Right-wing academics ‘forced to hide views’

[NotAllThere]

Which question has been answered?

And the post I quoted was on page 12 of this thread. It has not been "answered repeatedly"

This is vetran's MO. Demanding disproof of his rambling, chaotic brainfarts. Vetran - come to the next IRL do. Maybe it will show you that people are complex and their views generally don't confirm to mainstream narratives. You do sometimes raise cogent points. Just not recently.

[WTFH]

This is vetran's MO. Demanding disproof of his rambling, chaotic brainfarts. Vetran - come to the next IRL do. Maybe it will show you that people are complex and their views generally don't confirm to mainstream narratives. You do sometimes raise cogent points. Just not recently.

You expect me to raise cogent points all the time, even in the face of the drivel?

If I didn't have £75k in passive income and 100 houses to my name, I'd not have to work as hard.

[NotAllThere]

This is vetran's MO. Demanding disproof of his rambling, chaotic brainfarts. Vetran ...

Everything after that was directed toward vetran. I know you're a mod, but do try to follow what people are posting.

[Old Greg]

This is vetran's MO. Demanding disproof of his rambling, chaotic brainfarts. Vetran - come to the next IRL do. Maybe it will show you that people are complex and their views generally don't confirm to mainstream narratives. You do sometimes raise cogent points. Just not recently.

The fascinating thing about vetran from a cretinology perspective is his inability to understand nuance and his faith that matters of judgment can be objectively proven.

[NotAllThere]

The fascinating thing about vetran from a cretinology perspective is his inability to understand nuance and his faith that matters of judgment can be objectively proven.

Be nice. To him, it's real.

[Old Greg]

Be nice. To him, it's real.

That was me being nice.

And the way he thinks you believe the opposite of what he does, just because you challenge his argument. A truly fascinating specimen in the Museum of Cretins.

[vetran]

Which question has been answered?

And the post I quoted was on page 12 of this thread. It has not been "answered repeatedly"

Actually it has , but Barmy & you are apparently slow on the uptake, because he has asked it repeatedly.

It was first asked on page 4 post 38. Try the thread search its pretty good.



I do try to provide answers in the face of the drivel. You boys just make tulip up and then accuse posters of being stupid.

[vetran]

The fascinating thing about vetran from a cretinology perspective is his inability to understand nuance and his faith that matters of judgment can be objectively proven.

OK lets explain nuance with figures. We can prove them because they are so bad. I posted the link earlier in the thread as a challenge maybe the trio of twits (WTFH,Barmy & Old Smeg) can find it. By you demonstrated incompetence you obviously need the practice.

Figures released by the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) show that just 1,439 cases resulted in a conviction for rape or another sexual offence in the year to March. Out of more than 55,000 rape accusations that were filed to police, less than 2,102 of those made it to court.

So under 4% of accusations make it to court and 2.6% actually result in a conviction yet you want to ruin someone's name based on an yet as unsubstantiated accusation when on the face of it is 97% likely he didn't do it at least according to English law where a suspect is innocent until PROVEN guilty.

Now I think the prosecution figures stink, but hey the Police & CPS have been all given resource and a political push to improve it for years and failed. having seen a rape trial and competence displayed by the Police & court I am surprised they win any.

Considering the figures I have repeatedly suggested that the accused receives anonymity until the Police can convince a judge there is a reason to remove it and the press are unable to report including any identification until the court approves. That seems fair and if the accused is proven innocent or not even prosecuted his life is not ruined.

Obviously if like Cliff Richard or others the Police are found to have lied on the application a grovelling apology from the Commander, sacking of the officers who committed perjury and a nice financial apology from the force's budget should be required.

If the Police clearly made a genuine and explainable mistake then an apology should be issued so that person can at least show that when they are vetted.

If they are still a suspect then a judge can decide to withhold an apology stating why.

That is fairly nuanced or at least I consider it better than the pitchforks you lot are holding.

[vetran]

Everything after that was directed toward vetran. I know you're a mod, but do try to follow what people are posting.

well you obviously failed to follow Barmy asking the same question on many pages in the thread.

So you are obviously at peak cretin-dom

[darmstadt]

Looks like someone's spent half the evening trying to justify their existence, sad isn't it...

Sent from my 5g carrier pigeon