Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Breaking News...edward Heath Was Investigated For Possible Child Abuse
http://
"In a statement, Wiltshire Police said: "Sir Edward Heath has been named in relation to offences concerning children"
"In a statement, Wiltshire Police said: "Sir Edward Heath has been named in relation to offences concerning children"
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by mikey4444. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
jno - //I believe it was to Russell Harty on TV, andy-hughes. Who it was aimed at I couldn't say; nonetheless, Harty asked him if he liked sex and BG gave the cup of tea reply, hence my post. //
That does ring a bell - and the reasoning is similar.
George had an image as a cuddly, but slightly odd pop star that mums and grans liked, so it was politic not to mention is extra-curricular activities which would upset them.
Russell Harty would have completely understood where he was coming from!!
That does ring a bell - and the reasoning is similar.
George had an image as a cuddly, but slightly odd pop star that mums and grans liked, so it was politic not to mention is extra-curricular activities which would upset them.
Russell Harty would have completely understood where he was coming from!!
Just wait a minute....
one of us is guilty of wonky reasoning innit ?
Boy Geo wasnt a child molester ... innit
"Boy George was today sentenced to 15 months in jail for falsely imprisoning a male escort by handcuffing him to a wall and beating him with a metal chain."
I dont think we call rent-boys - - - underage "male escorts" do we ?
there you were sanctimoniously rebuking dear old AOG for deliberately confusing paedophilia and being gay ....
[but I cd be wrong: I frequently am]
one of us is guilty of wonky reasoning innit ?
Boy Geo wasnt a child molester ... innit
"Boy George was today sentenced to 15 months in jail for falsely imprisoning a male escort by handcuffing him to a wall and beating him with a metal chain."
I dont think we call rent-boys - - - underage "male escorts" do we ?
there you were sanctimoniously rebuking dear old AOG for deliberately confusing paedophilia and being gay ....
[but I cd be wrong: I frequently am]
-- answer removed --
Mikey, how coarse you are. I’m not sticking my head in the sand. I simply find witch-hunts distasteful. Tom Watson has made allegations – he is not a ‘victim’. Edward Heath was not a man I admired but it’s very wrong to besmirch anyone’s name without strong evidence to support the allegations. Unlike you, I haven’t pre-judged him, and I don’t slaver over the prospect of anyone's reputation being reduced to tatters for no good reason. I try to be fair. If any genuine ‘victims’ complain to the police we’ll find out whether he’s guilty or not.
Peter Pedant - //Just wait a minute....
one of us is guilty of wonky reasoning innit ?
Boy Geo wasnt a child molester ... innit
"Boy George was today sentenced to 15 months in jail for falsely imprisoning a male escort by handcuffing him to a wall and beating him with a metal chain."
I dont think we call rent-boys - - - underage "male escorts" do we ?
there you were sanctimoniously rebuking dear old AOG for deliberately confusing paedophilia and being gay ....
[but I cd be wrong: I frequently am] //
I am unsure if your post is directed at me - ?
If it is, I don't understand the point you are making - could you please repost in English so I can see what you are getting at? Thanks.
one of us is guilty of wonky reasoning innit ?
Boy Geo wasnt a child molester ... innit
"Boy George was today sentenced to 15 months in jail for falsely imprisoning a male escort by handcuffing him to a wall and beating him with a metal chain."
I dont think we call rent-boys - - - underage "male escorts" do we ?
there you were sanctimoniously rebuking dear old AOG for deliberately confusing paedophilia and being gay ....
[but I cd be wrong: I frequently am] //
I am unsure if your post is directed at me - ?
If it is, I don't understand the point you are making - could you please repost in English so I can see what you are getting at? Thanks.
What you do is..... - read the post Andy
No it is not directed at you - "Andy" does not feature in my post.
it is directed at those who have confused ( durrr ) a conviction for imprisoning a prostitute ( Boy George ) with a conviction for paedophilia ( others )
and I am saying they are different [ but being a decent chap I admitted the possibility of mistake ] No wonder you couldnt understand it: some of these concepts are Very Difficult Indeed.
as for
// Five Police forces investigating this case. " i find it quite chilling".//
think of waste of money
and now think of waste of money five times over.
[ Note to Andy: no, that was not aimed at you either - NB five times table needed to understand comment ]
No it is not directed at you - "Andy" does not feature in my post.
it is directed at those who have confused ( durrr ) a conviction for imprisoning a prostitute ( Boy George ) with a conviction for paedophilia ( others )
and I am saying they are different [ but being a decent chap I admitted the possibility of mistake ] No wonder you couldnt understand it: some of these concepts are Very Difficult Indeed.
as for
// Five Police forces investigating this case. " i find it quite chilling".//
think of waste of money
and now think of waste of money five times over.
[ Note to Andy: no, that was not aimed at you either - NB five times table needed to understand comment ]
Peter Pedant - //What you do is..... - read the post Andy //
I did read the post - how else could I have failed to understand it.
//No it is not directed at you - "Andy" does not feature in my post. //
But since it followed on from my post, I think I made a reasonable assumption - you failed to make clear who the other 'one of us ...' was.
//it is directed at those who have confused ( durrr ) a conviction for imprisoning a prostitute ( Boy George ) with a conviction for paedophilia ( others ) //
Again I do not understand the point you are making - what is the relevance of BG's conviction in this context?
// Note to Andy: no, that was not aimed at you either - NB five times table needed to understand comment ] //
If you continue to post in your own idiosyncratic way, and continue to be misunderstood by myself and others, then the responsibility for that is yours.
The standard when someone queries a post is to offer the explanation requested - that is good manners.
Sarcasm is not required.
I did read the post - how else could I have failed to understand it.
//No it is not directed at you - "Andy" does not feature in my post. //
But since it followed on from my post, I think I made a reasonable assumption - you failed to make clear who the other 'one of us ...' was.
//it is directed at those who have confused ( durrr ) a conviction for imprisoning a prostitute ( Boy George ) with a conviction for paedophilia ( others ) //
Again I do not understand the point you are making - what is the relevance of BG's conviction in this context?
// Note to Andy: no, that was not aimed at you either - NB five times table needed to understand comment ] //
If you continue to post in your own idiosyncratic way, and continue to be misunderstood by myself and others, then the responsibility for that is yours.
The standard when someone queries a post is to offer the explanation requested - that is good manners.
Sarcasm is not required.
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.