Fuck off, Jamie!
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
WEIT post on the defenders of Sarah Jeong claiming reverse racism is impossible:
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... e-racists/
The usual SJW suspects are commenting that 'privilege plus prejudice' really is a thing.
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... e-racists/
The usual SJW suspects are commenting that 'privilege plus prejudice' really is a thing.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Not so fast -- there is a germ of truth in what he says.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑Fri Aug 03, 2018 7:48 amEnough of your strawman arguments.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑I doubt any of you have the moral fibre for that.Driftless wrote: ↑Or start a bran new discussion just for this.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
I'm going to blame John D - he planted the seed.Driftless wrote: ↑Not so fast -- there is a germ of truth in what he says.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑Fri Aug 03, 2018 7:48 amEnough of your strawman arguments.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑I doubt any of you have the moral fibre for that.Driftless wrote: ↑Or start a bran new discussion just for this.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
This just turned up in my Youtube feed
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1awwAgU_t8
...not sure if it relates to the current 'Pyt in-fighting or not...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1awwAgU_t8
...not sure if it relates to the current 'Pyt in-fighting or not...
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Peez retweeted a woman who was calling Sarah Jeong a national treasure. She noted that, among other things, Jeong was the one who broke the news that Elon Musk followed ZERO WOMEN on Twitter. We had to invent phrases like "hard hitting" for that kind of journalism.
-
- .
- Posts: 5898
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:05 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
:hankey:
You repeatedly break the law and run the police and the judiciary's nose in it and they come down on you like a tonne of bricks.
You would have no difficulty understanding this if it involved US cops with guns.
Yes.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑So, to speak out against the clearly willful mistreatment of TR, one must be a dues-paying member in good standing of the Prison Reform Society?Shatterface wrote: ↑ All of a sudden people are giving a shit about conditions in British prisons.
People who, months ago, would have thought they were too soft.
You keep bashing these TR fanboi strawmen while mocking silly, made-up claims that nobody's actually made. How 'bout instead you precisely establish your own claims?
1) Do you believe that TR's treatment in prison is 'par for the course' for conditions among the general prison population?
The answer to 1) renders these meaningless.2) If not, do you believe it was accidental or intentional?
3) If intentional, was it expressly intended to punish him for his anti-islam stance?
Yes.4) Do you believe that TR's drumhead trial & conviction was typical of court proceedings?
That what was intentional?5) Do you believe it was accidental or intentional?
If what was intentional?6) If intentional, was it expressly intended to punish him for his anti-islam stance?
The treatment Robinson has received is no different than any other persistent offender would receive.7) Do you believe that the treatment TR has received at the hands of the government, police, courts, & prisons -- not mention the press -- is the result of him just being a dickhead, or is it part of a general policy to deter, hinder, intimidate & punish any who speak out against Islam?
You repeatedly break the law and run the police and the judiciary's nose in it and they come down on you like a tonne of bricks.
You would have no difficulty understanding this if it involved US cops with guns.
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Well, I think you're blinded by your TR hate boner, but whatever.Shatterface wrote: ↑ :hankey:Yes.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑So, to speak out against the clearly willful mistreatment of TR, one must be a dues-paying member in good standing of the Prison Reform Society?Shatterface wrote: ↑ All of a sudden people are giving a shit about conditions in British prisons.
People who, months ago, would have thought they were too soft.
You keep bashing these TR fanboi strawmen while mocking silly, made-up claims that nobody's actually made. How 'bout instead you precisely establish your own claims?
1) Do you believe that TR's treatment in prison is 'par for the course' for conditions among the general prison population?
The answer to 1) renders these meaningless.2) If not, do you believe it was accidental or intentional?
3) If intentional, was it expressly intended to punish him for his anti-islam stance?
Yes.4) Do you believe that TR's drumhead trial & conviction was typical of court proceedings?
That what was intentional?5) Do you believe it was accidental or intentional?
