You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Ghislaine Maxwell trial
January 29 2022 1.48pm

Ghislaine Maxwell trial

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 13 of 16 < 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 >

 

View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 03 Jan 22 9.37am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Apparently that reasonable request offends him in some way.

I don't regard it as reasonable to expect anyone to do anything anywhere that is neither against the law, nor the site rules or common decency. I am not impolite, or make personal criticism. I address the post, and not the poster.

When posters get offended that their post is being criticised it gives me encouragement that my criticism has had an impact.

As I have often said, if anyone has no interest in what I have to say the answer is entirely in their own hands. Just don't read it! It's never posted personally. Only ever to express an alternative viewpoint.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 03 Jan 22 9.52am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Badger11

Whilst I am not a conspiracy theorist I think it is pretty obvious that Epstein cultivated the friendship of the elite across the world to protect himself and his illegal activities. Some of those people may have also participated in this sex trafficking. At the very least these powerful people are compromised and now want to hide their association.

Bill Clinton claimed he only flew on that plane 2/3 times the plane logs indicate double figures.

I don't believe that Epstein was murdered I think he couldn't face life in jail that said there are plenty of people who don't want any further investigation for fear of embarrassment of even criminal charges.

You seem content that the authorities will investigate I am more cynical like I say no big conspiracy but the politicians and law enforcement just don't want to turn stones over in case they find more stuff against the elite.

I agree with this. The circumstantial evidence doesn't look good, but that's not enough. That the rich and powerful were cultivated by Epstein is obvious, but were they corrupted by him too? Or just flattered? I am sure that it won't just be the authorities looking. The press will be all over it, looking in every dark corner and offering substantial sums for "exclusives". If the evidence is there someone will break it out. If evidence of anyone seeking to suppress evidence was found then that would be just as big a story as this is, so would they risk it?

I don't know, any more than anyone else here does so until I do, I reserve judgement.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 03 Jan 22 10.09am Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Styxhexenhammer666 is not in the 'alt right'....that's a phrase that's falling out of use anyway and describes the former Spencer centred crowd.

He is a libertarian that's on the right certainly but to call him 'alt right' is just ignorance and shows leftist media influence, where they will happily lie about their opponents.

If you want to know what the dissident right actually believe in and what they discuss watch some of Academic Agent's streams...you'd certainly find out where that info graphic came from.

[Link]

Or you could just watch Millenniyule that's on every year.

[Link]

Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2022 12.00am)

An alternative opinion of Tarl Warwick aka "Styxhexenhammer666"

[Link]

Note, it says he is a "YouTube talker who promotes alt-right talking points. Warwick previously considered himself a "libertarian", and before that, a "progressive"."

RationalWiki, the source of the above is not "leftist media".

It's stated purpose is:-

Analyzing and refuting pseudoscience and the anti-science movement;
Documenting the full range of crank ideas;
Explorations of authoritarianism and fundamentalism;
Analysis and criticism of how these subjects are handled in the media.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 03 Jan 22 11.26am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by cryrst

Geez it's lucky your on the ball. I imagine the society that's been created makes hurty words the worst crime!

We don't hear anyone call this a free society anymore do we. Those activists are bad people and it's relevant to warn others at just the extent some of them will go to damage people.

Having joined Hol back in 2009 I certainly should have been far more careful with my info....more fool me I suppose, but I was a default normie conservative back then....small 'c' even.

Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2022 11.33am)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 03 Jan 22 11.32am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Originally posted by Mr Palaceman

I'm actually really shocked at that. That's quite extreme..

It is.

That's the irony.

It certainly narrowed my options. However, I'm doing better than in my teaching days and to be honest I don't think I have the energy levels to teach again.

Probably why you don't see many grey haired teachers anymore.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 03 Jan 22 11.41am Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

RationalWiki is just another leftist/establishment hijacked project, like its parent Wikipedia.

The idea that there are 'alt right' talking points is a complete nonsense. There is nothing that they talk about that the default right itself wasn't freely discussing thirty even twenty years ago. It's a deliberate attempt to colour something as extreme and censor people via fear of association.

These are not objective non agendaed takes and anyone who tells you that is either ignorant or deliberately dishonest.

The co-founder of Wikipedia explains the problem here....Wikipedia use to be a site I funded back in the day.....because its core principle of providing mass information to anyone for free was revolutionary and humanitarian. But it was hijacked.

[Link]

Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2022 11.54am)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 03 Jan 22 12.23pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Ouzo Dan

I'm sorry you have to put up with some absolute freaks on here & elsewhere online mate.

You are right that there are some absolute freaks on here, but none, so far as I can tell, that target this particular poster, or those who support him. They are all from "the other, darker side".

Nor do I see any regular poster who is likely to have sent the Police to anyone's door as a consequence of anything posted in the open forums. I haven't and, whilst I thoroughly disagree with some odious opinions posted here, respect their right to be expressed, so long as others respect their right to be contradicted.

I trust all advocates of free speech agree.

What any past users might be doing is unknown to me. I have no contact, and have never had.


 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 03 Jan 22 12.52pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

RationalWiki is just another leftist/establishment hijacked project, like its parent Wikipedia.

The idea that there are 'alt right' talking points is a complete nonsense. There is nothing that they talk about that the default right itself wasn't freely discussing thirty even twenty years ago. It's a deliberate attempt to colour something as extreme and censor people via fear of association.

These are not objective non agendaed takes and anyone who tells you that is either ignorant or deliberately dishonest.

The co-founder of Wikipedia explains the problem here....Wikipedia use to be a site I funded back in the day.....because its core principle of providing mass information to anyone for free was revolutionary and humanitarian. But it was hijacked.

[Link]

Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2022 11.54am)

That directly contradicts its mission statement, which makes no political statements of any kind.

Having lived for 77 years I see the type of right wing opinion being opening promoted these days as significantly more extreme than at any previous time. The idea that it is more moderate today seems ridiculous to me. As people tend to become more conservative as they age I would have expected to have become more sympathetic, rather than less, to right wing attitudes.

Nor do I see any kind of deliberate attempt to "colour" anything as extreme. When something IS extreme, colour isn't needed.

I have no idea why anyone thinks Wiki has been hijacked. So far as I am aware anyone can still edit entries. It seems to be that there are some who just don't like contradictory opinions to their own appearing.

Sanger was hardly a "co-founder" of Wiki! He exchanged some early emails with Jimmy Wales, who actually drove the project, but they quickly fell out on over its direction, and he left, to become a regular critic.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 03 Jan 22 12.59pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

The Police themselves told me that they had been directed by someone concerning my postings on Hol in relation to PR (who are a legal organisation). PR are a subject that's probably been more posted about by its opponents than me.

I told them my politics and that my views are freely available to read on Hol if they want and that I can think of nothing I've posted that's particularly controversial within a free society. I told them that I think this seems to be the actions of leftist activism trying to harm me and as a consequence my family.

As I've thought about it I have my suspicions of who it is, mainly of someone who was banned but that's suspicion only. I only have assumptions.

However, the malign intentions of this person and the fuel that greases that wheel are obvious.


Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2022 1.17pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 03 Jan 22 1.10pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

Apparently mission statements should be taken at face value.

I don't think its fair to demote Sanger's role in the original form of Wikipedia.....the form that I enthusiastically supported.

On Wikipedia's own page it states, 'Wikipedia was launched on January 15, 2001, by Jimmy Wales[6] and Larry Sanger; Sanger coined its name as a blending of "wiki" and "encyclopedia".'

On Sanger's page it states, 'Sanger served as Wikipedia's community leader in Wikipedia's early stages but became increasingly disillusioned with the project and left it in 2002'.

It's a statement of fact that Sanger was a co-founder of Wikipedia.

While I think the original intent of Wikipedia was a noble one and that some good people are still there, I think Sanger's criticisms of it now that it is largely a politically establishment mouthpiece that is no longer neutral, which is a divergence from its original conception, is just a statement of reality.

Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2022 2.24pm)

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Stirlingsays's Profile Stirlingsays Online Flag 03 Jan 22 1.24pm Send a Private Message to Stirlingsays Holmesdale Online Elite Member Add Stirlingsays as a friend

While I recognise that this is taking us away from the trial I have to question the statement that 'the type of right wing opinion being openly promoted these days as significantly more extreme than at any previous time'.

That's nonsense.

 


'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Wisbech Eagle's Profile Wisbech Eagle Flag Truro Cornwall 03 Jan 22 5.50pm Send a Private Message to Wisbech Eagle Add Wisbech Eagle as a friend

Originally posted by Stirlingsays

Apparently mission statements should be taken at face value.

I don't think its fair to demote Sanger's role in the original form of Wikipedia.....the form that I enthusiastically supported.

On Wikipedia's own page it states, 'Wikipedia was launched on January 15, 2001, by Jimmy Wales[6] and Larry Sanger; Sanger coined its name as a blending of "wiki" and "encyclopedia".'

On Sanger's page it states, 'Sanger served as Wikipedia's community leader in Wikipedia's early stages but became increasingly disillusioned with the project and left it in 2002'.

It's a statement of fact that Sanger was a co-founder of Wikipedia.

While I think the original intent of Wikipedia was a noble one and that some good people are still there, I think Sanger's criticisms of it now that it is largely a politically establishment mouthpiece that is no longer neutral, which is a divergence from its original conception, is just a statement of reality.

Edited by Stirlingsays (03 Jan 2022 2.24pm)

What it actually says is "During 2000, Jimmy Wales (founder of Nupedia and co-founder of Bomis), and Larry Sanger, whom Wales had employed to work on the encyclopedia project, discussed ways of supplementing Nupedia with a more open, complementary project. Multiple sources suggested that a wiki might allow public members to contribute material, and Nupedia's first wiki went online on January 10, 2001.

There was considerable resistance on the part of Nupedia's editors and reviewers to the idea of associating Nupedia with a website in the Wiki format, so Sanger gave the new project the name "Wikipedia" and it was launched on its own domain, wikipedia.com, on January 15".

So Sanger was an employee, given due credit for coming up with the name, but who quickly departed.

When anyone, whatever their political persuasion might be, can edit Wiki, the idea that it has a "leftish" bias, or is an "establishment mouthpiece", is plainly preposterous.

That has the aroma of a disaffected employee who is sore that he quit too soon, and has missed out on considerable wealth.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 13 of 16 < 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Ghislaine Maxwell trial