Outlaw Pete wrote: » Yeah, not one ... Or are you going to absurdly claim that suggesting the whole thing was concocted doesn't mean that they are saying the girl isn't being honest.
Boggles wrote: » Lolz. From a guy who still thinks Harvey Weinstein did nothing wrong. Get up that fúcking you yard you absolute hypocrite.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » It's clear Harvey is something of sleazeball and abused his position no end, intimidating young women at every chance he could get, using his position in the film industry as leverage but he wasn't charged with being a sleazeball creep. Had he been then I'd be the first to say he's guilty as charged, but rape and sexual assault are another matter..
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Seen this said a few times and it makes no sense whatsoever. #ibelieveher is propagated by those who suggest we should believe any woman that makes a sexual assault allegation, even when there is a mountain of evidence to suggest that the complainant may have an ulterior motive for making it, such as weaponizing them for political purposes as we see a lot of in the States. It's nonsensical to suggest we should believe all allegations purely because the person making them is female To suggest that those who believe due process should be applied in the above cases are some how now hypocrites because and inconsistent because they feel the accusation of an eight year old should be listened to is laughable. Have we said the man doesn't deserve his day in court? No. Have we said he must be guilty because a girl said it? No. We have just said that it's clear the girl is being genuine and it should be looked into and she should not be used to have a pop at her Dad because his politics don't happen to align with that of liberals.
Snickers Man wrote: » What's he actually saying in the original video? It sounds like "he folked my daughter" or was it "he photoed my daughter"? There's a definite "Oh" sound but I can't make out what word he's using. Then again, I'm closer to 60 than 50 and not down with the street lingo of you young people. So if anyone could enlighten me I'd be grateful. Just how severe a sexual assault is "Folking" or "photoing" or whatever word he's saying? This is why I have a problem with the weasel term "sexual assault". It covers such a broad spectrum of behaviour and carries such a potentially dangerous loaded message. Could it be that a man (possibly not the fairest skinned in the place) was using his phone and Mr Robinson/Yaxley-Lennon inadvertently (or perhaps not) jumped to the worst possible conclusion? I only ask
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Or are you going to absurdly claim that suggesting the whole thing was concocted doesn't mean that they are saying the girl isn't being honest.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » This keeps getting posted, where has it been reported there were 3 men? Wheres thenproof these "3 men" were not there with their families?
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Stop lying please. From the recent thread: Now, if you want to challenge my take on the lack of evidence in that recent case, have the chutzpah to bump that thread and do so. However, there is no hypocrisy here as I have pointed already out. Here's the post again as you seem to have missed it:
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Those are clearly directed at Stephen. Did you even read them?
ohnonotgmail wrote: » in the weinstein case they are no longer allegations. they have been proven in court and you still dont believe them.
str8talkingguy wrote: » Well he is unscrupulous enough to video tape her reliving it so he can record it for hits. The last thing a real loving parent does is make their child relive something like this unless absolutely necessary,which is while speaking to the relevant authorities,otherwise they want to make them completely forget the whole thing not force her to relive and relive it so he can record it for his followers to get donations and hits.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » As I said to the other user: bump that thread if you have an issue with how I see that case with regards to lack of substantial evidence and how I feel certain allegations entered into evidence should not have been ( with regards to the prior bad acts law). Didn't you lot question the verdict of the Belfast Rape trial by the way? Course ye did. Again letting politics dictate how you see sexual assault trials. Not so with me. Harvey gave millions to the Clintons, raving leftist politically speaking, and yet I had no trouble parking my political views and judging his trial on the merits of the evidence. Not everyone can do that though it would seem.
ancapailldorcha wrote: » It's actually insane that he would force her to relive the ordeal for profit. I think on some level, his acolytes know this so they deceitfully pretend that anyone who criticises Yaxley-Lennon is actually implying that a child is willfully lying about being molested. She is nothing more than a pawn to them.
Snake Plisken wrote: » As if you give a about his child Mr Wannabe Solictor!
Outlaw Pete wrote: » The irony of you asking me did I not read something. Did YOU not read: And that's precisely what you are now doing, trying to suggest that saying Tommy made it up is someone not also saying his daughter is making it up. They are not mutually exclusive. If Tommy is lying, his daughter also has to be. This is not complicated. Here's the girl relaying what happened to her again. I suggest you (and everyone else suggesting that she is part of some elaborate lie) watch it. It's time stamped but in case YouTube block its hotlinking (as they did with the last one posted) you can hear her describe what happened at 44 seconds in:
ancapailldorcha wrote: » Yaxley-Lennon should have informed the Police if this happened. The fact that he didn't and decided to film himself smacking someone suggests that he's just after some publicity.
Billy Mays wrote: » Making up stuff seems to be a common trait in Tommeh's Boards.ie fanboys
Outlaw Pete wrote: » Anyone that sucker punches someone is a cowardly cunt, don't care what they've done.
Outlaw Pete wrote: » I'd say what with Tommy being something of a twat at times he gave him a slap
Outlaw Pete wrote: » I also thought it might be something which was made up BEFORE I viewed the footage,
Tasfasdf wrote: » Yeah its sad to think instead of going to work or doing something productive with their lifes they spend 8-10 hours on boards.ie fighting 'fascists'.
LincolnsBeard wrote: » And if I was Tommy Robinson I would film every single situation I was in, including this. All of the news articles following this stated "Far right extremist arrested for assault in centre parcs" , failing to mention the allegation in the headline.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » Your 1st post yesterday 13.50 Your last post 22.22 11 posts Total time 8 hours 30 mins Lonesomerhodes A total just shy of 8 hours. 15 posts Oh the irony :pac:
Boggles wrote: » It's not footage, it's Stephen talking to "somebody" as his phone points to the ceiling. Was this recorded before he assaulted your man or during the 3 hour wait for the police to get there after he assaulted your man? I'll give you a clue, you don't know. It's not fúcking evidence.It's a 15 minute heavily edited narrated grift video with absolute no verifiable context. It's sole purpose it to steal money off simpletons so Stephen can keep himself out of prison because of yet more criminal thuggery. As for Weinstein you had made up your mind very early on he was not guilty of any criminal offence, on a trial that largely hinged on verbal evidence you decided even after the trial there was not enough to convict. But because Stephen says so on his "news" site you are convinced there was 3 Asian "paedos" touching up children in the centre parcs that day. You are an absolute parody of your self lad.
Snake Plisken wrote: » A bit rich coming from you and the other keyboard warriors!
Outlaw Pete wrote: » A scattergun post but just for the record, I'm no fanboy:
Snake Plisken wrote: » You're in the UK! You should head to the trial and tell Tommy and his supports what you really think of him outside the courthouse if you feel so strongly about him! I No that's never going to happen is it!
Boggles wrote: » I do love the projection from the constant "new" members. All half dozen of them.
Timberrrrrrrr wrote: » They say anyone posting over the space of 8 hours in a day is a "dole head" yet they post over the space of 8 hours a day themselves :pac:
Boggles wrote: » Self awareness would not really be a strong point TBF.