Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

You'll be getting the sealioning meme in a bit, Spen. That's the next step when you ask for receipts or evidence more than twice.

 

[monkers]

Ohh look another attempt to rewrite history.
You threw your toys out of pram then when you were asked if criminal damage, burglary and assaults were part of peaceful protests

I mentioned unspecified peaceful protestors.

You then with outrage rattled off specific charges with the only fit being those of the Filton protestors. When I raised that you pretended never to have heard of them. I predicted that they might be released on grounds of lawful excuse. You had hissy fits over that.

What then happened was the were released on the grounds of lawful excuse. You had more hissy fits.

The anger and outrage was all your own. I did suggest you kept this to the thread where it originated.

Oh and finally, the peaceful protesters I first mentioned - well they were not the Filton prisoners but others. Had you asked me that question you could have spared your blushes.

 

[spen666]

I mentioned unspecified peaceful protestors.

You then with outrage rattled off specific charges with the only fit being those of the Filton protestors. When I raised that you pretended never to have heard of them. I predicted that they might be released on grounds of lawful excuse. You had hissy fits over that.

What then happened was the were released on the grounds of lawful excuse. You had more hissy fits.

The anger and outrage was all your own. I did suggest you kept this to the thread where it originated.

Oh and finally, the peaceful protesters I first mentioned - well they were not the Filton prisoners but others. Had you asked me that question you could have spared your blushes.

Again complete lies.

I neither mentioned specific protectors or specific charges.

But hey don't let facts get in the way of your rewriting history.


You were the one who kept mentioning Pilton, not me.

.

 

[monkers]

Again complete lies.

I neither mentioned specific protectors or specific charges.

But hey don't let facts get in the way of your rewriting history.


You were the one who kept mentioning Pilton, not me.

.

You literally just restated the question above on this thread from the original thread with that very set of specific charges. The Filton prisoners are the match for that specific set of charges.

Ohh look another attempt to rewrite history.
You threw your toys out of pram then when you were asked if criminal damage, burglary and assaults were part of peaceful protests

The jury cleared them on the grounds of lawful excuse as I had predicted. So yes the jury said that their actions were intended as part of a justifiable protest. Those prisoners had been on remand for more than a year - the ordinary maximum being 90 days - and that was my point after you implied these prisoners.

You are really bad at this. Perhaps you should stop yourself from starting these petty squabbles.

 

[CXRAndy]

The more 'monkers' poster posts

The more and more it looks like the same person from a year or two back.

Less sweary, but very similar style.

I reckon they could be one and the same

 

[spen666]

You literally just restated the question above on this thread from the original thread with that very set of specific charges. The Filton prisoners are the match for that specific set of charges.



The jury cleared them on the grounds of lawful excuse as I had predicted. So yes the jury said that their actions were intended as part of a justifiable protest. Those prisoners had been on remand for more than a year - the ordinary maximum being 90 days - and that was my point after you implied these prisoners.

You are really bad at this. Perhaps you should stop yourself from starting these petty squabbles.

I have never mentioned the "filton prisoners".


You keep bringing them up.


You are making up that I am "implying" them. That is your invention.



you are not very good at rewriting hisory - and why you keep mentioning Filton in a thread about Gender is beyond me, unless its to avoid having to accept the Supreme Court ruled against your views in their detailed reasoned judgement that you refuse to accept is law

 

[monkers]

This is what I posted ...

If you want an example of the government / parliament creeping towards a police state, then what better example of the imprisonment of the peaceful protesters who express views to oppose genocide?

At the time of writing I had in mind the pensioners who held up placards and were then subject to overnight and in some cases weekend police cell detentions without charges being brought. They used powers under the terrorism act so to do. Nothing there about remanded prisoners who faced charges of burglary, criminal damage, or assault. Nothing there about me calling those prisoners peaceful. Nothing there about me saying what the jury should find.

This was your initial reaction ...

Ahh yes peaceful protestors who between them are alleged to have burgled premises, committed acts of criminal damage and assaulted people.
Those well known peaceful protest methods

and again immediately after ...

Who are on remand awaiting trial accused of various offences including burglary, criminal damage, assault etc - all well known peaceful protest methods

In so doing you turned my post into something not stated by me. I did not mention remanded prisoners charged with having committed burglary, criminal damage, or assault.

The only remanded prisoners with that specific set of charges are the 24 prisoners who are famously known as the Filton prisoners. You deny knowing who they are despite them being the only remanded prisoners with the specific list of charges. Therefore you can only be talking about them, and no other prisoners.

I asked you specific questions to check with you, but you were so intent on spitting your dummy that you ignored those questions.

In order to lower the temperature, I shrugged and said I'll let the jury decide. I made the point to you that the jury had the right to find 'lawful excuse'.

To my surprise you said the jury could not decide that and that I was hiding now behind the jury. I couldn't make sense of that.

At which point I just had to laugh as the jury has the right to vote with their own conscience.

And then ... the jury did just that ... they released the Filton 6 that you introduced to the thread at that point.

My tone has been more or less neutral throughout. I left the histrionics to you.

And just to remind you that before a charge of assault can be made, the assailant needs to be identified. It is not possible under the law to charge the whole group of 24 under group enterprise without proving intent of the whole group.

 

[monkers]

For anyone remotely interested to see how this spat took off, view the thread 'Free speech' #507

https://ncap.cyclechat.net/threads/free-speech.771/page-34

 

[AuroraSaab]

Shall we have some cheery news?

Swedish skier Elis Lundholm, a trans identifying female, is competing in the winter Olympics in the correct category - women's. Apart from a few thick Americans on sm who think she's a man in women's sports, there's been no fuss, nobody complaining about unfairness, no athletes losing out.

