Stephen Lawrence MURDERERS

[Chicken Runner61]

I did, sort of in my last post. It wasn't what I was originally refering to. I suspect you have had to much to drink so at this point I'll wish you a good night.

Yeah right.......

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

I'm happy to let you get it right but you just got it wrong. I said nothing of the sort, so don't put words in my mouth. I'm sure I agree with him about some subjects too. I felt that at times people were giving credence to points that were posted simply because of a racist agenda, while not taking that agenda into account. I'm not exactly the first to notice any of this am I?

All MP said was that, in his view, a fair trial was impossible. Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Buzzer]

I felt that at times people were giving credence to points that were posted simply because of a racist agenda, while not taking that agenda into account

Sorry but I'm with Merry Prankster on this. I don't think a fair trial was possible. If you can't accept that 'reasonable' people can have that opinion then there's not much more to debate.

 

[Chicken Runner61]

Sorry but I'm with Merry Prankster on this. I don't think a fair trial was possible. If you can't accept that 'reasonable' people can have that opinion then there's not much more to debate.

I'm quite happy to let almost anyone have an opinion.

So what would have constituted a fair trial for these people?

And are you saying that they should not be prosecuted now even though that there is evidence to prove their involvement?

How s that fair on Stephen Lawrence or his family?

When is a trial ever completely fair ? People make assumptions about others as soon as they see them - if anything for me the way the case developed would make me even more careful that I gave them a fair trial and not decide on the outside influences.

And in all hasn't the justice system acted to plan in this case.....

1) They went to trial originally - not enough evidence so they were found not guilty.
2) after a change in the law (jeopardy) more / new evidence found they went for retrial and found guilty.

They have not just reheard the original facts they now have more evidence-Unless the evidence is suspect how is that not a fair trial ?

 

[User removed 4]

Which is why 90% of this thread is pointless - their posts are about nothing but race, whatever else they hope to hide it behind. Makes me sick when I see it pandered to and excuses made by otherwise reasonable people

They aren't at all, but you cant or wont see that because of your inherent view that anyone who posts contrary to the accepted NSC majority viewpoint is " a thick racist " , you are the shortsighted one.

 

[El Presidente]

They aren't at all, but you cant or wont see that because of your inherent view that anyone who posts contrary to the accepted NSC majority viewpoint is " a thick racist " , you are the shortsighted one.

IMO the accepted NSC majority viewpoint is that racism is wrong. I don't think you are a racist, or thick, and whilst 99% of your posts seem to involve politics or race related issues, you put forward a considered viewpoint and will argue at length to define your stance.

Das Reich on the other hand is a racist, as for his intelligence, it is difficult to tell as he never posts anything more than a single line, most of which is incoherent. If he does post anything which is explicitly racist he will be banned, and to his credit (of sort) he never goes that far, having been banned for it in the past.

 

[User removed 4]

IMO the accepted NSC majority viewpoint is that racism is wrong. I don't think you are a racist, or thick, and whilst 99% of your posts seem to involve politics or race related issues, you put forward a considered viewpoint and will argue at length to define your stance.

Das Reich on the other hand is a racist, as for his intelligence, it is difficult to tell as he never posts anything more than a single line, most of which is incoherent. If he does post anything which is explicitly racist he will be banned, and to his credit (of sort) he never goes that far, having been banned for it in the past.

But I am Audenshawist !

 

[El Presidente]

But I am Audenshawist !

I would use the phrase PAMOPHILE

 

[aolstudios]

All MP said was that, in his view, a fair trial was impossible. Nothing more, nothing less.

Which I never commented on or responded to! He (mistakenly) took a general comment I made in a post, that reasonable people gave credence, time and respect to posts of Bushy's which I felt were smokescreens for his various racist agendas, as being a response to his, which it wasn't - see below.

Originally Posted by The Merry Prankster

Let me get this right - reasonable people (of which I count myself ) are not allowed to agree with any points made by bushy about anything at all because of some of his views and it will make you sick if they do.

Grow the f*** up.

originally posted by aolstudios

I'm happy to let you get it right but you just got it wrong. I said nothing of the sort, so don't put words in my mouth. I'm sure I agree with him about some subjects too. I felt that at times people were giving credence to points that were posted simply because of a racist agenda, while not taking that agenda into account. I'm not exactly the first to notice any of this am I?

 

[aolstudios]

They aren't at all, but you cant or wont see that because of your inherent view that anyone who posts contrary to the accepted NSC majority viewpoint is " a thick racist " , you are the shortsighted one.

Your posts, including those in this thread, are prompted and driven almost exclusively by a racist agenda. You're picked up on it time and time again. I've never called you a 'thick racist' but you are, absolutely a racist and you know it. Just my opinion mind

 

[User removed 4]

Your posts, including those in this thread, are prompted and driven almost exclusively by a racist agenda. You're picked up on it time and time again. I've never called you a 'thick racist' but you are, absolutely a racist and you know it. Just my opinion mind

As I've said , you're shortsighted , and probably need to get out of your bubble a bit more,just my opinion mind , I'd be interested to see your views on the real racist that is Diane Abbott.

 

[aolstudios]

As I've said , you're shortsighted , and probably need to get out of your bubble a bit more,just my opinion mind , I'd be interested to see your views on the real racist that is Diane Abbott.

I think she's a twat as it goes, as I'm sure you do. And my eyesight's fine, thanks

 

[BadFish]

f***ing hell are you two still at it...Get a f***ing room!

aol IMHO you went past standing up to a bully a good few pages ago (I am not sure that really stands on an internet forum btw). Bushy is Bushy, he may even be a wind up I don't know.

What I do know is that he threatened to come out her and shag my missus a few months back and she is still waiting.

But either way you are just poking the bear.

 

[User removed 4]

f***ing hell are you two still at it...Get a f***ing room!

aol IMHO you went past standing up to a bully a good few pages ago (I am not sure that really stands on an internet forum btw). Bushy is Bushy, he may even be a wind up I don't know.

What I do know is that he threatened to come out her and shag my missus a few months back and she is still waiting.

But either way you are just poking the bear.

did I ? I cant remember that !!

 

[BadFish]

did I ? I cant remember that !!

And now she is crying, you heartless bastard!

 

[User removed 4]

And now she is crying, you heartless bastard!

My apologies to the fragrant Mrs BF .

 

[aolstudios]

f***ing hell are you two still at it...Get a f***ing room!

aol IMHO you went past standing up to a bully a good few pages ago (I am not sure that really stands on an internet forum btw). Bushy is Bushy, he may even be a wind up I don't know.

What I do know is that he threatened to come out her and shag my missus a few months back and she is still waiting.

But either way you are just poking the bear.

I hear you, re standing up to a bully (who was suggesting we take it outside an internet forum, so I reckon it stands up fine) - I'd much rather be chatting about our football team and the he's backed off from his more ridiculous and threatening crap, as he always does when stood up to. I won't be poking the gonk anyway but can't promise not to respond under provocation

 

[User removed 4]

I hear you, re standing up to a bully (who was suggesting we take it outside an internet forum, so I reckon it stands up fine) - I'd much rather be chatting about our football team and the he's backed off from his more ridiculous and threatening crap, as he always does when stood up to. I won't be poking the gonk anyway but can't promise not to respond under provocation

I havent "backed off" from anything, you are now the one pursuing this .

 

[BadFish]

I hear you, re standing up to a bully (who was suggesting we take it outside an internet forum, so I reckon it stands up fine) - I'd much rather be chatting about our football team and the he's backed off from his more ridiculous and threatening crap, as he always does when stood up to. I won't be poking the gonk anyway but can't promise not to respond under provocation

mmm the irony

 

[Pretty pink fairy]

F.a.o. Hitony , i spoke to you at Cheltenham station a few years back when you looked at bit lost