If what was intentional?6) If intentional, was it expressly intended to punish him for his anti-islam stance?
The treatment Robinson has received is no different than any other persistent offender would receive.7) Do you believe that the treatment TR has received at the hands of the government, police, courts, & prisons -- not mention the press -- is the result of him just being a dickhead, or is it part of a general policy to deter, hinder, intimidate & punish any who speak out against Islam?
You repeatedly break the law and run the police and the judiciary's nose in it and they come down on you like a tonne of bricks.
You would have no difficulty understanding this if it involved US cops with guns.
Would your answers be the same for Lauren Southern's treatment at the hands of UK authorities?
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
I'm going to blame John D - he planted the seed.MarcusAu wrote: ↑Not so fast -- there is a germ of truth in what he says.Driftless wrote: ↑Enough of your strawman arguments.InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑Fri Aug 03, 2018 7:48 amI doubt any of you have the moral fibre for that.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Or start a bran new discussion just for this.
[/quote]
You reap what you sow.
-
- .
- Posts: 5898
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:05 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
I think she should be free to speak in the U.K.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Well, I think you're blinded by your TR hate boner, but whatever.
Would your answers be the same for Lauren Southern's treatment at the hands of UK authorities?
I also think if she committed contempt of court for the second time and had a history of violence I wouldn't give her a pass.
I'm not the one blinded by a boner here.
Robinson pled guilty the first time round and the second time round. I give it a few months before he does it again, again pleads guilty, and the conspiracy nuts start bleating again.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Has anyone got any evidence whatsoever about how badly Robinson got treated in prison, that isn't something he himself has said?
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Has anyone else considered that the narrative that the UK government is on a specific project of protecting Islam AND the narrative that the prisons are overrun with Islam are somewhat self-contradictory?
Is it possible that as stupid as we may think it to be, hatespeech laws here aren't designed to protect Islam? If not then why was Dankula tried for insulting Jews?
Can we please get this fucking bollocks to be at least a bit reflective of the facts and not just pure void-screaming bias.
Is it possible that as stupid as we may think it to be, hatespeech laws here aren't designed to protect Islam? If not then why was Dankula tried for insulting Jews?
Can we please get this fucking bollocks to be at least a bit reflective of the facts and not just pure void-screaming bias.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Really, Peez? I thought "cuck(old)" was an epithet no Marx-fearing justice warrior would use. Like "soyboy."
The rest sounds like classic Zvan, pomposity driving her into a bone-headed misreading of a situation.
https://imgur.com/FzcUOJo.png
https://twitter.com/RichardCCarrier/sta ... 6751571968
The rest sounds like classic Zvan, pomposity driving her into a bone-headed misreading of a situation.
https://imgur.com/FzcUOJo.png
https://twitter.com/RichardCCarrier/sta ... 6751571968
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Peer-reviewed PSA:
-
- .
- Posts: 5898
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:05 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
As Jerry has declared me to be persona non grata at his blog, you, or others here, might want to reference, quote, or link an oldie-but-a-goldie from the heydays of the late but unlamented AtheismPlus:Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑ WEIT post on the defenders of Sarah Jeong claiming reverse racism is impossible:
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... e-racists/
The usual SJW suspects are commenting that 'privilege plus prejudice' really is a thing.
https://web.archive.org/web/20160507082 ... f=7&t=2632
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Think it's about time to leave that field fallow, put the horses out to pasture there rather than flogging them to death ...
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Like I've no doubt you can get proper roughed up in the nick, but a lot of these claims are pretty extraordinary... if a bit milder than the death sentence that people said was given.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Maybe something to warm the cockles of the hearts of those here who are laying various types of pipes ... ;-)
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Maybe he had the wrong type of tattoos? I hear that can get you in trouble in prison. At least he didn't get his wig split.DrokkIt wrote: ↑Like I've no doubt you can get proper roughed up in the nick, but a lot of these claims are pretty extraordinary... if a bit milder than the death sentence that people said was given.
