This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In
Stirlingsays 06 Dec 22 8.56am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by HKOwen
Waiting to hear his adventures of thwarting ivory poachers Indeed, I think his senior editor friend at the Mail should do a piece on all his heroic acts to improve the world. It's the least he deserves at this point. Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Dec 2022 8.57am)
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Dec 22 10.53am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by HKOwen
I think when Musk is made aware that WE thinks he is making a fool of himself we will see a significant shift in his behaviour. Peter Kay's return to stand up second behind WE posts in things that make you laugh out loud. I am not an expert on the US Constitution and it's interpretation. Are you? So when something like this comes up I read the objective opinions of those who are experts. Perhaps you, and those who think like you, only read the biased opinions of right wing observers who want the Constitution to say things it does not? Musk has been taken to task for completely misinterpreting what the First Amendment means. You can think I am foolish for reporting that, but it doesn't make it untrue. Whether Musk changes his stance after being on the end of ridicule is as big open question as whether you, and your fellow purveyors of ad hominems do also. I rather doubt it myself as you all appear to share some blindspots to basic truth. Musk appears to be making a determined effort to destroy a very expensive purchase. One he tried to withdraw from. He obviously must possess business acumen, but common sense and political nous seem to be missing.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Dec 22 10.56am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Stirlingsays
Indeed, I think his senior editor friend at the Mail should do a piece on all his heroic acts to improve the world. It's the least he deserves at this point. Edited by Stirlingsays (06 Dec 2022 8.57am) He retired from the Mail some years ago, but remains active, using his writing skills elsewhere and in pursuit of loftier goals than responding to sarcasm.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
HKOwen Hong Kong 06 Dec 22 10.59am | |
---|---|
This isn't sarcasm, it's poking fun at pomposity, quite different. Enjoy the attention, the gift of making people laugh is a wonderful thing
Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Dec 22 11.21am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
From Wikipedia regarding the convincing witness Steele the Inspector General's conclusion. "One of the report's findings related to conflicting accounts of sourced content in the dossier. When one of Steele's sources was later interviewed by the FBI about the allegations sourced to them, they gave accounts which conflicted with Steele's renderings in the dossier. They indicated that Steele "misstated or exaggerated" the source's statements.[52][114] The IG found it difficult to discern the causes for the discrepancies between some dossier allegations and explanations later provided to the FBI by the sources of those allegations. The IG attributed the discrepancies to three possible factors: miscommunication between Steele and the sources, "exaggerations or misrepresentations" by Steele, or misrepresentations by the sources when questioned by the FBI" Steele was a paid informant to the FBI but admitted that he considered his client was not them but the people who asked him to commission the report e.g. Hilary Clinton. In short much of what Steele has said is conjecture certainly the more salacious stuff he is not a reliable witness as he was paid and therefore had a financial incentive to dig up these allegations. He maybe telling the truth I have no idea however he is most certainly tainted as a witness but the press lapped it up. I hear they are going to prosecute Trump any day now any day. Edited by Badger11 (06 Dec 2022 8.12am) Steele has always said that not everything he reported would ultimately be proved true, as it all came from second and third hand testimony. Don't let that stop you assuming that you know which of those three explanations is correct. Steele did not work for Clinton or the DNC. He worked for an intermediary and it is disputed on how much he knew about who the final client was. Initially that was a group of "never-Trumpers". When his contract was ended he continued to work, without reward, because what he was discovering was so important. He was certainly paid so had a financial incentive in finding the evidence. However, all it ever did was confirm what other sources had found. It was the decision to publish it that made it controversial. You can doubt him all you wish. I have heard him speak on this several times. He is a quiet, modest man who doesn't seek attention. If I was on a jury I would find him a compelling witness. He makes no claim that everything he reports being told will be true. He just reports it and says that it comes from usually reliable sources, independent of each other, which taken together establishes a troubling pattern.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Dec 22 11.30am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by HKOwen
This isn't sarcasm, it's poking fun at pomposity, quite different. Enjoy the attention, the gift of making people laugh is a wonderful thing You can poke fun using sarcasm, even if you regard the target as pompous! No mutual exclusivity there! I am doing a short stand up at a gig next Saturday whilst a mate of mine gets his music gear set up. Maybe you will be in the audience. Don't want a sea of blank faces do I?
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
HKOwen Hong Kong 06 Dec 22 11.50am | |
---|---|
The gift that keeps on giving
Responsibility Deficit Disorder is a medical condition. Symptoms include inability to be corrected when wrong, false sense of superiority, desire to share personal info no else cares about, general hubris. It's a medical issue rather than pure arrogance. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Dec 22 11.58am | |
---|---|
Originally posted by HKOwen
The gift that keeps on giving It's nearly Christmas, the season of goodwill to all men. Even those who don't really deserve it.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 06 Dec 22 2.31pm | |
---|---|
Kanye West wants Jews to forgive Hitler......Completely unrealistic, instead of that how about we get an apology for Vanessa Feltz.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Badger11 Beckenham 06 Dec 22 3.49pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Wisbech Eagle
Steele has always said that not everything he reported would ultimately be proved true, as it all came from second and third hand testimony. Don't let that stop you assuming that you know which of those three explanations is correct. Steele did not work for Clinton or the DNC. He worked for an intermediary and it is disputed on how much he knew about who the final client was. Initially that was a group of "never-Trumpers". When his contract was ended he continued to work, without reward, because what he was discovering was so important. He was certainly paid so had a financial incentive in finding the evidence. However, all it ever did was confirm what other sources had found. It was the decision to publish it that made it controversial. You can doubt him all you wish. I have heard him speak on this several times. He is a quiet, modest man who doesn't seek attention. If I was on a jury I would find him a compelling witness. He makes no claim that everything he reports being told will be true. He just reports it and says that it comes from usually reliable sources, independent of each other, which taken together establishes a troubling pattern. I don't have to prove anything WE. You are the one who claims that the media didn't report the Hunter Biden story because it was unverified. I am merely making the same point about Steele's claims which were widely reported before any official investigation by the IG concluded what I posted above. But apparently he is to be believed without any evidence whilst Hunter Biden claims are to be dismissed for the same reason.
One more point |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Wisbech Eagle Truro Cornwall 06 Dec 22 5.37pm | |
---|---|
Originally posted by Badger11
I don't have to prove anything WE. You are the one who claims that the media didn't report the Hunter Biden story because it was unverified. I am merely making the same point about Steele's claims which were widely reported before any official investigation by the IG concluded what I posted above. But apparently he is to be believed without any evidence whilst Hunter Biden claims are to be dismissed for the same reason. Neither of us are likely to prove anything, certainly not to the other's satisfaction. We are expressing opinions. Mine on the Hunter Biden story is supported by what the media have said themselves and, I would suggest, by the usual behaviour of responsible media outlets. Nothing the IG said is inconsistent with what Steele claimed or indeed what I wrote. Steele always acknowledged that some of the things he had been told would be later proved inaccurate. What he said was that was a body of claims, from trusted sources that, taken as a whole, and not individually, caused significant concern. Something that ought to concern us all and not be brushed aside just because one element has been found wanting.
For the avoidance of doubt any comments in response to a previous post are directed to its ideas and not at any, or all, posters personally. |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Stirlingsays 06 Dec 22 9.38pm | |
---|---|
[Tweet Link]
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
Alert a moderator to this post |
Registration is now on our new message board
To login with your existing username you will need to convert your account over to the new message board.
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2024 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.