Protest outside Old Bailey in support of Constance Marten & Mark Gordon

[cupid_stunt]

I for one don't trust posters who * out their swear words.

Yeah, fucking cunts.

 

[CharlotteF1]

Note to counter-disinformation specialists: whatever you do, don't help publicise the protests outside the Old Bailey that will resume on Monday 25 March and continue on every subsequent day of the trial.

These protests will continue during the evidence given by Ian Josephs, an expert witness for Constance Marten, if he is called.

They will also continue if the defence is successful in forcing SS officers to come to court to explain themselves.

Also don't link to pieces on major news sites showing the interviews the defendants (who will no longer be defendants) will give outside the Old Bailey when they are acquitted.

They are bound to mention those who are still suffering. Victims of judicial persecution, when they're vindicated, always do. The Birmingham Six did it, the Guildford Four did it, and you can expect the wicked Constance Marten to do it too.

Remember: protestors against oppression are deranged; protestors against oppression are monsters. They aren't like decent counter-disinformation specialists and social workers who kidnap and lie and fanatically believe they should be given even more resources to continue their evil work. Such valiant public servants are thoroughly normal and socially responsible. Just remember: protestors are deranged, protestors are monsters, and those who publicise political protests against oppression are undermining public safety and do not deserve one molecule of the oxygen of publicity. These people deliberately undermine the state, health and safety, safeguarding, the public good, morality, national security, the defence of the nation, the GDPR, public health, and the tough work undertaken by social workers for so little reward or recognition. Undermining the state is the same thing as being an enemy of the people. It's a people's state. It's a free country. Anyone who undermines it is an enemy of the people. Ask any expert.

These people are monsters. And they will be everywhere, if they get the chance. Lines of defence against these monsters are like thin ice.

So please inform the nearest social worker or counter-disinformation officer, worker for Prevent, or police officer if you believe you have spotted a monster. Do not on any account attempt to engage with them. Hurling hate-filled vitriol at them in short internet messages is acceptable, so long as you realise they are the public enemy. Don't do it more than once or twice. Don't feed them. Starve them. They are dangerous. Protestors are dangerous. Protests are only acceptable if they run on accepted lines, on what are accepted to be responsible people's issues, such as climate change or home insulation or calling on the government to do more to achieve its stated aims.

Supporting defendants who criticise social workers is only a few steps short of terrorism. Enemies of the system can be highly articulate. Be vigilant against them whenever you are in a public space, offline or online. They will exploit whatever freedom they are allowed. They will use their wombs against what they call "the System", their keyboards - absolutely anything.

These people are wicked. They use the language of "human rights" and "opposing violence against women" with nothing but subversion and sabotage in their tiny deranged minds.

They are extremists. You can report them here.

 

[editor]

Do not on any account attempt to engage with them. Hurling hate-filled vitriol at them in short internet messages is acceptable, so long as you realise they are the public enemy. Don't do it more than once or twice. Don't feed them. Starve them. They are dangerous. Protestors are dangerous. Protests are only acceptable if they run on accepted lines, against what are accepted to be responsible people's issues, such as climate change.

But people have tried to engage with you multiple times, yet you refuse to answer straightforward questions like:

Ever stopped to wonder why not a single person here agrees with you, despite you being given ample time and space to state your supposed case?

 

[belboid]

Note to counter-disinformation specialists: whatever you do, don't help publicise the protests outside the Old Bailey that will resume on Monday 25 March and continue on every subsequent day of the trial.

These protests will continue during the evidence given by Ian Josephs, an expert witness for Constance Marten, if he is called.

They will also continue if the defence is successful in forcing SS officers to come to court to explain themselves.

Also don't link to pieces on major news sites showing the interviews the defendants (who will no longer be defendants) will give outside the Old Bailey when they are acquitted.

They are bound to mention those who are still suffering. Victims of judicial persecution, when they're vindicated, always do.

