If conspiracy theorists would only take the time to ask themseves a few questions such as, 'Where is the evidence that doesn't rely on uncorroborated personal testimonials?', 'What does uncorroborated mean?' or 'Why do aliens ony ever abduct f***wits?', there would be a lot less nonsense on t'internet.
Last edited by dloper; 01-03-2012 at 10:58 PM.
How come aliens only abduct f*ckwits?
Thankfully, that could never happen here.
But, just as black holes cannot be seen directly, but only by the influence they exert on nearby objects, the available evidence here is what people may choose not recognise as relevant, but is still important. It would be the simplest thing in the world for a willing constabulary to prove that the tale of a police raid on Anne & Hollie Greig's home was entirely false, so why don't they? Because that would be giving too much weight to the allegations, some would say, although sentencing a man (who has never been in court before?) to a year without suspension for 'breach of the peace' (and violating a bail order?) is not...
Last edited by Joker; 04-03-2012 at 11:21 AM.
Some would also say that a man who has an interdict (not a bail order) made against him would be intelligent enough to know that if he breached it he would go to prison, since that is the normal punishment. If a lay expert on the law isn't intelligent enough to know that breach of a court's interdict leads to a prison sentence then really there is no hope for the people he purports to represent. I'm glad I don't have him as a representative.
There was an appeal in the RCJ on Friday mid-day IIRC. How did that go?
Just checked. The appeal was for Hollie Greig's mother to keep her.
There is a Youtube link:
As always, attacks on the system, but no names and no proof. The video was uploaded by 7bananatrees77. It was categorised as 'News & Politics'. The tags are what sums up the whole thing in my eyes:
I make no further comment other than to point out that one of the comments referred to the presence of the 'Free man dom'.bill maloney ProtestRobert Green Anne Greig Hollie Greig Child Snatching David Icke Brian Gerrish UK Column conspiracy High Court Protest 9/11 INSIDE JOB 7/7 INSIDE JOB Hollie Demands Justice Aberdeenshire the Guardian police social services lying police state FILTHY PAEDOPHILES baby P.
And I could not recall the precise offence the extra three months were added for, which is why I used brackets and a question mark when I added that part, as I equally wan't sure if Robert Green had been guilty of any previous offence. This also isn't grounds for glibness, although that does, again, distract from aspects of the case which some might wish to be overlooked.
Taking everything together, Robert Green was sentenced to a year in prison because he would not cease to accuse various people of offences that the police failed, at various points, to investigate properly. Yet despite those failures, Robert Green is the only person to come to grief over these events.
I don't put any more faith in the testimony of an abused girl than anyone else, but I know personally how quickly authorities can fall into abusing their powers, for what they might think are the best of reasons, and then start covering up those abuses as well, to make matters much worse. There's fire in them thar hills (some would say).
The 'No smoke without fire' argument doesn't hold water.
How come aliens only abduct f*ckwits?
Conspiracy theorists get a bad rep because they fail the Occam's Razor test, being too ready to insist that there's someone micro-managing a situation when, yes, it just isn't possible to maintain the required degree of secrecy in those circumstances. What is easier to conceive of is a looser form of cover-up, where various people fear for their jobs if they speak out, perhaps also believing, as groundlessly as the theorists, that someone in a position of authority will suppress the facts ruthlessly anyway. Neither ****-up or true cover-up, but cocker-up. There was a story a few days ago which suggested that the UK might be more corrupt than we generally assume it to be, and I don't really doubt it. Behind some of the rumours there will be facts, but we won't know for sure unless we ask the questions, and get answers.
Well it happened alright in Belgium, but the thing was everyone knew the authorities were corrupt and in the end about ½ million ended up outside the government buildings and wouldn't go home until the government had resigned. What I reckon is going on here though is that the authorities, which are worried about Brian Gerrishes investigations into genuine matters, are fighting back with attempts to feed bogus claims that will discredit the claims that are true by association.
I spent a bit of time on the UK Column forum and there were a mixture of genuine people, some of whom were very smart, and then there were one or two I was certain were working for the other side. One in particular seemed like an expert brainwasher and others were highly politically correct. The ones with good information were constantly undermined by these people. Now I see the forum has been shut down. They managed to ban me from it before it did because I found some rather embarrassing information on them. They had blown their cover. Brian Gerrish has been infiltrated himself. John Harris is one to watch out for.
Question the nature of your orders
This is a well articulated discourse following the eviction of Occupy London from the area around St Paul's. The Freeman stuff was effectively knocked on the head by the Master of the Rolls in the Court of Appeal:
The Court of Appeal only recognises MC 1297. No other MC is in force. Endex. All Freemen of the land are demonstrably stupid (IMHO). I say that based on legal evidence and not, as with all of these conspiracy loons, idle speculation.