Cluesforum - How far will they go exactly

It's the maudlin sentimental drunken Glaswegian you really have to watch out for.... ;)

Rolfe.
 
Azrael 5 said:
We already know.
Hope Glasgow police arrest Cluesforum members but I doubt it,their radar seems to be concerned with Twitter posts.
Click to expand...

I despise the clowns at Cluesforum. BUT they have a right to free speech. To claim it should be criminal to deny and be generally offensive is in my opinion a dangerous route to take. Censoring should be applied with extreme caution, not because the public is offended.
 
hgus said:
I despise the clowns at Cluesforum. BUT they have a right to free speech. To claim it should be criminal to deny and be generally offensive is in my opinion a dangerous route to take. Censoring should be applied with extreme caution, not because the public is offended.
Click to expand...

I know exactly what you're saying, but here's a similar example that was on DIF a while ago, where many members were sputtering with outrage at the report of a man who has barred from a supermarket for wearing some sort of nazi uniform.

"Freedom of speech" they cried, "how dare he be censored in this way, he has a right to wear what he likes."

What none of them seem to spot was that there were other people there who also had rights, including the right to be offended and outraged by the man's behaviour, and the right to report him to the supermarket and have him removed. Rights apply to all sides.

The families of the people who died have rights. The emergency services and members of the public who were involved have rights, and one of those rights must surely be not to be called liars and frauds by idiots who weren't there and have no idea what happened.

The morons at clueless have rights, but they also have a responsibility to actually check that what they are saying has any truth to it, or at least construct some sort of logical argument based on actual information, not blind and wilful ignorance. If they want to exercise their rights, they need to do so within the context of civilised discussion and rule of law that the people they are targeting are acting under.

Stalking is an offence, libel is an offence. That's what these scum do every time something like this happens, and they don't even have the courage to discuss it openly - they hide behind keyboards and refuse to admit dissenting voices.

No sympathy for them.
 
I cant figure out why they ganged up on Evil Edna attacking him for posting photos that were merely taken at different angles and werent "evidence of fraud". When that is typically what all the members do anyway!
 
threadworm said:
I know exactly what you're saying, but here's a similar example that was on DIF a while ago, where many members were sputtering with outrage at the report of a man who has barred from a supermarket for wearing some sort of nazi uniform.

"Freedom of speech" they cried, "how dare he be censored in this way, he has a right to wear what he likes."

What none of them seem to spot was that there were other people there who also had rights, including the right to be offended and outraged by the man's behaviour, and the right to report him to the supermarket and have him removed. Rights apply to all sides.

The families of the people who died have rights. The emergency services and members of the public who were involved have rights, and one of those rights must surely be not to be called liars and frauds by idiots who weren't there and have no idea what happened.

The morons at clueless have rights, but they also have a responsibility to actually check that what they are saying has any truth to it, or at least construct some sort of logical argument based on actual information, not blind and wilful ignorance. If they want to exercise their rights, they need to do so within the context of civilised discussion and rule of law that the people they are targeting are acting under.

Stalking is an offence, libel is an offence. That's what these scum do every time something like this happens, and they don't even have the courage to discuss it openly - they hide behind keyboards and refuse to admit dissenting voices.

No sympathy for them.
Click to expand...

I don't know how things work in Scotland, apparently it's different than here. Freedom of speech protects you from being prosecuted by the government for what you say (short of incitement). Who a private company decides to let in the door or not has nothing to do with free speech. Also, being censored or banned from a forum isn't a free speech issue either.

I would stand up for any of those blithering idiots over there if one actually got arrested because of something retarded they said on the internet. Who knows where that line of "acceptable" will be drawn next and what side you'll find yourself on.
 
Somehow, I'm not quite getting the outrage expressed here at Cluesforum. At least, not at this time.

Their response to the helicopter crash really isn't all that terrible compared to their threads on 9/11 vicsims or Newtown. Doubting tragedies is what they do, and this tragedy and their response isn't out of the ordinary.
 
