Dawn: I am talking about accusations against people other than JS. The forums across the internet are wild with specualtion and libel is a serious charge and could be levelled at the forum, if we skip on these phrases.

NOBODY is defending nonces but one cannnot make direct accusations against people with nasty lawyers and expect others too field the shitstorm.

I repeat: NOBODY is defending nonces.

I understanbd that it is a very emotive issue, but landing the admin in shit (you were not doing that btw- I was addressing averybody and not replying to you) -- but landing the forum in shit or at best, forcing the admin to cut out anythong libelous will not help anybody.

See the legals sticky that the founders thoughtfully supplied.

Best regards

dawnbreak wrote:
The onus was on every fucker who knew, and particularly if they had any shred of evidence - every single one of them!

sorry psketti

I just felt Mikey was defending Jimmy Saville

dawnbreak wrote:
It falls on ANYONE who knew. ESPECIALLY the founder of Childline.

Hey, we are all gutted by this. It is a betrayal of our trust.

dawnbreak wrote:
Then I think you should apologise for that. I have in NO WAY defended that monster.

It seems trite to say this but : quote it or it didn't happen.

Gilly wrote:
I can't - hence why I asked

Me...I know nothing about masonic handshakes. Just I've heard/read much speculation about that photo and its 'hidden meanings'

However, take a quick scan around the internet, and prepared to be gobsmacked by the number of people who are taking the photo to be a proving for a fact that it's masonic. This is my point. It's proof of nothing of the kind! So if we can't be sure, we shouldn't perpetuate the disinfo, imo.

And Dawn, the Water Rats are nothing whatsoever to do with the Freemasons.

diamondgeezer wrote:
One of the risks of being a secret society, or perhaps a closed one, is that they become a target of suspicion. But laying this at the door of one section of the community, however dodgy, is just letting the others involved involved get away with murder (possibly literally).

And that won't protect the kids from the scumbags.

mikey mikey wrote:
/\ This!

so I should apolgise for that. Mickey........your having a laugh yeah?

How's Italy working out for you are you having loads of Pizzas??

dawnbreak wrote:
Its not me you owe the apology to woman. Mikey certainly wasn't defending him anywhere.

dawnbreak wrote:
No. I am very serious. If you have any respect for me at all, you should at least retract that.

And if, OTOH, you feel that I have indeed defended So-Vile, then you should show proof by quoting me.

There is no way in hell i'm apologising s to mickey ............he owes me a big a big huge apology for what went down last month.


Hold a grudge, me no never

dawnbreak wrote:
Then don't.

Just acknowledge that you were mistaken to believe that I was defending JS.

That is all I ask.

you questioned it Mickey and didn't make a post saying jimmy Saville was a child abuser instead you said look at the women who were invovled

You didnt even get the name of the name of hostipal/prison correct

dawnbreak wrote:
Again I can't find any reference to Saville and the Grand Order of Water Rats, (including the Water Rats website).
If I'm missing something and anyone can supply a link I'd be grateful ta.

mikey mikey wrote:
Discussing the widespread speculation that is taking place in regards to that photo all over the internet, on a forum, isn't exactly ''laying the blame at (the freemasons) door'', is it?

@ feather . just you tube him.he openly admitted he was mason....i'm not sure how me or anyone else could provide you with actual proof he was mason?

Again - even if a credible confirmation of Saville being in the Grand Order of Water Rats can be found - they've got bugger all to do with Freemasons!!!

diamondgeezer wrote:
The widespread 'speculation' is being cited as 'fact' elsewhere around the internet, and also has been here - hence the discussion of that point.