-
- Brassy, uncouth, henpecked meathead
- Posts: 5059
- Joined: Tue Jan 08, 2013 2:08 am
- Location: Lurking in a dumpster
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
DrokkIt wrote: ↑Like I've no doubt you can get proper roughed up in the nick, but a lot of these claims are pretty extraordinary... if a bit milder than the death sentence that people said was given.
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
That would appear especially stupid in the case of Asians, who seem to be the most advantaged in our society.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Fri Aug 03, 2018 8:36 amWEIT post on the defenders of Sarah Jeong claiming reverse racism is impossible:
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... e-racists/
The usual SJW suspects are commenting that 'privilege plus prejudice' really is a thing.
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
I've not followed this very closely, but wasn't Robinson released early due to irregularities in his trial?Shatterface wrote: ↑I think she should be free to speak in the U.K.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Well, I think you're blinded by your TR hate boner, but whatever.
Would your answers be the same for Lauren Southern's treatment at the hands of UK authorities?
I also think if she committed contempt of court for the second time and had a history of violence I wouldn't give her a pass.
I'm not the one blinded by a boner here.
Robinson pled guilty the first time round and the second time round. I give it a few months before he does it again, again pleads guilty, and the conspiracy nuts start bleating again.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
I've heard that they don't always measure up.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑That would appear especially stupid in the case of Asians, who seem to be the most advantaged in our society.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Fri Aug 03, 2018 8:36 amWEIT post on the defenders of Sarah Jeong claiming reverse racism is impossible:
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... e-racists/
The usual SJW suspects are commenting that 'privilege plus prejudice' really is a thing.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
TR has the distinct air of someone who got caught peter-gazing and got his cheeks bust imofree thoughtpolice wrote: ↑Maybe he had the wrong type of tattoos? I hear that can get you in trouble in prison. At least he didn't get his wig split.DrokkIt wrote: ↑Like I've no doubt you can get proper roughed up in the nick, but a lot of these claims are pretty extraordinary... if a bit milder than the death sentence that people said was given.
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Is this then to be the measure of men?MarcusAu wrote: ↑I've heard that they don't always measure up.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑That would appear especially stupid in the case of Asians, who seem to be the most advantaged in our society.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Fri Aug 03, 2018 8:36 amWEIT post on the defenders of Sarah Jeong claiming reverse racism is impossible:
https://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.co ... e-racists/
The usual SJW suspects are commenting that 'privilege plus prejudice' really is a thing.
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
It looks like there will be a rally held in DC on the anniversary of last year's Charlottesville march.
https://wtop.com/virginia/2018/08/charl ... y/slide/1/
https://wtop.com/virginia/2018/08/charl ... y/slide/1/
-
- .
- Posts: 7556
- Joined: Thu Sep 05, 2013 8:39 am
- Location: Somewhere in the pipes
-
- .
- Posts: 6555
- Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
I certainly don't believe the little fella's claim that he lost 40lbs while inside. He's skinnier, sure, but put 40lbs on him and he'd be spherical. And he refused his family's money to buy more grub just to make a point? Many virgins will surely be the reward for such hard-won martyrdom.
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
My boner casts shadows Eratosthenes would've found useful.Shatterface wrote: ↑ I'm not the one blinded by a boner here.
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
I think TR just liked the idea of making his own Tuna Casserole instead of eating prison food, especially English prison food. Apparently the bodybuilders in prison find it builds muscles. He got skinny because he didn't know how to do proper carb loading.
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Shh. You're spoiling the narrative. Also, Tommy was treated like royalty, despite being a thick hooligan who deserved everything that didn't actually happen to him, including the conviction that hasn't been overturned.CaptainFluffyBunny wrote: ↑ I've not followed this very closely, but wasn't Robinson released early due to irregularities in his trial?
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
The family that jizzes together sticks together.Ape+lust wrote: ↑ Really, Peez? I thought "cuck(old)" was an epithet no Marx-fearing justice warrior would use. Like "soyboy."