Justin39640 said:
I don't know how things work in Scotland, apparently it's different than here. Freedom of speech protects you from being prosecuted by the government for what you say (short of incitement). Who a private company decides to let in the door or not has nothing to do with free speech. Also, being censored or banned from a forum isn't a free speech issue either.

I would stand up for any of those blithering idiots over there if one actually got arrested because of something retarded they said on the internet. Who knows where that line of "acceptable" will be drawn next and what side you'll find yourself on.
Click to expand...

Again, I know exactly where you're coming from and to an extent I agree - who gets to decide what is or is not offensive? It's a thin and dangerous line, one that is cheerfully exploited by these morons on a daily basis.

Technically no-one is censoring them, what we are talking about is prosecuting them if, by exercising their democratic rights and freedoms, they commit an offence such as libel and thus infringe the freedoms and rights of others.
 
MinimumWageShill said:
As for The Clutha, Evil Edna has decided it's just another Psyop complete with Vicsims and a 50 year old helicopter all done to redevelop the land. I would have thought that if that was the case a simple gas explosion when the pub was empty would create far less publicity.
Click to expand...
My guess is that in the Cluesforum mindset, it's all about the publicity, the spectacle. Our Evil Overlords have set up everything as a global theatre set, so as to stun the sheeple into mindlessness with endless repetitions of attention-grabbing disasters that divert them away from looking behind the scenes. Where, of course, the Evil Overlords are doing....
...um...
..well, something terribly evil....
...like ummmmm...
.

.

..

(exits quietly gibbering)
 
Rolfe said:
It's the maudlin sentimental drunken Glaswegian you really have to watch out for.... ;)

Rolfe.
Click to expand...

Based on personal experiences you need to pay attention to all drunken Glaswegians as they can be unpredictable, and often travel in packs.
 
how far will Cluesforum go? That's like asking how deep is "down."


Heh, when I mistyped "Cluesforum" as "Lcuesforum" my auto-correct suggested I meant "Misfortune." :D
 
threadworm said:
Again, I know exactly where you're coming from and to an extent I agree - who gets to decide what is or is not offensive? It's a thin and dangerous line, one that is cheerfully exploited by these morons on a daily basis.

Technically no-one is censoring them, what we are talking about is prosecuting them if, by exercising their democratic rights and freedoms, they commit an offence such as libel and thus infringe the freedoms and rights of others.
Click to expand...


Point of information, there is no such offence as libel in Scotland. Both spoken and written defamation are simply defamation.

Rolfe.
 
threadworm said:
Again, I know exactly where you're coming from and to an extent I agree - who gets to decide what is or is not offensive? It's a thin and dangerous line, one that is cheerfully exploited by these morons on a daily basis.

Technically no-one is censoring them, what we are talking about is prosecuting them if, by exercising their democratic rights and freedoms, they commit an offence such as libel and thus infringe the freedoms and rights of others.
Click to expand...

I was talking about prosecuting them. With libel here, you get sued by the victim in civil court for money, not jail time. People say horrible things about others all the time. We don't throw them in prison for it. The price you pay so to say!

Freedom of speech (in the US) isn't meant to protect you from what you don't want to hear. It's quite the opposite. Like I said, I would think this would make more for a civil case, not a criminal one. Apparently, Scotland is different.

Rolfe said:
Point of information, there is no such offence as libel in Scotland. Both spoken and written defamation are simply defamation.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...
But would you normally go to jail for it there?
 
Last edited:
Justin39640 said:
But would you normally go to jail for it there?
Click to expand...


IANAL, but I don't think so. It's a civil offence.

In Scots legal parlance, a "libel" is the case put forward by the Crown against the accused, or something like that. That's the context I've seen the word used in.

The law makes no distinction between the written word and the spoken word. If you're defamed in either way, it's defamation. The law is different from in England though. I'm not sure of the exact details, but plaintiffs aren't in line for the mega-damages that get awarded in English courts on what seem to me to be quite flimsy grounds sometimes.

