Max Clifford Eight Years

Big Tone says, ultimate power corrupts! Now I can understand the attitude of Joe!!

ROFL
 
Sponsored Links
Why are the sentences consecutive when the only sentencing I've ever seen has been concurrent?
 
RH, you state in the previous post that you didn't claim either to be innocent or that you were defending his actions.

What you said and how we interpret what you say might be two different things.

I personally also assumed by your comments that you were defending his actions.
You may interpret my comments to see anything that you think I said. Others may even intentionally misrepresent my comments.

As I stated, I think that is despicable, devious and desparate.

You presumed wrong, when you thought I was defending either criminals actions.
I neither stated anything that resembles that, or even implied that.

I criticised joe's comaprison of the two penalties. I also stated that I thought it was an attempt to ferment religious intolerance by him making the comarison.
As others have said, the comparison is fatuous.
I believe joe only used it for his own perverted purposes.

If, as you say, joe is the owner of this site, then I'm obviously wasting my time discussing prejudice and bigotry, because joe will ensure it is perpetuated on this site.
Indeed, he goes further, he initiates it.
 
Sponsored Links
A tree is known by its fruit, a man by his deeds.
Saint Basil.

Is that the best put down you can manage,by quoting some one else,come on RH.
You behaved despicably, deviously and desparately.
Drawn your own conclusions.

I was commenting on your inability to offer a put down in your own words,if the best you can do is quote some one else don't bother.
If you didn't feel "put down" why respond with a silly comment suggesting that you weren't

You have behaved despicably, deviously and desparately by intentionally distorting my comment.
Why?
 
Desperately seeking common sense, what are we talking about the patron saint of hotels for?

I was a bit tongue in cheek with my remark about Joe owning this forum, good for him if he does, most of us have crossed swords with him at some time or another, some people think he's a pillock while others think he's a prat, whatever, the thing is we live in a free country with free speech, he has a point of view and you appear to attack him on the grounds of being a racist RH.

With everything that's happened over the last few years from the young girls being groomed to one of OUR soldiers being murdered on the streets of our capital city in broad daylight I think we have a right to talk about these issues, I don't remember there being a gagging order in force with the atrocities being carried out in Northern Ireland thirty years ago!!
 
Desperately seeking common sense, what are we talking about the patron saint of hotels for?

I was a bit tongue in cheek with my remark about Joe owning this forum, good for him if he does, most of us have crossed swords with him at some time or another, some people think he's a pillock while others think he's a prat, whatever, the thing is we live in a free country with free speech, he has a point of view and you appear to attack him on the grounds of being a racist RH.

With everything that's happened over the last few years from the young girls being groomed to one of OUR soldiers being murdered on the streets of our capital city in broad daylight I think we have a right to talk about these issues, I don't remember there being a gagging order in force with the atrocities being carried out in Northern Ireland thirty years ago!!

Quite right, pred.
We do have a right to discuss these issues.
We also have a right to state racist views. We even have a right to ferment prejudice. It's free speech.
Similarly I have a right to oppose prejudice.
Look what happens on this forum when someone does oppose prejudice!

I hope the behaviour of the prejudicist bigade is the action of the few. Sadly, it includes joe.

What we don't have is a right to incite racial hatred or worse still violence. Either is illegal.

However, when the owner of the site, i.e. joe, if he is the owneer, fails to discourage or even initiates prejudice and intolerance, it gives cause for concern.
It means that others are allowed, even encouraged to post offensive comments.

Additionally, the "Alert Mod" function is pointless because the mods are hardly likely to delete offensive posts made by the owner.

But the "Alert Mods" function does not divest the owner of any responsibility for hosting prejudicial material. It could be argued that the owner, actually encourages the posting of bigotted comments.

Moreover, any posts by the owner, which are obviously not deleted, or going to be deleted, sets the level for the mods to work to.
The amount, breadth and depth of offensive posts is hardly conducive to alerting the mods. Therefore the function is more or less superfluous.
 
Sponsored Links
Back
Top