[Misnomer]

s42blue, on 17 September 2024 - 06:58 AM, said:

Sadly this is what the board has come to (not aimed at you btw) : you have to explicitly call out ?a nonce is bad? etc etc or you?re seemingly either supporting or either your view doesn?t hold credibility because you haven?t called out the opposite opinion at every turn.

Is that true? A viewer gets a slap on the wrist? Disappointing, if true but not surprising, given the prison over crowding.

It is surprising though that spaces are available for, amongst other things, (2 years 4 months space) ?rocking a dog van? !

Spat out my brew at this one...you mean you've only just noticed?

Do you actually need to be pointed in the direction of the board's main protagonist; the poster who aims virtually all of his posts at the 'bigots' and the 'usual suspects'?

Who, with eye rolling predictability, at every opportunity, masturbates his left-wing bigotry; all the while, with classic sanctimony and whataboutery, trying to appear the ultimate moralist.

There's some clues in there for you 😉

Funny, mind; talking about race and religion.... very peculiar that he was and, still is, strangely absent in his condemnation of the Pakistani grooming gangs. He did defend (pre-trial) Hugh Edwards, though.

This post has been edited by Misnomer: 17 September 2024 - 06:29 PM

[Westbars Spireite]

Why would anyone defend Hugh Edwards?

[Misnomer]

Westbars Spireite, on 17 September 2024 - 06:21 PM, said:

Why would anyone defend Hugh Edwards?

You might need to ask him, Tim.

To be clear, when I say defended, I'm referring to when the allegations came to the fore; not post trial outcome. He said, amongst other things, Edwards was being 'smeared'.

[Mr Mercury]

Westbars Spireite, on 17 September 2024 - 06:21 PM, said:

Why would anyone defend Hugh Edwards?

I?m still trying to grasp how anyone can pay for Cat A images, ie penetration, of a child who could be as young as 7, and avoid jail and compare that with some of the recent sentences for online posting.
Also the BBC reporting of the verdict, radio clip I think I heard, was OTT on his mental health issues and how because he didn’t go to Oxford or Cambridge he felt inferior…
Why the f.ck is this being reported as some kind of mitigation for the vile man.

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 17 September 2024 - 07:19 PM

[Westbars Spireite]

Misnomer, on 17 September 2024 - 06:27 PM, said:

You might need to ask him, Tim.

To be clear, when I say defended, I'm referring to when the allegations came to the fore; not post trial outcome. He said, amongst other things, Edwards was being 'smeared'.

I'm not sure why you'd confidently state that.

[Search & Destroy]

https://www.euractiv...cil-presidency/


You couldn?t make it up

How will Labour feel about this?

[s42blue]

Misnomer, on 17 September 2024 - 06:05 PM, said:

Spat out my brew at this one...you mean you've only just noticed?

Do you actually need to be pointed in the direction of the board's main protagonist; the poster who aims virtually all of his posts at the 'bigots' and the 'usual suspects'?

Who, with eye rolling predictability, at every opportunity, masturbates his left-wing bigotry; all the while, with classic sanctimony and whataboutery, trying to appear the ultimate moralist.

There's some clues in there for you 😉

Funny, mind; talking about race and religion.... very peculiar that he was and, still is, strangely absent in his condemnation of the Pakistani grooming gangs. He did defend (pre-trial) Hugh Edwards, though.

No. I?ve posted about it regularly. Have you just noticed?

No. I stay out of both of your personal, pathetic bickering.

[Andy Spireite]

Search & Destroy, on 18 September 2024 - 06:48 AM, said:

https://www.euractiv...cil-presidency/


You couldn?t make it up

How will Labour feel about this?

I assume you're comparing this to the Rwanda plan and equating it to be the same? Have you read the article at all?

[Search & Destroy]

Andy Spireite, on 18 September 2024 - 09:43 AM, said:

I assume you're comparing this to the Rwanda plan and equating it to be the same? Have you read the article at all?

Yes Andy, have you?

This is an extract


Rwanda-style deals?

Meanwhile, the European People?s Party (EPP), the political family of Metsola and von der Leyen, has pledged in their electoral manifesto to go one step further and adopt the UK?s controversial Rwanda model, whereby asylum seekers are sent to third countries for application processing, and following the decision.

[Andy Spireite]

Shall i cut and paste the rest of the article, rather than this one excerpt, that refers to a combination of processing in a 3rd country and then successful applicants being granted asylum within the EU itself or returns agreements being put in place? You're making a false equivalence to the mainstream discussions being had and the Rwanda plan.

[Search & Destroy]

Andy Spireite, on 18 September 2024 - 11:29 AM, said:

Shall i cut and paste the rest of the article, rather than this one excerpt, that refers to a combination of processing in a 3rd country and then successful applicants being granted asylum within the EU itself or returns agreements being put in place? You're making a false equivalence to the mainstream discussions being had and the Rwanda plan.

https://amp.theguard...gration-reforms

[Misnomer]

s42blue, on 18 September 2024 - 08:20 AM, said:

No. I?ve posted about it regularly. Have you just noticed?

No. I stay out of both of your personal, pathetic bickering.

But you've stuck your nose in plenty, so that's complete tosh

[Misnomer]

Westbars Spireite, on 17 September 2024 - 07:41 PM, said:

I'm not sure why you'd confidently state that.

13th July 05.49.

[s42blue]

Misnomer, on 18 September 2024 - 05:03 PM, said:

But you've stuck your nose in plenty, so that's complete tosh

In? Your bickering? Only because it?s tedious 🦆

[Painted Wagon]

Al-Fayed seems to be another example of getting away with despicable acts in part to having friends in high places. Shame he never faced the consequences for his actions.

[Westbars Spireite]

Doesn't come as any surprise to me. Always seemed a wrong 'un.

[Mr Mercury]

Painted Wagon, on 20 September 2024 - 12:02 PM, said:

Al-Fayed seems to be another example of getting away with despicable acts in part to having friends in high places. Shame he never faced the consequences for his actions.

Pity the DPP didn?t know about him! But wait, his department did

[Valley Blues]

The CPS considered charging Al-Fayed on two separate occasions, in 2009 and 2015, but decided there wasn?t a realistic prospect of conviction.

Angela Rayner thinks there?s a culture of powerful people getting away with committing criminal offences.

Who was the head of the CPS in 2009?

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Can anyone quote the reasoning behind the CPS decisions?

Based on available evidence?

Possibly explaining why subsequent occupants of the top job failed to prosecute either?

I get it. There're Labour haters on here. No probs.

But simply parroting Mail-esque media smears is just, y'know, like shouting up your own jacksy...

[Mr Mercury]

Valley Blues, on 22 September 2024 - 12:28 PM, said:

The CPS considered charging Al-Fayed on two separate occasions, in 2009 and 2015, but decided there wasn?t a realistic prospect of conviction.

Angela Rayner thinks there?s a culture of powerful people getting away with committing criminal offences.

Who was the head of the CPS in 2009?

He was probably too busy attending football matches to do his job properly. Sadly the record of those that got away after the CPS were made aware of their crimes but didn?t prosecute, under his tenure, is pretty abhorrent. And indeed the CPS has said it twice failed to prosecute Fayed. A spokesperson for Dowming street said ..the report did not cross Starmers desk, a new get out clause Starmer tends to use now, as he never heard of the buck stopping at the top? Not a good look at all.

This post has been edited by Mr Mercury: 22 September 2024 - 01:30 PM