Discussion:
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed
(too old to reply)
D@vid SNSP
2005-05-04 05:12:35 UTC
Permalink
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.

I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "

QUOTE ~ "One city resident told of his disgust when he received one of the
leaflets as he walked down Princes Street. He said: "These leaflets are
offensive. I'm all for freedom of expression but this guy is clearly a
lunatic."

I expect to fund the further advances of the SNSP from the winnings in this
case.
I wish to offer any Lawyers present - 25% of all winnings
--
Scottish National Socialist Party ~ SNSP
Pàrtaidh Nàiseanta Sòisealta na h-Alba
http://www.snsp.info/
MacRobert
2005-05-04 06:00:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
QUOTE ~ "One city resident told of his disgust when he received one of the
leaflets as he walked down Princes Street. He said: "These leaflets are
offensive. I'm all for freedom of expression but this guy is clearly a
lunatic."
I expect to fund the further advances of the SNSP from the winnings in this
case.
I wish to offer any Lawyers present - 25% of all winnings
I dunno, Davearoonie. I read your website and he has a point.

Stephen
D@vid SNSP
2005-05-04 07:19:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by MacRobert
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
QUOTE ~ "One city resident told of his disgust when he received one of the
leaflets as he walked down Princes Street. He said: "These leaflets are
offensive. I'm all for freedom of expression but this guy is clearly a
lunatic."
I expect to fund the further advances of the SNSP from the winnings in this
case.
I wish to offer any Lawyers present - 25% of all winnings
I dunno, Davearoonie. I read your website and he has a point.
Stephen
This was 2 years ago.

400,000 Americans spending around £200 million in Scotland ***@W
More tourists come to Scotland from the US than any other country with some
400,000 Americans spending around £200 million annually. A spokesperson for
the tourist board VisitScotland said: "This sort of thing is not helpful
when we're trying to encourage US visitors to Scotland.

"Having said that, people are entitled to their freedom of speech.
Hopefully, people will treat the leaflets sensibly."

WELL SAID Spokesperson for http://www.visitscotland.com/

Lothian and Borders Police spokesperson said: "We are aware of the
leaflets." The spokesman refused to say whether they would take any action
against Mr Allison.

NO ACTION from Lothian and Borders Police who stand proudly FOR Freedom &
democracy.
--
Scottish National Socialist Party ~ SNSP
Pàrtaidh Nàiseanta Sòisealta na h-Alba
http://www.snsp.info/
T N Nurse
2005-05-04 08:44:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
MacRobert
2005-05-04 13:51:21 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?

Nuts.

Stephen
Michilín
2005-05-04 14:23:43 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:51:21 -0400, MacRobert
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Nuts.
Stephen
It's not against the law in a democracy to express support for bin
Laden. That's why the police did not proceed against him at the time.

Of course we understand your confusion, as by now if he had been in
the US, he would have spent the last two years in Guantanamo Bay,
waiting for his turn to be sent to Syria to be tortured, like the
Canadian businessman of Lebanese descent who was taken off a Canadian
plane in New York and deported to Syria instead of Canada and
viciously tortured "by mistake"; all part of the twisted logic which
keeps American hands "clean".

Perhaps some day the EU will use Canada as a springboard to liberate
the US and help ordinary Americans install democracy. I'm afraid all
you can do is wait.

Michilín

Nuair nì iad fàsach, canaidh iad sìth ris.
They make a wilderness and call it peace.
Michilín
2005-05-04 14:31:35 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:51:21 -0400, MacRobert
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Nuts.
Stephen
He could be in totalitarian regimes like Libya, Russia, China, Egypt
or the United States.

What sort of political education did you have that you believe people
can be abused and have their rights taken away simply because you
don't agree with their views?

Woul;d this have anything to do with the million plus immigration
applications being processed by Canada on behalf of American citizens?
Why do you think so many people, most of whom are apparently
acceptable to Canada, would be motivated to leave what is touted as
the most democractic country in the world?