Remember: protestors against oppression are deranged; protestors against oppression are monsters. They aren't like decent counter-disinformation specialists and social workers who kidnap and lie and fanatically believe they should be given even more resources to continue their evil work. Such valiant public servants are thoroughly normal and socially responsible. Just remember: protestors are deranged, protestors are monsters, and those who publicise political protests against oppression are undermining public safety and do not deserve one molecule of the oxygen of publicity. These people deliberately undermine the state, health and safety, safeguarding, the public good, and morality. Undermining the state is the same thing as being an enemy of the people. It's a people's state. It's a free country. These people are monsters. Please inform the nearest social worker or counter-disinformation officer, or worker for Prevent, if you believe you have spotted one. Do not on any account attempt to engage with them. Hurling hate-filled vitriol at them in short internet messages is acceptable, so long as you realise they are the public enemy. Don't do it more than once or twice. Don't feed them. Starve them. They are dangerous. Protestors are dangerous. Protests are only acceptable if they run on accepted lines, on what are accepted to be responsible people's issues, such as climate change or home insulation or calling on the government to do more to achieve its stated aims. Supporting defendants who criticise social workers is only a few steps short of terrorism. Be vigilant.

These people are wicked. They use the language of "human rights" and "opposing violence against women" with only subversion and sabotage in their tiny deranged minds.

you haven't presented a single piece of 'evidence'. Just a bunch of unsustained (and likely unsustainable) assertions. You know absolutely nothing about this case, beyond a simple headline and are just making wild assumptions.

And, is that the Ian Josephs who helped Marie Black to flee to France? Before she was convicted of 23 charges of child sexual abuse, including rape?

 

[existentialist]

Yeah, fucking cunts.

Gr*n

 

[klang]

you haven't presented a single piece of 'evidence'. Just a bunch of unsustained (and likely unsustainable) assertions. You know absolutely nothing about this case, beyond a simple headline and are just making wild assumptions.

And, is that the Ian Josephs who helped Marie Black to flee to France? Before she was convicted of 23 charges of child sexual abuse, including raprape

I still think it's potentially dangerous to have the op posting on this site

 

[Sweet FA]

But people have tried to engage with you multiple times, yet you refuse to answer straightforward questions like:

Is there a reason why they're not banned yet?

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

And guess what - this prosecution is about to collapse.

The prosecution are between a rock and a hard place because they can't call Napier Marten to come and tell lies in "rebuttal" of the true statements Constance made in the witness box yesterday.

Victory!

*taps watch

 

[existentialist]

Is there a reason why they're not banned yet?

Urban is playing with its food.

 

[editor]

Is there a reason why they're not banned yet?

Because people are still engaging with the OP who is still responding, and it hasn't descended into an insult fest.
Besides, it's in the general forum so easily ignored but even I do have my limits.

 

[Spymaster]

Supporting defendants who criticise social workers is only a few steps short of terrorism.

 

[PTK]

Note to counter-disinformation specialists: whatever you do, don't help publicise the protests outside the Old Bailey that will resume on Monday 25 March and continue on every subsequent day of the trial.

These protests will continue during the evidence given by Ian Josephs, an expert witness for Constance Marten, if he is called.

They will also continue if the defence is successful in forcing SS officers to come to court to explain themselves.

Also don't link to pieces on major news sites showing the interviews the defendants (who will no longer be defendants) will give outside the Old Bailey when they are acquitted.

They are bound to mention those who are still suffering. Victims of judicial persecution, when they're vindicated, always do. The Birmingham Six did it, the Guildford Four did it, and you can expect the wicked Constance Marten to do it too.

Remember: protestors against oppression are deranged; protestors against oppression are monsters. They aren't like decent counter-disinformation specialists and social workers who kidnap and lie and fanatically believe they should be given even more resources to continue their evil work. Such valiant public servants are thoroughly normal and socially responsible. Just remember: protestors are deranged, protestors are monsters, and those who publicise political protests against oppression are undermining public safety and do not deserve one molecule of the oxygen of publicity. These people deliberately undermine the state, health and safety, safeguarding, the public good, morality, national security, the defence of the nation, the GDPR, public health, and the tough work undertaken by social workers for so little reward or recognition. Undermining the state is the same thing as being an enemy of the people. It's a people's state. It's a free country. Anyone who undermines it is an enemy of the people. Ask any expert.

These people are monsters. And they will be everywhere, if they get the chance. Lines of defence against these monsters are like thin ice.

So please inform the nearest social worker or counter-disinformation officer, worker for Prevent, or police officer if you believe you have spotted a monster. Do not on any account attempt to engage with them. Hurling hate-filled vitriol at them in short internet messages is acceptable, so long as you realise they are the public enemy. Don't do it more than once or twice. Don't feed them. Starve them. They are dangerous. Protestors are dangerous. Protests are only acceptable if they run on accepted lines, on what are accepted to be responsible people's issues, such as climate change or home insulation or calling on the government to do more to achieve its stated aims.

Supporting defendants who criticise social workers is only a few steps short of terrorism. Enemies of the system can be highly articulate. Be vigilant against them whenever you are in a public space, offline or online. They will exploit whatever freedom they are allowed. They will use their wombs against what they call "the System", their keyboards - absolutely anything.

These people are wicked. They use the language of "human rights" and "opposing violence against women" with nothing but subversion and sabotage in their tiny deranged minds.

They are extremists. You can report them here.

To quote you "that's just semantics". By that comment you demonstrated that words have no meaning to you, and therefore we should ignore your statements.

 

[klang]

I couldn't be asked reading all their drivel, but there are still hidden gems!

 

[ElizabethofYork]

you haven't presented a single piece of 'evidence'. Just a bunch of unsustained (and likely unsustainable) assertions. You know absolutely nothing about this case, beyond a simple headline and are just making wild assumptions.

And, is that the Ian Josephs who helped Marie Black to flee to France? Before she was convicted of 23 charges of child sexual abuse, including rape?

Yes. Constance Marten talked about him at her trial. She's heavily influenced by him.

 

[Silas Loom]

Because … it hasn't descended into an insult fest.

So all it will take to get this monstrous person banned and the thread binned is for one person to formally accuse them of being a big smelly poo?

 

[Silas Loom]

Yes. Constance Marten talked about him at her trial. She's heavily influenced by him.

A mate, moreover, of Christopher Booker and John Hemming, lord help us.

 

[Spymaster]

I couldn't be asked reading all their drivel, but there are still hidden gems!

I've avoided posting on the thread because the OP's obviously a few quid short of a monkey, but that just popped out.

 

[Magnus McGinty]

Because people are still engaging with the OP who is still responding, and it hasn't descended into an insult fest.
Besides, it's in the general forum so easily ignored but even I do have my limits.

Don’t they fall under rule 11 of the FAQ which states:

Monomaniacs. 'Sheeple'-accusers, bigoted gun nuts, ranting xenophobes, cut'n'pasters, god-squadders, disruptive 'comical' alter-egos, conspiraloons, fruitloops, small minded bigots etc. are not welcome.

 

[PTK]

you haven't presented a single piece of 'evidence'. Just a bunch of unsustained (and likely unsustainable) assertions. You know absolutely nothing about this case, beyond a simple headline and are just making wild assumptions.

And, is that the Ian Josephs who helped Marie Black to flee to France? Before she was convicted of 23 charges of child sexual abuse, including rape?

I looked up your reference, and discovered that there is a network of people who help abusers of children flee the country. Perhaps the poster is connected with them.

 

[CharlotteF1]

I looked up your reference, and discovered that there is a network of people who help abusers of children flee the country. Perhaps the poster is connected with them.

"Abusers of children". Imagine calling parents who rescue their children from kidnappers that! There is a huge amount of abuse in foster care and in local authority institutions, and parents are scared into not complaining about it if they ever want their children back, or sometimes if they are to be allowed even to meet their children. This is quite aside from the fact that forced adoption is an abuse, and forced adoption at birth, i.e. the designation of women as unfit to breed, is an abomination.

You should have your mouth washed out with a toilet brush, for calling resistant victims "abusers", and for defining the escape network as one that helps abusers evade justice.

Everyone who resists the state is a paedophile underminer of public health paid by Russia, right?

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon are not any kind of child abusers.

 

[CharlotteF1]

Don’t they fall under rule 11 of the FAQ which states:

Monomaniacs. 'Sheeple'-accusers, bigoted gun nuts, ranting xenophobes, cut'n'pasters, god-squadders, disruptive 'comical' alter-egos, conspiraloons, fruitloops, small minded bigots etc. are not welcome.

Yes. Wreckers, anti-social types, deranged insane mentioners of protest demonstrations against state goons. Kiddy-fiddler Nazi gun nuts. Especially the leftwing working class mothers who call social workers "soft cops" and mention Cathy Come Home. They are Nazi Christian Anders Breivik fans, the lot of them. Utter bigots. They love Toby Young. You can tell, because they say they despise "eugenics".

No oxygen. No publicity. No protest.

But do come to outside the Old Bailey to hear the defendants' statements on the steps when they are vindicated and released. You'll be welcome, Magnus.

