scalyboy
They’re taking the piss now
A Doctor Writes
How much evidence is there of long term high level UK paedophile ring?
- Thread starter free spirit
- Start date
A Doctor WritesMaybe Jerry Sadowitz will do a comedy routine about it.
Wilf
Slouching towards Billingham
Leon, 'it might kill him',Brittan. Creaking gates these m'Lords.Yeah, inevitable I suppose, feared that might happen, what with Brittan too
Lurdan
old wave
elbows
Well-Known Member
They made other posts here before that one, check your facts.
I won't comment on anything else you've said, but I will say that unsubstantiated talk of super-injunctions is silly.
I mean legal stuff used to block truth is a serious issue. But there are many other aspects to this beyond people routinely jumping to the conclusion that d-notes/da-notes or super-injunctions simply must be the reason why some info hasn't been printed in the press.
In this particular case I've seen nothing that would enable the media to report details of a persons name and their alleged crimes without running a high risk of being sued for libel. There is just a list of names on the net, and that is nowhere near enough to run with.
bluescreen
tofu eating wokerati
Yes, through a guardian ad litem.
elbows
Well-Known Member
There was always going to be a backlash against the choice of inquiry chair, the only question was how broadly this understandable cynicism would reach.
For example for those on the conspiraloon fringes, any inquiry would not be met with any faith whatever the detail, and by picking Butler-Sloss they have something easy to grasp onto since she was involved in a Diana inquiry.
Next we have all those who are not conspiraloons but lack faith in the establishment and its inquiries for all manner of sensible reasons. Again these would not be easy to satisfy no matter the terms, choice of personnel and other details, but could be won over to a certain extent if the inquiry actually seemed to be doing good work when it got going and shared some info with the public.
But in this case the government seem to have managed to make critics out of a far broader range of society than they often do with inquiries and chair choices. Hopefully it will blow up in their face, but whatever happens I find it unlikely that much credibility and faith will be restored by going about this stuff in such a manner. Quite how much they actually care about that remains to be seen.
For example for those on the conspiraloon fringes, any inquiry would not be met with any faith whatever the detail, and by picking Butler-Sloss they have something easy to grasp onto since she was involved in a Diana inquiry.
Next we have all those who are not conspiraloons but lack faith in the establishment and its inquiries for all manner of sensible reasons. Again these would not be easy to satisfy no matter the terms, choice of personnel and other details, but could be won over to a certain extent if the inquiry actually seemed to be doing good work when it got going and shared some info with the public.
But in this case the government seem to have managed to make critics out of a far broader range of society than they often do with inquiries and chair choices. Hopefully it will blow up in their face, but whatever happens I find it unlikely that much credibility and faith will be restored by going about this stuff in such a manner. Quite how much they actually care about that remains to be seen.
Its all over the internet that that particular pop star has a super injunction connected with him and the Elms.
Its also common knowledge these allegations have been around since the 80s, they are nothing new, including the said popstars female nickname.
Its no more "silly" then any another "unsubstantiated" claims.
Last edited:
Here is Janner in 2011 - looking a bit batty back then. He is 86 now after all.
http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/...p_founding_chairman_lord_janner_of_braunstone
http://www.worldjewishcongress.org/...p_founding_chairman_lord_janner_of_braunstone
elbows
Well-Known Member
And the internet found out about the super-injunction how exactly?
There was always going to be a backlash against the choice of inquiry chair, the only question was how broadly this understandable cynicism would reach.
For example for those on the conspiraloon fringes, any inquiry would not be met with any faith whatever the detail, and by picking Butler-Sloss they have something easy to grasp onto since she was involved in a Diana inquiry.
Next we have all those who are not conspiraloons but lack faith in the establishment and its inquiries for all manner of sensible reasons. Again these would not be easy to satisfy no matter the terms, choice of personnel and other details, but could be won over to a certain extent if the inquiry actually seemed to be doing good work when it got going and shared some info with the public.
But in this case the government seem to have managed to make critics out of a far broader range of society than they often do with inquiries and chair choices. Hopefully it will blow up in their face, but whatever happens I find it unlikely that much credibility and faith will be restored by going about this stuff in such a manner. Quite how much they actually care about that remains to be seen.
"For example for those on the conspiraloon fringes, any inquiry would not be met with any faith whatever the detail"
So you must be a conspiracy loon, not to have faith in the establishment investigating itself ?
Leaked, like most stuff.
Buckaroo
Donkey piss and tractors
Or just " lack faith in the establishment and its inquiries for all manner of sensible reasons."
If we look at history establishment inquires have been a fix from bloody Sunday to Hillsborough, why would this one be any different ? Apparently that makes me a conspiracyloon.
Buckaroo
Donkey piss and tractors
Fuck off.
Lurdan
old wave
is no defense if the site gets sued.
http://www.urban75.net/forums/threa...threads-and-naming-living-individuals.300541/
I contribute very little but I like the site still being here.
elbows
Well-Known Member
Try comprehending what I actually said. Others already pointed out what I meant, so I'm not entirely sure its worth me trying to explain it to you again.
Anyway, I'm not going to punch a giant hole in my filter just to satisfy those that are not so careful with distinguishing between facts and possibilities. Believe me, I am very interested in the murky stuff but Im not going to make the mistake of thinking that the stuff that floats around on the net is established fact just because its been repeated for so long.
Meanwhile:
Lurdan
old wave
Where did Sally Bercow name McAlpine ?
On twitter, she directly referred to the event and person in a direct way. Where did I do that ? Famous 60s pop star whos a bachelor, ffs is hardly liable.
Lurdan
old wave
No she didn't - she alluded to an internet rumour which she could not substantiate in a deliberately oblique way expecting that it insulated her from consequences. It didn't. Exactly as you are doing.
My money is on it all being swept under the carpet, the media dropping it slowly, the investigation being wishy washy blaming a few dead people, coming out with how it can be stopped from happening again, MI5 run this country. They have numerous journalist's, editors etc in their pocket, I suppose that makes me a conspiracyloon.
Lurdan
old wave
She tweeted "Why is Lord McAlpine trending? *innocent face*".
After losing the subsequent libel action
What you posted was entirely obvious innuendo about an individual. The fact it is "all over the internet" and that you believe it to be true is of little use to this site if you can't prove it.
This isn't about you. If you feel strongly enough that the truth as you see it needs to be out there you can always start your own blog.
After losing the subsequent libel action
What you posted was entirely obvious innuendo about an individual. The fact it is "all over the internet" and that you believe it to be true is of little use to this site if you can't prove it.
This isn't about you. If you feel strongly enough that the truth as you see it needs to be out there you can always start your own blog.
Similar threads
- Poll