"I've always been treated well'.
'I came out and identified as a man. But I compete against women because they have the same qualifications as me. And that's okay with everyone.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/w...first-transgender-Winter-Olympian-skiing.html

It just shows nobody is banning trans athletes from sport, only asking that they compete in the correct and fair category.

 

[monkers]

Shall we have some cheery news?

Swedish skier Elis Lundholm, a trans identifying female, is competing in the winter Olympics in the correct category - women's. Apart from a few thick Americans on sm who think she's a man in women's sports, there's been no fuss, nobody complaining about unfairness, no athletes losing out.

"I've always been treated well'.
'I came out and identified as a man. But I compete against women because they have the same qualifications as me. And that's okay with everyone.'

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/w...first-transgender-Winter-Olympian-skiing.html

It just shows nobody is banning trans athletes from sport, only asking that they compete in the correct and fair category.

That's dandy. Have you asked him about his testosterone level?

 

[spen666]

This is what I posted ...



At the time of writing I had in mind the pensioners who held up placards and were then subject to overnight and in some cases weekend police cell detentions without charges being brought. They used powers under the terrorism act so to do. Nothing there about remanded prisoners who faced charges of burglary, criminal damage, or assault. Nothing there about me calling those prisoners peaceful. Nothing there about me saying what the jury should find.

This was your initial reaction ...


and again immediately after ...


In so doing you turned my post into something not stated by me. I did not mention remanded prisoners charged with having committed burglary, criminal damage, or assault.

The only remanded prisoners with that specific set of charges are the 24 prisoners who are famously known as the Filton prisoners. You deny knowing who they are despite them being the only remanded prisoners with the specific list of charges. Therefore you can only be talking about them, and no other prisoners.

I asked you specific questions to check with you, but you were so intent on spitting your dummy that you ignored those questions.

In order to lower the temperature, I shrugged and said I'll let the jury decide. I made the point to you that the jury had the right to find 'lawful excuse'.

To my surprise you said the jury could not decide that and that I was hiding now behind the jury. I couldn't make sense of that.

At which point I just had to laugh as the jury has the right to vote with their own conscience.

And then ... the jury did just that ... they released the Filton 6 that you introduced to the thread at that point.

My tone has been more or less neutral throughout. I left the histrionics to you.

And just to remind you that before a charge of assault can be made, the assailant needs to be identified. It is not possible under the law to charge the whole group of 24 under group enterprise without proving intent of the whole group.

See - thank you for quoting those which of course do not mention the Pilton mob- mainly because I have no involvement or interest in them.
you decided despite my repeatedly telling you to the contrary that my posts were about Pilton


You carry on trying to rewrite history

 

[monkers]

See - thank you for quoting those which of course do not mention the Pilton mob- mainly because I have no involvement or interest in them.
you decided despite my repeatedly telling you to the contrary that my posts were about Pilton


You carry on trying to rewrite history

I said once before that you are a tiresome little man. If I was wrong then, I'm not now.

You identified a group, not by name, but you did identify a group as being remand prisoners and listed the specific charges being brought.

The only remand prisoners with those specific charges are the Filton prisoners. Therefore the group can ONLY have been the Filton prisoners. Whether you knew that the media called them that makes no difference, this is the only group you can have meant.

I did not state or imply that they were the group I referenced. I asked questions of you more than once seeking clarity. But you don't answer questions put to you do you!

The Filton prisoners are PA activists who use civic disobedience. The peaceful protesters I referenced are the pensioners sitting holding placards who were subjected to detention by the police using powers under the terrorism act. Something I view as unlawful detention.

I had no reason to justify the action of PA because I never mentioned them.

Time for you to sit down and stop hectoring I will say.

 

[AuroraSaab]

That's dandy. Have you asked him about his testosterone level?

I don't need to. She doesn't take testosterone so is allowed to compete in the Womens category. If she took testosterone she would be banned for doping.

In men lowered testosterone doesn't mitigate residual male body advantage, as you know. They're still men and that's why they are required to compete in their own sex category.

Good for Lundholm. No unfair advantage, nobody loses out, nobody is displaced. Good example of how no one is being excluded.

 

[monkers]

I don't need to. She doesn't take testosterone so is allowed to compete in the Womens category. If she took testosterone she would be banned for doping.

In men lowered testosterone doesn't mitigate residual male body advantage, as you know. They're still men and that's why they are required to compete in their own sex category.

Good for Lundholm. No unfair advantage, nobody loses out, nobody is displaced. Good example of how no one is being excluded.

I have no objections to him as a competitor in any category. As I said ''that's dandy''.

 

[spen666]

I said once before that you are a tiresome little man. If I was wrong then, I'm not now.

You identified a group, not by name, but you did identify a group as being remand prisoners and listed the specific charges being brought.

The only remand prisoners with those specific charges are the Filton prisoners. Therefore the group can ONLY have been the Filton prisoners. Whether you knew that the media called them that makes no difference, this is the only group you can have meant.

I did not state or imply that they were the group I referenced. I asked questions of you more than once seeking clarity. But you don't answer questions put to you do you!

The Filton prisoners are PA activists who use civic disobedience. The peaceful protesters I referenced are the pensioners sitting holding placards who were subjected to detention by the police using powers under the terrorism act. Something I view as unlawful detention.

I had no reason to justify the action of PA because I never mentioned them.

Time for you to sit down and stop hectoring I will say.

Carry on rewriting history


You and you alone keep going on about the Pilton mob. I have never mentioned them.

Who or what PA is or are I haven't got a clue, but no idea what they have to do with a thread about Gender