The rest sounds like classic Zvan, pomposity driving her into a bone-headed misreading of a situation.
https://imgur.com/FzcUOJo.png
https://twitter.com/RichardCCarrier/sta ... 6751571968
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
That is disputedShatterface wrote: ↑Robinson pled guilty the first time round and the second time round.Matt Cavanaugh wrote: ↑Well, I think you're blinded by your TR hate boner, but whatever.
Would your answers be the same for Lauren Southern's treatment at the hands of UK authorities?
-
- .
- Posts: 2649
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: ↑ And he refused his family's money to buy more grub just to make a point? Many virgins will surely be the reward for such hard-won martyrdom.
He didn't refuse his families offer for more money you plum he was refused permission to spend more than £12 per week.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
It's such a shame Sharon Hill suffers from internet skeptic personality syndrome because she's really quite fit.
I seem to remember her being rather cool during the rift but a recent glance at her timeline reveals she's gone all Gurdur.
I seem to remember her being rather cool during the rift but a recent glance at her timeline reveals she's gone all Gurdur.
-
- .
- Posts: 2649
- Joined: Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:01 am
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Engineers, Doctors, Scientists,
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
In his other interview he said he didn't want his family to pay for more food. He is intentionally deceptive here. I think it was in the Tucker Carlson interview where he said he refused the offer from his family for more money.shoutinghorse wrote: ↑ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: ↑ And he refused his family's money to buy more grub just to make a point? Many virgins will surely be the reward for such hard-won martyrdom.
He didn't refuse his families offer for more money you plum he was refused permission to spend more than £12 per week.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Just listened to the Tucker interview for 8 mins. Didn’t hear that reference.
Given the donations, I doubt his family would have to stump up tuna money.
Time stamp please.
Given the donations, I doubt his family would have to stump up tuna money.
Time stamp please.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Ie I listened to the whole interview.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
It's not a bad point. Being adequately and safely fed without having to have family members pay extra is a basic requirement of any humane prison.ConcentratedH2O, OM wrote: ↑Fri Aug 03, 2018 1:40 pmAnd he refused his family's money to buy more grub just to make a point? Many virgins will surely be the reward for such hard-won martyrdom.
-
- .
- Posts: 1471
- Joined: Tue Aug 20, 2013 4:30 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45064237A woman has become the first person in Denmark to be charged with wearing a face veil in public, after a ban came into effect on Wednesday.
Local media report a 28-year-old woman was fined after getting into a scuffle with a woman trying to remove her veil.
Police say they were called and when they reviewed CCTV, informed the woman she would be charged if she refused to take her niqab off.
The new law has provoked protests and criticism from human rights groups.
It was officially introduced on Wednesday after it passed in Denmark's parliament earlier this year.
It does not mention burkas and niqabs by name, but says "anyone who wears a garment that hides the face in public will be punished with a fine".
On Wednesday night protesters gathered in the capital to demonstrate against law, with women in traditional burqas and veils standing alongside people with makeshift coverings.
Friday's incident is reported to have taken place at a shopping centre in Horsholm, 25km (15 miles) north of Copenhagen.
Police told local media that they were called to the shopping centre after a fight had broken out.
They said both women were charged with violating the peace and said one had also been charged with violating the full-face veil law.
She was given a 1,000 kroner fine ($160; £120) after refusing to take it off at their request.
Some Muslim women have said they will not adhere to the law - which carries a 10,000 ($1,500; £1,200) kroner penalty for repeat offenders.
Human Rights Watch has labelled the ban "discriminatory" and said it was the "latest in a harmful trend."
Last year the European Court of Human Rights upheld a similar Belgian ban, saying that communal harmony trumped an individual's right to religious expression.
