cartoon

















IMPORTANT NOTE:
You do NOT have to register to read, post, listen or contribute. If you simply wish to remain fully anonymous, you can still contribute.





Lost Password?
No account yet? Register
King of Hits
Home arrow Forums
Messageboards
Welcome, Guest
Please Login or Register.    Lost Password?
Your Views Messageboard
Post a new message in "Your Views Messageboard"
Name:
Subject:
Boardcode:
B I U S Sub Sup Size Color Spoiler Hide ul ol li left center right Quote Code Img URL  
Message:
(+) / (-)

Emoticons
B) :( :) :laugh:
:cheer: ;) :P :angry:
:unsure: :ohmy: :huh: :dry:
:lol: :silly: :blink: :blush:
:kiss: :woohoo: :side: :S
More Smilies
 Enter code here   

Topic History of: Castle's explosive dossier
Max. showing the last 5 posts - (Last post first)
Author Message
hedda MI5 , Special Branch a law unto themselves.

Unless you are prescribing to the hysterical claims of Exaro who are bullying MPs into joining their pedo campaign. They claim the above 'seize' "dossiers" for other reasons.

I predict : these 'inquiries' will come to nothing.

## incidently one of Hale's tales (and full marks for his previous campaigns to release an innocent) was beaten up by tabloids re a "Tory grandee with a young boy video" with full frothing at the mouth except...when you got to the last paragraph Hales said basically "I knew the man well and it wasn't him in the video"!

but who cares about details?
JK2006 Person makes vague complaint to police. Huge publicity in press. Person's evidence enhanced by detail obtained through media. You couldn't make it up! Well, Max Clifford did, 14 years ago. A clever man. Though not quite as clever as he thought.
In The Know Pattaya wrote:
Is there any hard evidence? Or just his word?

I haven't read the entire story, Pat (they are all starting to sound very very similar aren't they?)
Pattaya In The Know wrote:
sorry, forgot link -

At this point, the officer produced a document, signed by a judge. It showed that his previous remark about not printing the story had not been a request, but an order. The document handed to Hale was a D-notice — a relic of wartime censorship that could be served on newspaper editors, allowing the Government to block any story that threatened national security.

‘If you don’t comply with this notice, we will arrest you for perverting the course of justice,’ the detective barked. ‘You will be liable for up to ten years in prison.’

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2697947...r.html#ixzz37vY6AqY9

whilest on the subject -

Labour peer allegedly raped 4 year old 40 years ago !

... but the police got the wrong contact details - so have reported themselves to the IPCC ! (you couldn't make this up, could you?)

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2698139...our-decades-ago.html


Is there any hard evidence? Or just his word?
In The Know sorry, forgot link -

At this point, the officer produced a document, signed by a judge. It showed that his previous remark about not printing the story had not been a request, but an order. The document handed to Hale was a D-notice — a relic of wartime censorship that could be served on newspaper editors, allowing the Government to block any story that threatened national security.

‘If you don’t comply with this notice, we will arrest you for perverting the course of justice,’ the detective barked. ‘You will be liable for up to ten years in prison.’

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2697947...r.html#ixzz37vY6AqY9

whilest on the subject -

Labour peer allegedly raped 4 year old 40 years ago !

... but the police got the wrong contact details - so have reported themselves to the IPCC ! (you couldn't make this up, could you?)

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2698139...our-decades-ago.html