Sir Cliff Richard
Discussion
Yes you could try that BV except nobody really cares enough to ring and find out. You do care, you have been called out and now you are whining because you aren't dictating the narrative. Which is quite amusing. I've experience of D's aswell but I've no desire to prove it online. I find Guam as much of an area whole as anybody when he is on one of his randy conspiracy crusades but you have done yourself up a right kipper on this one.
Another new mode? A makes an assertion. B queries the assertion. A declines to discuss it save on the phone. In that scenario it looks to me that A has been, as you put it, called out. Call me old fashioned, but I tend to go along the lines of he who asserts something should be able to back it up. Credit to the poster who first suggested D Notices have been used in pervo cases. He offered a source. It turned out to be a rubbish source but at least he was clear.
I have had some experience of attempts by Government to suppress information, acting for both sides of the argument at different times. It has not been my experience that media organisations roll over absent compelling reasons to do so.
I have had some experience of attempts by Government to suppress information, acting for both sides of the argument at different times. It has not been my experience that media organisations roll over absent compelling reasons to do so.
Breadvan72 said:
Another new mode? A makes an assertion. B queries the assertion. A declines to discuss it save on the phone. In that scenario it looks to me that A has been, as you put it, called out. Call me old fashioned, but I tend to go along the lines of he who asserts something should be able to back it up. Credit to the poster who first suggested D Notices have been used in pervo cases. He offered a source. It turned out to be a rubbish source but at least he was clear.
I have had some experience of attempts by Government to suppress information, acting for both sides of the argument at different times. It has not been my experience that media organisations roll over absent compelling reasons to do so.
The basic premise here is that you're making an assumption based upon your guess at what Guam is talking about.I have had some experience of attempts by Government to suppress information, acting for both sides of the argument at different times. It has not been my experience that media organisations roll over absent compelling reasons to do so.
Having been privy to the story (I call it a 'story' as I wasn't there at the time), it came up in conversation with Guam years back, further, having had a quick chat on the phone with Guam this afternoon to confirm it is about what I thought he was talking about, I can fully understand why Guam does not want to commit ANY OF IT to public record on an Internet forum.
As DJRC states, (and I don't know if he is privy to the story), "you have done yourself up a right kipper on this one.".
My assertion is that Guam was perfectly happy to explain the situation to you and you've stumbled at the first fence in refusing to clarify the situation by actually speaking to the bloke.
Who's trying to make himself look like Johnny Big Spuds now?
Anyway, continue in your ignorance, it matters little to me.
P.S. What colour do you like your toe nails?
Breadvan72 said:
Another new mode? A makes an assertion. B queries the assertion. A declines to discuss it save on the phone. In that scenario it looks to me that A has been, as you put it, called out. Call me old fashioned, but I tend to go along the lines of he who asserts something should be able to back it up.
A bit like my little police problem you and Derek Smith helped me with last summer. They made allegations, they realised I had rumbled them and ran away and hid under a rock. If the woeful and inaccurate letter the Chief Constable sent my MP after four months is helpful, I wonder who it helps the most? 
Edited by carinaman on Friday 22 August 19:57
"I know something you don't know!"
"What?"
"Not telling"
>Special Secret Gang<
"I know!!
"Well, tell the rest of us otherwise I'm calling bulls
t"
"NO!"
"Bullst"
>Special Secret Gang<
"YOU'RE JUST PISSY BECAUSE YOU DONT KNOW!"
"I don't care. It's bullst"
"NUH UH!"
That's how this played out.
Good work.
"What?"
"Not telling"
>Special Secret Gang<
"I know!!
"Well, tell the rest of us otherwise I'm calling bulls
t""NO!"
"Bulls
t">Special Secret Gang<
"YOU'RE JUST PISSY BECAUSE YOU DONT KNOW!"
"I don't care. It's bulls
t""NUH UH!"
That's how this played out.
Good work.
I think this is probably the most interesting thread I've ever read on an internet forum, so many different fascinating things covered.
As for sir cliff, has anything emerged yet as to what he is actually accused of doing apart from crimes against popular music?
And what about those dodgy lawyers, politicians and cover-ups.
What is a D/DA again?
What is a super-injunction?
Cheers all great thread, the drinks are on me, when I get my royalty cheque!
As for sir cliff, has anything emerged yet as to what he is actually accused of doing apart from crimes against popular music?
And what about those dodgy lawyers, politicians and cover-ups.
What is a D/DA again?
What is a super-injunction?
Cheers all great thread, the drinks are on me, when I get my royalty cheque!
Hilts said:
Justayellowbadge said:
So.
Cliff Richard.
He's a one, eh?
You're on thin ice son.Cliff Richard.
He's a one, eh?
Just IMO.
Feel free to ignore.
As far as I know 'He's a one' has no negative connotations, it is akin to 'he's a card' or similar meaningless exclamations.
Merely attempting to remind that the thread is not about BV's opinion on Guam, DAs or any other recent tangent.
The clue being in the thread title.
Justayellowbadge said:
Hilts said:
Justayellowbadge said:
So.
Cliff Richard.
He's a one, eh?
You're on thin ice son.Cliff Richard.
He's a one, eh?
Just IMO.
Feel free to ignore.
As far as I know 'He's a one' has no negative connotations, it is akin to 'he's a card' or similar meaningless exclamations.
Merely attempting to remind that the thread is not about BV's opinion on Guam, DAs or any other recent tangent.
The clue being in the thread title.
Here, you hold the rope, I'll chuck it over the tree.
mybrainhurts said:
Justayellowbadge said:
Hilts said:
Justayellowbadge said:
So.
Cliff Richard.
He's a one, eh?
You're on thin ice son.Cliff Richard.
He's a one, eh?
Just IMO.
Feel free to ignore.
As far as I know 'He's a one' has no negative connotations, it is akin to 'he's a card' or similar meaningless exclamations.
Merely attempting to remind that the thread is not about BV's opinion on Guam, DAs or any other recent tangent.
The clue being in the thread title.
Here, you hold the rope, I'll chuck it over the tree.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff