musky wrote:
Exactly, yep

Presumably, from the msm reporting, there are some outings coming re world-famous pop stars / ex-ministers and such, when such things happen there's always a massive hike in activity, views and discussion. I mean imagine the titanic media flurry if / when ..... ....... gets outed, lol.

musky wrote:

I take it you typed a name that you shoudn't have there then?


I can see this would go well....

Nope, I just edited because I didn't put enough dots first time.

musky wrote:

Well cheers for that but my idea of funny and yours are considerably some distance apart over this one....

Presumably admin are able to check what posters have edited?

The savile thread was good for the sheer amount of info in one place, because actual connections could be made to associates through investigating real data. The number of people solving concrete inconsistencies was remarkable. The number if first hand accounts and contacts with people who suffered institutional abuse and their willingness ti be open about it was commendable.

What was a bag of shit was leaping to massive conclusions, linking to abstract esoteric malarky and the incessant drive to prove the queen di'd it. Jimmy savile was a child abuser, not the gatekeeper for hells ever open vortex. Sorry if that's your bag but it distracted and confused. Looking how the symbolism of the triangulation of points travelled by savile on his roadshow, was never going to be as useful and effective as asking your council how many out of court settlements they had made to abuse victims in the last fifty years.

The other concern is the repetition of a single point. The mccanns case is a classic example, how many posts will simply repeat "dogs don't lie".

Threads can be a great point for open minded discussion or just turn into hammering home a single issue and making wild claims from that.

revlovejoy wrote:

Jimmy Savile was a child abuser who was best mates with princes Philip and Charles, the Archbishop of Westminster, and the Prime Minister, was waved through security at Westminster and at airports and was known to police and intelligence services at least since the 1950s!

musky wrote: I knew a guy for years who turned out to be a child abuser.
I had no fucking clue, none, zip!
Guilt by association is nonsense, you need more, much more.

When someone has the intelligence agencies at their disposal like the royals and PMs do, vetting anyone who comes near them, and they know that someone is a child-raping paedo and a gangster and they choose to be great mates with them anyway, for decades, it doesn't say much for their character and morals, does it.

musky wrote:
There is only one true statement in that post. The fact he was vetted, is enough to pressure for answers and indicates state and institutional collusion.

David icke was vetted just as many times by the way? DI'd I just call David icke a nonce? Therein lies the problem with ikean dot connecting approach.

Oops wrong thread.......

What are you on about. Savile was a child abuser, fact. Norman Tebbitt let slip that he was waved through security at Westminster. Savile enjoyed a close friendship with members of the royal family for decades. And Thatcher. What's David Icke got to do with it? Are you saying the Queen didn't know about Savile?

I'd like to say a few words if I may .

Firstly , as of the OP , I think is spot on , and I think it mirrors some/most of my sentiments , which are in black and white in my previous posts over the past 4/5 days

Secondly , I myself am a great believer in truth , and when I see lies , I speak up , or injustice I step in , over the past few days people will have seen me look abrasive or non conforming , yep that's right I will stand my ground with anyone , even if I'm against the status quo , seems I was in the thick of things last week , but hey I'm big enough and ugly enough to stand up and say I was wrong , when I am wrong , or fight till I die , still fighting here

Thirdly , as of injustice , yes child abuse is an injustice , the way that things get swept under the carpet etc, etc. are shocking , and let me reitterate , 99.9% of us here know this , we never just got back from the moon last week from a decade vacation , so we all know about the savilles etc, etc. , but one thing we are here for is truth , so we look for truth , we strive to weed out the bullshit in things , which should be evident to all of the newer posters by now , going by the past week . But ............... we cannot just sit back and see blatant lies being printed , which is massaging certain ego's , sorry but for me ................ it's either truth or fuck off ! Love me or despise me I will tell you no lies .


I don't think this site needs some of this conspiracy that is heavily smeared with bullshit , as it will put such a strain on the people who give the random punter a soapbox to have a laugh , vent or a gossip about the truth , batty , oi and the sket , would be run off their feet trying to moderate ooooooooooooops I mean facilitate this place if it keeps going in this direction , most people will know that this is not what sanctumzone is really all about .

So , anyway , here is a 38 yo dyslexic man trying to put into words what he thinks

suck it up bitches , i have a curry to eat

musky wrote: I've met Charles twice.
The second time I had a scalpel in my jacket pocket as part of the kit I had with me to mount a display and a metal brace velcro support on my wrist after a bike accident. Both picked up by the metal detector btw and needing to be explained.

I assume they had to vet me as well before I met him, yet oddly enough they didn't seem to pick up on the fact that I knew a nonce, (I wish they fucking had and let me know about it).

Don't go assuming too much is all I'm saying.


I

I don't think it's unreasonable for people to raise the subject of the occult and symbolism when organisations like the Freemasons and the OTO have so much influence.

musky wrote: Are you categorically stating that she did?
Evidence please. Ta.

musky wrote:
Jimmy savile being waved through parliament? Non issue. It's comparing security today and not taking into account how parliamentary security was in a 60's, 70's.

Best mates, great mates, close friendship? can provide proof of that type of relationship? How many times did savile meet Charles? 1000's? Because that's how many times I've hung out with my best mates.

feather wrote:
Well someone who was as 'active' and careless of being observed as Savile would certainly show up on the security services radar, as well as with his extensive underworld connections. Plus he was arrested numerous times over the decades.