Rolfe.
 
tsig said:
Maybe dioxygen, a colorless, orderless gas that is lethal in high concentration.

It also intensifies fires and many other chemical reactions.
Click to expand...

Plus, it has "die" right there in the name.
 
Evil Edna
Member

Posts: 47
Joined: November 7th, 2013, 3:32 am

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Post by Evil Edna on December 5th, 2013, 12:36 am
Hi, I just want to say thank you for giving me a second chance. I will endeavour to maintain a much higher standard of image analysis in the future. And just as importantly, I want to apologise, especially to Lux, for my insulting tone, and to Hoi Polloi, who was also very patient in explaining where and why my logic was flawed. While it would seem possible that many key photos from Glasgow are faked, that is irrelevant when the poor points I was trying to argue didn't prove a thing. As Hoi and Lux have advised, I will properly study the subjects of parallax/perspective before commenting again. Maybe I can also try to reassure that my motives for participating here were always sound, and remain so. All the research documented in September Clues and Clues Forum has proved unquestionably accurate, and I would never challenge that. Whenever possible I do try to disseminate your work to the wider audience, and will continue to do that whether or not a forum member. There is certainly no wish on my part to undermine any of the groundbreaking work you guys have been doing over many years now. I'm sorry everyone.
Click to expand...

That bolded part is scary.

Wow, just wow.
 
Rolfe said:
IANAL, but I don't think so. It's a civil offence.

In Scots legal parlance, a "libel" is the case put forward by the Crown against the accused, or something like that. That's the context I've seen the word used in.

The law makes no distinction between the written word and the spoken word. If you're defamed in either way, it's defamation. The law is different from in England though. I'm not sure of the exact details, but plaintiffs aren't in line for the mega-damages that get awarded in English courts on what seem to me to be quite flimsy grounds sometimes.

Rolfe.
Click to expand...
Well E/W/NI abolished Criminal Libel as a statutory offense in 2010, though it was rarely used bu individuals. I don't think defamation is a criminal offense in Scotland but I don't know for sure.
 
The death rate in Glasgow copter crash has risen to 10 now,Simon Shack is going to mortified.
And didn't you know...
rolleyes.gif

Final death toll stands at 9
Click to expand...
 
Azrael 5 said:
The death rate in Glasgow copter crash has risen to 10 now,Simon Shack is going to mortified.
Click to expand...

But you're missing the point, nobody actually died because they're all 'Vicsims'. The evil powers that be changed the number because they knew Simon was onto them and they are quaking in fear, after all they monitor his site 24/7...Ohh no I've given the game away by including a 7 or something.
 
Evil Edna
Member

Posts: 47
Joined: November 7th, 2013, 3:32 am

Re: THE "CHATBOX"

Post by Evil Edna on December 5th, 2013, 12:36 am
Hi, I just want to say thank you for giving me a second chance. I will endeavour to maintain a much higher standard of image analysis in the future. And just as importantly, I want to apologise, especially to Lux, for my insulting tone, and to Hoi Polloi, who was also very patient in explaining where and why my logic was flawed. While it would seem possible that many key photos from Glasgow are faked, that is irrelevant when the poor points I was trying to argue didn't prove a thing. As Hoi and Lux have advised, I will properly study the subjects of parallax/perspective before commenting again. Maybe I can also try to reassure that my motives for participating here were always sound, and remain so. All the research documented in September Clues and Clues Forum has proved unquestionably accurate, and I would never challenge that. Whenever possible I do try to disseminate your work to the wider audience, and will continue to do that whether or not a forum member. There is certainly no wish on my part to undermine any of the groundbreaking work you guys have been doing over many years now. I'm sorry everyone.
Click to expand...

Ah finally a good old Maoist apology. "I was wrong, You were right, You are always right. I am a worm who humiliate myself before Your righteous feet." But in Maoist China it was followed by "please don't torture and kill me. Here it is followed by "Please let me post on your forum. I promise that I will not deviate from the forum-line." Wonderful! This is how the Maoist and Communistic parties worked in the sixties and seventies.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom