Crosswords1 min ago
Good Riddance
Answers
One by one the "gods" of the luvvies are revealed to have feet of clay. Meehh.
11:11 Sun 18th Feb 2018
The aBBC just can't help themselves, can they?
'Details of Mr Cox's alleged behaviour at Save the Children, which he left in 2015, emerged after Oxfam issued its own apology over a sex scandal involving aid workers in Haiti.'
'alleged behaviour'? Why would they say alleged after he's admitted to it himself.
'which he left'? Lol, sacked, left. No doubt interchangeable at the BBC too.
'emerged after Oxfam...' Emerged 2 years ago as well they know. Didn't stop them having him on to spout his pro-EU, pro-Muslim, anti-Trump, lefty botox every other day.
'Details of Mr Cox's alleged behaviour at Save the Children, which he left in 2015, emerged after Oxfam issued its own apology over a sex scandal involving aid workers in Haiti.'
'alleged behaviour'? Why would they say alleged after he's admitted to it himself.
'which he left'? Lol, sacked, left. No doubt interchangeable at the BBC too.
'emerged after Oxfam...' Emerged 2 years ago as well they know. Didn't stop them having him on to spout his pro-EU, pro-Muslim, anti-Trump, lefty botox every other day.
Jo Cox was murdered by an extremist far right nutcase.
Her husband, then unknown, became a public figure.
Historic allegations, before his wife was murdered, of inappropriate behaviour to women have come to light.
Mr Cox has admitted to the offenses.
However, it appears that he is being judged in some circles, has a hypocrite and a bogeyman because he was the victim of a far right killer and not as a normal person. Strange rationale being used methinks.
Her husband, then unknown, became a public figure.
Historic allegations, before his wife was murdered, of inappropriate behaviour to women have come to light.
Mr Cox has admitted to the offenses.
However, it appears that he is being judged in some circles, has a hypocrite and a bogeyman because he was the victim of a far right killer and not as a normal person. Strange rationale being used methinks.
Spicerack,
The BBC report says ‘alledged’ because Mr Cox denies the allegation, and nothing has been proven (either way) in a court of law.
There is no legal proof, just one persons word against another, so it is an allegation, not a proven fact, and the BBC has to say ‘alleged’ to avoid being sued for a falsehood ( something which posters on a minor social media site seemingly are unconcerned about ).
The BBC report says ‘alledged’ because Mr Cox denies the allegation, and nothing has been proven (either way) in a court of law.
There is no legal proof, just one persons word against another, so it is an allegation, not a proven fact, and the BBC has to say ‘alleged’ to avoid being sued for a falsehood ( something which posters on a minor social media site seemingly are unconcerned about ).
He said he didn't accept the allegations but did accept his actions were inappropriate. Did he just make a pass at someone?
It does seem to me that in general you can't chat someone up without being labelled some sort of pervert. Which I also think detracts from cases that do step over the boundaries.
It does seem to me that in general you can't chat someone up without being labelled some sort of pervert. Which I also think detracts from cases that do step over the boundaries.
// So you’re saying he can’t be criticised and his misdemeanours should be overlooked because he’s the ‘victim of a far right killer’? //
No I am not saying that.
But I am questioning why he is a figure of hate to right wing ‘thinkers’.
His wife was brutally murdered, he was a bit of a tit in the past. Not sure why that is front page news in the right wing media.
No I am not saying that.
But I am questioning why he is a figure of hate to right wing ‘thinkers’.
His wife was brutally murdered, he was a bit of a tit in the past. Not sure why that is front page news in the right wing media.
Mr Cox is not an elected individual or someone who should be subjected to trial by media.
He is a relative unknown, we only know about him because his wife was brutally murdered by a far right wing fanatic.
The allegations in the US are unproven, and never went to court.
The OP, in labelling the man a ‘pervert’ is guilty of libel, which is a criminal offence.
He is a relative unknown, we only know about him because his wife was brutally murdered by a far right wing fanatic.
The allegations in the US are unproven, and never went to court.
The OP, in labelling the man a ‘pervert’ is guilty of libel, which is a criminal offence.