I'll tell you why - because everything your country now says is a
monstrous lie. You have been betrayed by fascists, just as Gemany was
in 1934. Honour and decency are now dying fast south of the 49th
Parallel.

Michilín

Nuair nì iad fàsach, canaidh iad sìth ris.
They make a wilderness and call it peace.
MacRobert
2005-05-04 16:24:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michilín
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:51:21 -0400, MacRobert
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Nuts.
Stephen
He could be in totalitarian regimes like Libya, Russia, China, Egypt
or the United States.
What sort of political education did you have that you believe people
can be abused and have their rights taken away simply because you
don't agree with their views?
Woul;d this have anything to do with the million plus immigration
applications being processed by Canada on behalf of American citizens?
Why do you think so many people, most of whom are apparently
acceptable to Canada, would be motivated to leave what is touted as
the most democractic country in the world?
I'll tell you why - because everything your country now says is a
monstrous lie. You have been betrayed by fascists, just as Gemany was
in 1934. Honour and decency are now dying fast south of the 49th
Parallel.
Michilín
Nuair nì iad fàsach, canaidh iad sìth ris.
They make a wilderness and call it peace.
Get over yourself, puddin.

Stephen
T N Nurse
2005-05-04 14:52:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Of course. One is a civil action, the other is a criminal action.
Quite different from each other.
Post by MacRobert
Nuts.
Not so. Do you still have the rule that says any crime committed 25
years previously cannot be prosecuted - statutes of limitiation or
something like that? Now that's nuts.
MacRobert
2005-05-04 16:27:09 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 04 May 2005 15:52:57 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Of course. One is a civil action, the other is a criminal action.
Quite different from each other.
Post by MacRobert
Nuts.
Not so. Do you still have the rule that says any crime committed 25
years previously cannot be prosecuted - statutes of limitiation or
something like that? Now that's nuts.
Statutes of limitation vary, with seven years generally covering most
non-capital offenses. Murder is forever. Do you think "nuts"
referred to something being crazy? If so, let me explain; "nuts" when
used as I did is just an expression like "crumbs." Has nothing to do
with dry bread, either...

Stephen
Jim Stewart
2005-05-04 20:16:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 15:52:57 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Of course. One is a civil action, the other is a criminal action.
Quite different from each other.
Post by MacRobert
Nuts.
Not so. Do you still have the rule that says any crime committed 25
years previously cannot be prosecuted - statutes of limitiation or
something like that? Now that's nuts.
Statutes of limitation vary, with seven years generally covering most
non-capital offenses. Murder is forever. Do you think "nuts"
referred to something being crazy? If so, let me explain; "nuts" when
used as I did is just an expression like "crumbs." Has nothing to do
with dry bread, either...
Stephen
It is misunderstood by Nazi military

Jim Stewart
Michilín
2005-05-05 00:06:35 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 4 May 2005 15:16:21 -0500, "Jim Stewart"
Post by Jim Stewart
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 15:52:57 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Of course. One is a civil action, the other is a criminal action.
Quite different from each other.
Post by MacRobert
Nuts.
Not so. Do you still have the rule that says any crime committed 25
years previously cannot be prosecuted - statutes of limitiation or
something like that? Now that's nuts.
Statutes of limitation vary, with seven years generally covering most
non-capital offenses. Murder is forever. Do you think "nuts"
referred to something being crazy? If so, let me explain; "nuts" when
used as I did is just an expression like "crumbs." Has nothing to do
with dry bread, either...
Stephen
It is misunderstood by Nazi military
Jim Stewart
Especially Nazis dealing with people of Hebridean descent like the Son
of Olaf - General MacAuliffe in Bastogne...

This week is Victory in Europe Week. Those of us who remember seem to
be few and far between...


Michilín

Nuair nì iad fàsach, canaidh iad sìth ris.
They make a wilderness and call it peace.
D@vid SNSP
2005-05-05 00:20:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michilín
On Wed, 4 May 2005 15:16:21 -0500, "Jim Stewart"
This week is Victory in Europe Week. Those of us who remember seem to
be few and far between...
Michilín
Nuair nì iad fàsach, canaidh iad sìth ris.
They make a wilderness and call it peace.
http://news.google.co.uk/news?q=Victory+in+Europe+Week&hl=en&lr=&cr=countryUK%7CcountryGB&c2coff=1&sa=N&tab=nn&oi=newsr
Jim Stewart
2005-05-05 02:53:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michilín
On Wed, 4 May 2005 15:16:21 -0500, "Jim Stewart"
Post by Jim Stewart
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 15:52:57 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Of course. One is a civil action, the other is a criminal action.
Quite different from each other.
Post by MacRobert
Nuts.
Not so. Do you still have the rule that says any crime committed 25
years previously cannot be prosecuted - statutes of limitiation or
something like that? Now that's nuts.
Statutes of limitation vary, with seven years generally covering most
non-capital offenses. Murder is forever. Do you think "nuts"
referred to something being crazy? If so, let me explain; "nuts" when
used as I did is just an expression like "crumbs." Has nothing to do
with dry bread, either...
Stephen
It is misunderstood by Nazi military
Jim Stewart
Especially Nazis dealing with people of Hebridean descent like the Son
of Olaf - General MacAuliffe in Bastogne...
This week is Victory in Europe Week. Those of us who remember seem to
be few and far between...
Michilín
Nuair nì iad fàsach, canaidh iad sìth ris.
They make a wilderness and call it peace.
It was too good to miss, and I knew you would be first to remember.
To all the boys under those white crosses...

Jim Stewart
Michilín
2005-05-05 17:07:12 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 4 May 2005 21:53:04 -0500, "Jim Stewart"
Post by Jim Stewart
Post by Michilín
On Wed, 4 May 2005 15:16:21 -0500, "Jim Stewart"
Post by Jim Stewart
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 15:52:57 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Of course. One is a civil action, the other is a criminal action.
Quite different from each other.
Post by MacRobert
Nuts.
Not so. Do you still have the rule that says any crime committed 25
years previously cannot be prosecuted - statutes of limitiation or
something like that? Now that's nuts.
Statutes of limitation vary, with seven years generally covering most
non-capital offenses. Murder is forever. Do you think "nuts"
referred to something being crazy? If so, let me explain; "nuts" when
used as I did is just an expression like "crumbs." Has nothing to do
with dry bread, either...
Stephen
It is misunderstood by Nazi military
Jim Stewart
Especially Nazis dealing with people of Hebridean descent like the Son
of Olaf - General MacAuliffe in Bastogne...
This week is Victory in Europe Week. Those of us who remember seem to
be few and far between...
Michilín
Nuair nì iad fàsach, canaidh iad sìth ris.
They make a wilderness and call it peace.
It was too good to miss, and I knew you would be first to remember.
To all the boys under those white crosses...
Jim Stewart
God bless them all; our martyrs for freedom.


Michilín

Nuair nì iad fàsach, canaidh iad sìth ris.
They make a wilderness and call it peace.
MacRobert
2005-05-05 05:48:16 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 4 May 2005 15:16:21 -0500, "Jim Stewart"
Post by Jim Stewart
Post by MacRobert
Statutes of limitation vary, with seven years generally covering most
non-capital offenses. Murder is forever. Do you think "nuts"
referred to something being crazy? If so, let me explain; "nuts" when
used as I did is just an expression like "crumbs." Has nothing to do
with dry bread, either...
Stephen
It is misunderstood by Nazi military
Jim Stewart
And to this day, the 101st maintains they didn't need rescuing. In
fact, they had the Germans right where they wanted 'em.

Stephen
Jim Stewart
2005-05-05 05:54:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michilín
On Wed, 4 May 2005 15:16:21 -0500, "Jim Stewart"
Post by Jim Stewart
Post by MacRobert
Statutes of limitation vary, with seven years generally covering most
non-capital offenses. Murder is forever. Do you think "nuts"
referred to something being crazy? If so, let me explain; "nuts" when
used as I did is just an expression like "crumbs." Has nothing to do
with dry bread, either...
Stephen
It is misunderstood by Nazi military
Jim Stewart
And to this day, the 101st maintains they didn't need rescuing. In
fact, they had the Germans right where they wanted 'em.
Stephen
I am visiting with a friend from that unit tomorrow. He always has
said they spread them around in a large circle to get a good shot.

Jim Stewart
MacRobert
2005-05-05 17:20:52 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 5 May 2005 00:54:19 -0500, "Jim Stewart"
Post by Jim Stewart
Post by Michilín
On Wed, 4 May 2005 15:16:21 -0500, "Jim Stewart"
Post by Jim Stewart
Post by MacRobert
Statutes of limitation vary, with seven years generally covering most
non-capital offenses. Murder is forever. Do you think "nuts"
referred to something being crazy? If so, let me explain; "nuts" when
used as I did is just an expression like "crumbs." Has nothing to do
with dry bread, either...
Stephen
It is misunderstood by Nazi military
Jim Stewart
And to this day, the 101st maintains they didn't need rescuing. In
fact, they had the Germans right where they wanted 'em.
Stephen
I am visiting with a friend from that unit tomorrow. He always has
said they spread them around in a large circle to get a good shot.
Jim Stewart
Was he there? If so, Jim, please tell him "thank you" from this
Coastie.

Oh, by the way, last night I saw three big fish leap clear out of the
water. Then to pick up dinner (we were in a hurry) I had to drive
right past the golf course. Nobody in my family plays golf. However,
that needn't prevent one from sitting out on the veranda with a
tumbler of adult beverage and *talking* about golf...

Stephen
T N Nurse
2005-05-05 09:08:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 15:52:57 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Of course. One is a civil action, the other is a criminal action.
Quite different from each other.
Post by MacRobert
Nuts.
Not so. Do you still have the rule that says any crime committed 25
years previously cannot be prosecuted - statutes of limitiation or
something like that? Now that's nuts.
Statutes of limitation vary, with seven years generally covering most
non-capital offenses. Murder is forever.
Mmm. All criminal offences are 'forever' here.
Post by MacRobert
Do you think "nuts"
referred to something being crazy?
Of course. That's its usual expressive meaning in that context.
Post by MacRobert
If so, let me explain; "nuts" when
used as I did is just an expression like "crumbs." Has nothing to do
with dry bread, either...
.or 'crikey!'? Never heard it used that way.
MacRobert
2005-05-05 17:35:59 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 05 May 2005 10:08:12 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 15:52:57 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Of course. One is a civil action, the other is a criminal action.
Quite different from each other.
Post by MacRobert
Nuts.
Not so. Do you still have the rule that says any crime committed 25
years previously cannot be prosecuted - statutes of limitiation or
something like that? Now that's nuts.
Statutes of limitation vary, with seven years generally covering most
non-capital offenses. Murder is forever.
Mmm. All criminal offences are 'forever' here.
Once in a while, a guilty verdict from generations past will be
commuted, to clear a family name. But that is symbolic. For most
crimes, the state has limits to how long it may initiate pursuit of a
citizen.
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
Do you think "nuts"
referred to something being crazy?
Of course. That's its usual expressive meaning in that context.
And another difference is unearthed. Here, if I'd said "That is nuts"
then it would have meant "crazy." But just plain "nuts" after a
disappointment is like "phooey" or "rats" or any other expression you
care to use (just not 'crikey' it sounds too *nglish). As an
adjective, it means crazy. As a noun, it can mean all sorts of things.
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
If so, let me explain; "nuts" when
used as I did is just an expression like "crumbs." Has nothing to do
with dry bread, either...
.or 'crikey!'? Never heard it used that way.
Sure you have, Nurse, you hear it all the time but with a variant:
"Bollocks!"

