O/T:- ⚠️Impressed with the leadership [The UK Party Politics Thread]

[Med Pie]

Ok so why are you so wary of posting the details then?

I haven't said whether or not I think it's true but Starmer is no stranger to these type of allegations.

Jim Davidson who had been touted as someone to have seen a video involving Lord Ali, subsequently, categorically, stated that this was not true.

As for 'hero's' assertion that I think a persons ***uality is newsworthy, he's yet to show me where I said that. I would normally defend a persons right to a private life but I am curious as to why these type of allegations get leveled at Starmer and why, if not true, legal action has not be taken against those outlets that proliferate such stories.

[HeroPie1862]

Ok so why are you so wary of posting the details then?

Just google it bro, you'll find the information.

[MarcusCole]

I didn't bring it up out of nothing, plenty of people are covering the story yet the MSM are ignoring it and btw, slander is not as simple as that. Even if something is false, if you can show that you genuinely thought it was true when you posted, you will not be guilty of slander.

That is not true, there is a defence of Honest Opinion but the statement must be genuine expression of opinion based on true facts, not just internet posts from a bunch of conspiracy theorists.

[Med Pie]

That is not true, there is a defence of Honest Opinion but the statement must be genuine expression of opinion based on true facts, not just internet posts from a bunch of conspiracy theorists.

Isn't that what I said?

'if you can show that you genuinely thought it was true when you posted' and who, in the eyes of the law, decides who is a conspiracy theorist and who is credible to the average man?

'The "honest opinion" defence is more protective of free speech, as it doesn't require the opinion to be based on demonstrably true facts

Again, why is no legal action being taken?

[Med Pie]

Ah, our sensitive little troll.

[LincsPie]

Can tell the season's over........

[Elite_Pie]

'if you can show that you genuinely thought it was true when you posted' and who, in the eyes of the law, decides who is a conspiracy theorist and who is credible to the average man?

'The "honest opinion" defence is more protective of free speech, as it doesn't require the opinion to be based on demonstrably true facts

So does that mean I would be safe if I said that I thought you were a f**king tw*t?

As long as I genuinely thought it was true?

[Med Pie]

So does that mean I would be safe if I said that I thought you were a f**king tw*t?

As long as I genuinely thought it was true?

Ah, Mr Saxby, I think the same of you and so do many others.

Hows the Port wine?

[MarcusCole]

So does that mean I would be safe if I said that I thought you were a f**king tw*t?

As long as I genuinely thought it was true?

No because I would report that to the Mods as abuse and would expect you to get a temporary ban, there are members of this board that assume because they have a large number of posts they can use this forum to abuse people. medpie called me a moron recently doesn't mean people should abuse them


Abusive Comments.
Members may not use the Forum to abuse any other member or non-member of the Forum. If a member does abuse another member then they will be issued a warning, along with details of why they have been warned. If a member repeats the offence, this will result in a permanent ban.
If however, you feel that you have been unfairly treated, then contact the Administrator, who will review the situation.

Just because you don't like someone doesn't mean you can use abuse against them

[Med Pie]

No because I would report that to the Mods as abuse and would expect you to get a temporary ban, there are members of this board that assume because they have a large number of posts they can use this forum to abuse people. medpie called me a moron recently doesn't mean people should abuse them


Abusive Comments.
Members may not use the Forum to abuse any other member or non-member of the Forum. If a member does abuse another member then they will be issued a warning, along with details of why they have been warned. If a member repeats the offence, this will result in a permanent ban.
If however, you feel that you have been unfairly treated, then contact the Administrator, who will review the situation.

Just because you don't like someone doesn't mean you can use abuse against them

I apologise for that, and btw I got a warning for it, I bet he won't.

Also, I'm not someone who obsesses over a particular poster like some do, I hadn't even realised it was you that I called.

Also, I am a him so can people please stop calling me they/them, that's twice today!