The whole of the 77th Brigade are welcome too, preferably in their uniforms.

 

[belboid]

"Abusers of children".

what else would you call a child rapist? Like Marie Black?

 

[JimW]

Yes. Wreckers, anti-social types, deranged insane mentioners of protest demonstrations against state goons. Kiddy-fiddler Nazi gun nuts. Especially the leftwing working class mothers who call social workers "soft cops" and mention Cathy Come Home. They are Nazi Christian Anders Breivik fans, the lot of them. Utter bigots. They love Toby Young. You can tell, because they say they despise "eugenics".

No oxygen. No publicity. No protest.

But do come to outside the Old Bailey to hear the defendants' statements on the steps when they are vindicated and released. You'll be welcome, Magnus.

How nice that the state that is victimising them is also going to arrange their vindication and release.

 

[CharlotteF1]

you haven't presented a single piece of 'evidence'. Just a bunch of unsustained (and likely unsustainable) assertions. You know absolutely nothing about this case, beyond a simple headline and are just making wild assumptions.

And, is that the Ian Josephs who helped Marie Black to flee to France? Before she was convicted of 23 charges of child sexual abuse, including rape?

First I heard of that case. Doubtless it's a standard talking point among SS officers who want to demonise the resistance.

You can read what Ian Josephs has to say about it here:

This is the situation

My name is Ian Josephs ,(BORN 1932).I have a law degree from Oxford University and in 1961 I was the youngest member of Kent County Council .A mother asked me to help her recover her 12 yea…

forced-adoption.com

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

"Abusers of children". Imagine calling parents who rescue their children from kidnappers that! There is a huge amount of abuse in foster care and in local authority institutions, and parents are scared into not complaining about it if they ever want their children back, or sometimes if they are to be allowed even to meet their children. This is quite aside from the fact that forced adoption is an abuse, and forced adoption at birth, i.e. the designation of women as unfit to breed, is an abomination.

You should have your mouth washed out with a toilet brush, for calling resistant victims "abusers", and for defining the escape network as one that helps abusers evade justice.

Everyone who resists the state is a paedophile underminer of public health paid by Russia, right?

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon are not any kind of child abusers.

Doesn't desecrating the corpse of their dead infant by putting her body in a bag with rubbish count as child abuse?

 

[cupid_stunt]

"Abusers of children". Imagine calling parents who rescue their children from kidnappers that! There is a huge amount of abuse in foster care and in local authority institutions, and parents are scared into not complaining about it if they ever want their children back, or sometimes if they are to be allowed even to meet their children. This is quite aside from the fact that forced adoption is an abuse, and forced adoption at birth, i.e. the designation of women as unfit to breed, is an abomination.

You should have your mouth washed out with a toilet brush, for calling resistant victims "abusers", and for defining the escape network as one that helps abusers evade justice.

Everyone who resists the state is a paedophile underminer of public health paid by Russia, right?

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon are not any kind of child abusers.

Way too far, this loon needs to be shown the door.

 

[Chilli.s]

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon are not any kind of child abusers.

Not turning up to a contact meeting with their kids, that is abuse of the child, mental abuse. Marten and Gordon abuse their own children.

 

[belboid]

First I heard of that case. Doubtless it's a standard talking point among SS officers who want to demonise the resistance.

You can read what Ian Josephs has to say about it here:

This is the situation

My name is Ian Josephs ,(BORN 1932).I have a law degree from Oxford University and in 1961 I was the youngest member of Kent County Council .A mother asked me to help her recover her 12 yea…

forced-adoption.com

Ian Joseph's is a rapist defending cunt. 'Social Services are sometimes wrong, therefore they are always wrong' is his imbecilic logic.

Stop pretending you are interested in defending children. You're defending abuse.

 

[editor]

Doubtless it's a standard talking point among SS officers who want to demonise the resistance.

You appear to be living in some bizarre WW2 fantasy.

 

[editor]

Constance Marten and Mark Gordon are not any kind of child abusers.

This is what child abuse looks like:

Once they had been separated from their children they continued to have "contact sessions" at which their interaction with the children was described as "excellent".

But their attendance at the contact sessions was inconsistent. The children were distressed by this. One child became quiet, withdrawn and inconsolable, saying on one occasion: "Mummy and daddy cancelled again."

After assessing the evidence a Family Court judge ordered that the four children should be adopted and care placement orders were made for all four children.