Stephen
Ian Morrison
2005-05-05 18:24:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by MacRobert
On Thu, 05 May 2005 10:08:12 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
.or 'crikey!'? Never heard it used that way.
"Bollocks!"
I would have thought "crikey!" was more akin to "jings!", both
expressions presumably being derived from the name of that well-known
prophet, JC.

"Jings!", I suspect has been replaced almost completely by the
increasingly all-pervasive "f***!", presumably because use of the latter
is not specifically barred by one of the Ten Commandments.

------
Ian O.
MacRobert
2005-05-05 19:57:01 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 05 May 2005 18:24:38 GMT, Ian Morrison
Post by Ian Morrison
Post by MacRobert
On Thu, 05 May 2005 10:08:12 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
.or 'crikey!'? Never heard it used that way.
"Bollocks!"
I would have thought "crikey!" was more akin to "jings!", both
expressions presumably being derived from the name of that well-known
prophet, JC.
"Jings!", I suspect has been replaced almost completely by the
increasingly all-pervasive "f***!", presumably because use of the latter
is not specifically barred by one of the Ten Commandments.
------
Ian O.
Except as it applies to someone else's spoooose, shirly?

MacR
T N Nurse
2005-05-06 08:30:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by MacRobert
On Thu, 05 May 2005 10:08:12 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 15:52:57 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
On Wed, 04 May 2005 09:44:22 +0100, T N Nurse
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they
printed
an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
So there's no way he can be prosecuted for supporting Bin Laden?
Of course. One is a civil action, the other is a criminal action.
Quite different from each other.
Post by MacRobert
Nuts.
Not so. Do you still have the rule that says any crime committed 25
years previously cannot be prosecuted - statutes of limitiation or
something like that? Now that's nuts.
Statutes of limitation vary, with seven years generally covering most
non-capital offenses. Murder is forever.
Mmm. All criminal offences are 'forever' here.
Once in a while, a guilty verdict from generations past will be
commuted, to clear a family name. But that is symbolic. For most
crimes, the state has limits to how long it may initiate pursuit of a
citizen.
Including rape and child molestation? Is this why there seem to be few
prosecutions of priests in the Catholic church scandal?
Post by MacRobert
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
Do you think "nuts"
referred to something being crazy?
Of course. That's its usual expressive meaning in that context.
And another difference is unearthed. Here, if I'd said "That is nuts"
then it would have meant "crazy." But just plain "nuts" after a
disappointment is like "phooey" or "rats" or any other expression you
care to use (just not 'crikey' it sounds too *nglish). As an
adjective, it means crazy. As a noun, it can mean all sorts of things.
Post by T N Nurse
Post by MacRobert
If so, let me explain; "nuts" when
used as I did is just an expression like "crumbs." Has nothing to do
with dry bread, either...
.or 'crikey!'? Never heard it used that way.
"Bollocks!"
OK. You're point's well made.
Post by MacRobert
Stephen
Adam Whyte-Settlar
2005-05-06 10:51:14 UTC
Permalink
"T N Nurse" <***@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:tnnurseNOUCE99-.
Post by T N Nurse
Including rape and child molestation? Is this why there seem to be few
prosecutions of priests in the Catholic church scandal?
No - though that's part of the reason - SFAIK California and Connecticut
changed their statute of limitation laws to help victims sue but most others
didn't. Mind you there are about 10,000 cases going through the coursts just
now so I'm not sure if this counts as 'few'. In relation to the total number
worldwide then of course it is just the tip of the iceberg.
But, again SFAIUI, the policy of the Catholic Church to cover up child rape
and intimidate the victims and their families into not reporting the
'incidents' to police is aided by the concept of 'Canon Law' which I think
was originaly intended to stop the Church from meddling in the affairs of
State.


A lot of people don't realise that The Catholic Church actually has it's own
courts that are formally seperate from other courts of law.
It's been on on-going battle for centuries - makes for some fascinating
history reading actually - centuries ago the Church used to have
jurisdiction over all kinds of stuff and still cling to their remaining, and
yet substantial, powers.

The pedophile's pimps - the Bishops - claim Canon Law gets priority over
Secular Law in preist child-rape cases and use it to circulate their clients
around the various Parishes where they can rape new child victims. Probably
something to do with Christian morality that sinners like us can't
understand.
It's being challenged much more often lately with prosecutions going for the
'perverting the course of justice' stance.
There is big money in it for lawyers you see. The Catholic Church have had
to fork out *billions* of dollars in compensation lately and this has
obviously attracted lawyers with a taste for social justice.

A W-S
T N Nurse
2005-05-06 11:07:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam Whyte-Settlar
news:tnnurseNOUCE99-.
Post by T N Nurse
Including rape and child molestation? Is this why there seem to be few
prosecutions of priests in the Catholic church scandal?
No - though that's part of the reason - SFAIK California and Connecticut
changed their statute of limitation laws to help victims sue
'sue'? Surely they should be prosecuting the perpetrators in a criminal
action?
Charles Ellson
2005-05-06 21:31:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by T N Nurse
Post by Adam Whyte-Settlar
news:tnnurseNOUCE99-.
Post by T N Nurse
Including rape and child molestation? Is this why there seem to be few
prosecutions of priests in the Catholic church scandal?
No - though that's part of the reason - SFAIK California and Connecticut
changed their statute of limitation laws to help victims sue
'sue'? Surely they should be prosecuting the perpetrators in a criminal
action?
They probably have already or at least have investigated whether the
evidence would be sufficient. Possibly the previous cut-off dates for
civil action did not work in a just manner where children were involved
(if e.g. a relatively short period started from the time of the event
rather than from the child reaching majority); hopefully someone can
enlighten us with the details.
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson: ***@e11son.demon.co.uk | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | > < |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|
Adam Whyte-Settlar
2005-05-07 01:46:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by T N Nurse
Post by Adam Whyte-Settlar
news:tnnurseNOUCE99-.
Post by T N Nurse
Including rape and child molestation? Is this why there seem to be few
prosecutions of priests in the Catholic church scandal?
No - though that's part of the reason - SFAIK California and Connecticut
changed their statute of limitation laws to help victims sue
'sue'? Surely they should be prosecuting the perpetrators in a criminal
action?
That's not for ordinary mortals to decide - the police decide wether to
press charges don't they?
I think they ( the victims) would have to bring a civil action as the police
have been extremely 'reluctant' (I wonder why) to press charges in the past.
Theres another complication in that (SFAIUI) the Catholic Canon Law can
block secular litigation for ten years after the victim reaches 'maturity' -
which I think is at the age of 18. So little kids who are currently being
passed around to be raped by priests at the age of, say, 8 or 9 can't have
their day in court for twenty years or more.
I think that's more or less correct - I was reading about in the press it a
few weeks back.
Don't underestimate the power of the Catholic Church - they are a *hugely*
successful business with influential contacts in every sphere.
Biggest slum landlords in the world for a start.

...Been having real trouble trying to find their financial statements - why
am I not surprised? - but I did find the profit figure from the rents on
their property holdings for the year 2000 which gives you an idea:
$29 billion net!
Not bad just for a wee side-line eh?
Would *you* fancy taking them on in a court of law?

