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?
Mark reports nothing on Beech guilt
Go to bottomPost New TopicPost Reply
TOPIC: Mark reports nothing on Beech guilt
#191166
MWTW

Mark reports nothing on Beech guilt 4 Years, 9 Months ago  
But he is happy to post in the same time frame that someone arrested for sexual offences.
Why nothing on Beech?
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#191171
'M'

Re:Mark reports nothing on Beech guilt 4 Years, 9 Months ago  
He has now commented MWTW but he knew all along it was lies
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#191172
Re:Mark reports nothing on Beech guilt 4 Years, 9 Months ago  
He has commented. H says...


"I always had very serious doubts about Carl Becch’s accounts of a VIP Westminster abuse ring & Savile - hence why I had nothing to do with him . The Mets Op.Midland have some very serious questions to answer as well - as to why they took his ‘preposterous’ claims seriously ."


I dont actually remember him voicing any doubts about Nick's credibility, but I am glad if he has now accepted that SOMETIMES people tell lies to get money, because the Nick claims were no dafter than many of the Savile stories, or the now disproved attack on the eight year old, by Rolf Harris,(at the event that never happened) which MWT has previously appeared to support.

I imagine he is questioning quite a lot of "evidence" after this!
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#191180
Randall

Re:Mark reports nothing on Beech guilt 4 Years, 9 Months ago  
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:

...the Nick claims were no dafter than many of the Savile stories, or the now disproved attack on the eight year old, by Rolf Harris,(at the event that never happened) which MWT has previously appeared to support.


Oh dear, Honey... You should be well aware that women can never be lying about sexual abuse but men can.

That's because the Feminists' Little Red Book (11th edition foreword by Alison Saunders) designates women as goodies. Nothing they do is wrong. Men are designated baddies, and can be prosecuted and jailed for anything, but really only for one thing: being a man.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#191185
Re:Mark reports nothing on Beech guilt 4 Years, 9 Months ago  
Randall wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:

...the Nick claims were no dafter than many of the Savile stories, or the now disproved attack on the eight year old, by Rolf Harris,(at the event that never happened) which MWT has previously appeared to support.


Oh dear, Honey... You should be well aware that women can never be lying about sexual abuse but men can.

That's because the Feminists' Little Red Book (11th edition foreword by Alison Saunders) designates women as goodies. Nothing they do is wrong. Men are designated baddies, and can be prosecuted and jailed for anything, but really only for one thing: being a man.


Lots of the ridiculous Savile claims were from men, and they were ALL believed.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#191189
Randall

Re:Mark reports nothing on Beech guilt 4 Years, 9 Months ago  
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:
Randall wrote:
honey!oh sugar sugar. wrote:

...the Nick claims were no dafter than many of the Savile stories, or the now disproved attack on the eight year old, by Rolf Harris,(at the event that never happened) which MWT has previously appeared to support.


Oh dear, Honey... You should be well aware that women can never be lying about sexual abuse but men can.

That's because the Feminists' Little Red Book (11th edition foreword by Alison Saunders) designates women as goodies. Nothing they do is wrong. Men are designated baddies, and can be prosecuted and jailed for anything, but really only for one thing: being a man.


Lots of the ridiculous Savile claims were from men, and they were ALL believed.




Who is believed is not the issue. I'm talking about who can be prosecuted when found to be telling porkies.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#191214
Sheba Bear

Re:Mark reports nothing on Beech guilt 4 Years, 9 Months ago  
At the very least Rolf Harris's so-called youngest victim should have been made to pay back the £22,000 that she received for telling a lucrative pack of lies.

In my view she was just a less extreme version of Carl Beech.
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
#191215
Randall

Re:Mark reports nothing on Beech guilt 4 Years, 9 Months ago  
Sheba Bear wrote:
At the very least Rolf Harris's so-called youngest victim should have been made to pay back the £22,000 that she received for telling a lucrative pack of lies.

In my view she was just a less extreme version of Carl Beech.


This is what I've been going on about, in several threads about Carl Beech.

He's been prosecuted for making fantastic accusations without any supporting evidence. But plenty of other people, almost exclusively women, make accusations without any supporting evidence. Some of these are equally fantastic. The woman who accused Mark Pearson for example. Or the HIV positive woman who accused registered blind man Sikhonzile Sibanda of rape.

How fantastic does an uncorroborated accusation have to be before #YouWillNotBeBelieved?
 
Logged Logged
  Reply Quote
Go to topPost New TopicPost Reply