my actions lead to that revelation in your obscure little heads, then maybe it’s a good thing that I partook in this event.
Yeah, that last part made me laugh. She should be SO proud that she can be as big an asshole as the "men". Besides, referring to the males that took part in the riot as "men" is being rather generous.
Arctic_Menace @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 12:59 pm
Well, I got this back from Burrard Acura...
$1:
Dear *******,
Like you Burrard Acura, the Dilawri Group and all our employees were very saddened by the events of last week. For the same reasons that none of us wish Vancouver to be now associated with the rioters, we wish no association with individuals involved with the riots and looting. Our employees are all subject to extensive checks prior to hiring and Camille Cacnio was no exception, how were we to know that this full scholarship student from UBC part of their competitive rowing team would come to humiliate her family, school, employer and herself.
As such we immediately terminated her employment once the evidence surfaced on Saturday morning.
We remain dedicated to our customer and our communities across Canada though our philanthropic actions and support.
Like you Burrard Acura, the Dilawri Group and all our employees were very saddened by the events of last week. For the same reasons that none of us wish Vancouver to be now associated with the rioters, we wish no association with individuals involved with the riots and looting. Our employees are all subject to extensive checks prior to hiring and Camille Cacnio was no exception, how were we to know that this full scholarship student from UBC part of their competitive rowing team would come to humiliate her family, school, employer and herself.
As such we immediately terminated her employment once the evidence surfaced on Saturday morning.
We remain dedicated to our customer and our communities across Canada though our philanthropic actions and support.
Zipperfish @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:32 pm
http://camillecacnioapology.wordpress.c%20...%20-am-sorry/
She got rid of the screed in the second part of her message and has just left the apology. Smartest move this young woman has made in days.
BartSimpson @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 2:34 pm
Perhaps she'll also have an opportunity to do a few thousand hours of community service to make up for what she did.
Gunnair @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 3:32 pm
Lemmy Lemmy:
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
Again, I fail to see how my actions in any way prevent the police and the justice system from doing their jobs. And, again, I fail to see how my actions can in any way be compared to murder. It's an inane and desperate comparison.
I don't believe I commented on your actions.
I think every tax payer forking over cash for new police cars, overtime, and equipment repair and replacement and city clean up and every ICBC contributer who's going to have money covering burned cars has a right here.
fifeboy @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 3:51 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Perhaps she'll also have an opportunity to do a few thousand hours of community service to make up for what she did.
Now that is an excellent suggestion. Perhaps if she had started on something before she did her "I am sorry, but it wasn't my fault" thing, people would have taken her more seriously.
Brenda @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 3:54 pm
BartSimpson BartSimpson:
Perhaps she'll also have an opportunity to do a few thousand hours of community service to make up for what she did.
You don't seriously think "they" will get that much, right?
Praxius @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 4:54 pm
Zipperfish Zipperfish:
http://camillecacnioapology.wordpress.c%20...%20-am-sorry/
She got rid of the screed in the second part of her message and has just left the apology. Smartest move this young woman has made in days.
She got rid of the screed in the second part of her message and has just left the apology. Smartest move this young woman has made in days.
Yeah I just noticed that now..... it might seem smart, but not really, because while she just edited and removed her excuses..... much of what she said has already been quoted & spread throughout the net and thus, she can not just erase it so simply.
What would have been smart would be her originally issuing a formal apology and acceptance of the consequences and leaving it at that.
She didn't do that, thus she's not too bright.
Lemmy @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:43 pm
Gunnair Gunnair:
I think every tax payer forking over cash for new police cars, overtime, and equipment repair and replacement and city clean up and every ICBC contributer who's going to have money covering burned cars has a right here.
A right to what? A right to assist in police investigations or a right to harass people at their places of work?
Gunnair @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:48 pm
Lemmy Lemmy:
Gunnair Gunnair:
I think every tax payer forking over cash for new police cars, overtime, and equipment repair and replacement and city clean up and every ICBC contributer who's going to have money covering burned cars has a right here.
A right to what? A right to assist in police investigations or a right to harass people at their places of work?
I can't say that I agree it's harassment to send a letter of displeasure to an employer based on the actions of their employee. Whether it's dangerous driving by a bus driver to rude behaviour with a client to posing in front of a burning car during an unlawful demonstration - the consumer/tax payer has the right to give reason why they either will not consume a certain product or why they are displeased with how their tax dollars are at work.
Brenda @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:53 pm
$1:
Whether it's dangerous driving by a bus driver
That's his job.
$1:
to rude behaviour with a client
That too.
$1:
to posing in front of a burning car during an unlawful demonstration
That not so much.
$1:
the consumer (...) has the right to give reason why they either will not consume a certain product
So stop buying their products.
$1:
(...)(/tax payer)... or why they are displeased with how their tax dollars are at work.
So provide your evidence to the cops.
Lemmy @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 5:57 pm
Gunnair Gunnair:
I can't say that I agree it's harassment to send a letter of displeasure to an employer based on the actions of their employee. Whether it's dangerous driving by a bus driver to rude behaviour with a client to posing in front of a burning car during an unlawful demonstration - the consumer/tax payer has the right to give reason why they either will not consume a certain product or why they are displeased with how their tax dollars are at work.
If it's a bus driver fucking up in the course of their operation of a bus, sure, but that's a hell of a lot different than calling up the bus company for something the employee did on their own time that has nothing to do with their job.
Gunnair @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 6:02 pm
$1:
Whether it's dangerous driving by a bus driver
Brenda Brenda:
That's his job.
Incorrect. Once he drives dangerously, he is no longer doing his job. As a consumer, you have a right to take the employer to account for the actions of said employee.
Brenda Brenda:
So provide your evidence to the cops.
I think that is happening.
Gunnair @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 6:03 pm
Lemmy Lemmy:
Gunnair Gunnair:
I can't say that I agree it's harassment to send a letter of displeasure to an employer based on the actions of their employee. Whether it's dangerous driving by a bus driver to rude behaviour with a client to posing in front of a burning car during an unlawful demonstration - the consumer/tax payer has the right to give reason why they either will not consume a certain product or why they are displeased with how their tax dollars are at work.
If it's a bus driver fucking up in the course of their operation of a bus, sure, but that's a hell of a lot different than calling up the bus company for something the employee did on their own time that has nothing to do with their job.
How so? You take issue with contacting an employer if their employee does something illegal?
Why?
Lemmy @ Mon Jun 20, 2011 6:06 pm
Gunnair Gunnair:
How so? You take issue with contacting an employer if their employee does something illegal?
Why?
Why?
Because enforcing the law is the police department's job. Call the cops, not the employer. I'm utterly surprised that I'm alone on this one, but it's clear you guys are out for blood, so let's just agree to disagree.