A W-S
Madra Dubh
2005-05-07 14:15:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam Whyte-Settlar
Post by T N Nurse
Post by Adam Whyte-Settlar
news:tnnurseNOUCE99-.
Post by T N Nurse
Including rape and child molestation? Is this why there seem to be few
prosecutions of priests in the Catholic church scandal?
No - though that's part of the reason - SFAIK California and Connecticut
changed their statute of limitation laws to help victims sue
'sue'? Surely they should be prosecuting the perpetrators in a criminal
action?
That's not for ordinary mortals to decide - the police decide wether to
press charges don't they?
I think they ( the victims) would have to bring a civil action as the police
have been extremely 'reluctant' (I wonder why) to press charges in the past.
Theres another complication in that (SFAIUI) the Catholic Canon Law can
block secular litigation for ten years after the victim reaches 'maturity' -
which I think is at the age of 18. So little kids who are currently being
passed around to be raped by priests at the age of, say, 8 or 9 can't have
their day in court for twenty years or more.
I think that's more or less correct - I was reading about in the press it a
few weeks back.
Don't underestimate the power of the Catholic Church - they are a *hugely*
successful business with influential contacts in every sphere.
Biggest slum landlords in the world for a start.
...Been having real trouble trying to find their financial statements - why
am I not surprised? - but I did find the profit figure from the rents on
$29 billion net!
Not bad just for a wee side-line eh?
Would *you* fancy taking them on in a court of law?
You do know there is a move afoot to excommunicate
you..........................
Adam Whyte-Settlar
2005-05-07 16:50:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Madra Dubh
Post by Adam Whyte-Settlar
Don't underestimate the power of the Catholic Church - they are a *hugely*
successful business.
You do know there is a move afoot to excommunicate
you..........................
Hmm..... It did occur to me that I might be receiving
being-burnt-at-the-stake threats shortly.
Madra Dubh
2005-05-07 19:28:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam Whyte-Settlar
Post by Madra Dubh
Post by Adam Whyte-Settlar
Don't underestimate the power of the Catholic Church - they are a
*hugely*
Post by Madra Dubh
Post by Adam Whyte-Settlar
successful business.
You do know there is a move afoot to excommunicate
you..........................
Hmm..... It did occur to me that I might be receiving
being-burnt-at-the-stake threats shortly.
Just don't visit Spain this summer.....
Ian Morrison
2005-05-07 20:52:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by Adam Whyte-Settlar
Hmm..... It did occur to me that I might be receiving
being-burnt-at-the-stake threats shortly.
Nah - the Catholic Church has bigger fish to fry....

------
Ian O.
--
Posted via Mailgate.ORG Server - http://www.Mailgate.ORG
Niall Tracey
2005-05-04 13:53:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
Surely he still has almost three months left in which to file...?

Níall.
Charles Ellson
2005-05-05 01:38:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by T N Nurse
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
It's time barred. That was 3 years ago. Too bad.
'Kinell! Is it August already ? Who won the election ?
--
_______
+---------------------------------------------------+ |\\ //|
| Charles Ellson: ***@e11son.demon.co.uk | | \\ // |
+---------------------------------------------------+ | > < |
| // \\ |
Alba gu brath |//___\\|
Rimmer
2005-05-05 05:08:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by ***@vid SNSP
http://news.scotsman.com/archive.cfm?id=825842002
Scotsman newspaper ~ legal advice needed ~ Sueing for Libel.
I need to sue the above "newspaper" On Wed 31rd July 2002 they printed an
article entitled
"Outrage as Bin Laden supporter targets city By DUNCAN ROBERTS "
QUOTE ~ "One city resident told of his disgust when he received one of the
leaflets as he walked down Princes Street. He said: "These leaflets are
offensive. I'm all for freedom of expression but this guy is clearly a
lunatic."
I expect to fund the further advances of the SNSP from the winnings in this
case.
I wish to offer any Lawyers present - 25% of all winnings
--
Scottish National Socialist Party ~ SNSP
Pàrtaidh Nàiseanta Sòisealta na h-Alba
http://www.snsp.info/
Suing them? You're lucky you have not been locked up yourself m' laddie
oh.Now get back to work..


Rimmer
Continue reading on narkive:
Loading...