Full or partial bans are also in place in France, Austria, Bulgaria and the German state of Bavaria.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
This is interesting from my perspective as I thought Europe more Progressive. Is this a right wing move or has the move come from the center considering it needed to be passed into law. Is it based on a reaction to an incident or was it hedged as freedom for women?InfraRedBucket wrote: ↑ MWSnap137 2018-08-04, 00_31_17.jpg
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-45064237A woman has become the first person in Denmark to be charged with wearing a face veil in public, after a ban came into effect on Wednesday.
Local media report a 28-year-old woman was fined after getting into a scuffle with a woman trying to remove her veil.
Police say they were called and when they reviewed CCTV, informed the woman she would be charged if she refused to take her niqab off.
The new law has provoked protests and criticism from human rights groups.
It was officially introduced on Wednesday after it passed in Denmark's parliament earlier this year.
It does not mention burkas and niqabs by name, but says "anyone who wears a garment that hides the face in public will be punished with a fine".
On Wednesday night protesters gathered in the capital to demonstrate against law, with women in traditional burqas and veils standing alongside people with makeshift coverings.
Friday's incident is reported to have taken place at a shopping centre in Horsholm, 25km (15 miles) north of Copenhagen.
Police told local media that they were called to the shopping centre after a fight had broken out.
They said both women were charged with violating the peace and said one had also been charged with violating the full-face veil law.
She was given a 1,000 kroner fine ($160; £120) after refusing to take it off at their request.
Some Muslim women have said they will not adhere to the law - which carries a 10,000 ($1,500; £1,200) kroner penalty for repeat offenders.
Human Rights Watch has labelled the ban "discriminatory" and said it was the "latest in a harmful trend."
Last year the European Court of Human Rights upheld a similar Belgian ban, saying that communal harmony trumped an individual's right to religious expression.
Full or partial bans are also in place in France, Austria, Bulgaria and the German state of Bavaria.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Yeah.... I listened to both videos again.... I think I am just plain wrong. Sorry yall. Bad on me. This is what I deserve for working while listening to videos. I suck at multitasking. This is even more outrageous than I originally thought It sounds like he couldn't spend any more money, even if provided by his family.
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Or was the video re-edited so that now TR does not make the original claim. I swear I heard him say he refused to take more money from his family. I don't think I made this up.... so.... did someone edit the original video? I am starting to think that is exactly what happened. TR made one statement that said is family wanted to give him money to buy more food but he refused, because it wasn't his family's fault. I really doubt I made this up in my head. I fucking hate the internet.
-
- .
- Posts: 5898
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:05 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Anyone can send money to a prisoner. They can keep up to £500 in their account. If Robinson is too proud to accept a few quid to buy something above what the prison supplies for every other prisoner maybe he shouldn't grovel when it comes time to crowd fund his appeal.
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
I thought I had heard that or read that too. Possibly something someone else said or tweeted. Caolon Robertson?John D wrote: ↑ Or was the video re-edited so that now TR does not make the original claim. I swear I heard him say he refused to take more money from his family. I don't think I made this up.... so.... did someone edit the original video? I am starting to think that is exactly what happened. TR made one statement that said is family wanted to give him money to buy more food but he refused, because it wasn't his family's fault. I really doubt I made this up in my head. I fucking hate the internet.
-
- .
- Posts: 5898
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:05 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
How can someone who has lived in nothing but water and toe-nail clippings be so full of shit?
-
- .
- Posts: 5898
- Joined: Sat Nov 01, 2014 2:05 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
It's almost like coming out thin and haggard looking... helps his career or something?Shatterface wrote: ↑ Anyone can send money to a prisoner. They can keep up to £500 in their account. If Robinson is too proud to accept a few quid to buy something above what the prison supplies for every other prisoner maybe he shouldn't grovel when it comes time to crowd fund his appeal.
If anyone flat-out believes every bit of convenient conspiracy tosh coming out of TR's gob I've got a couple of bridges to sell you.
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
btw. TR maintains that his cell was directly adjacent to a mosque and a main walkway in the prison.
If true, this looks like the prison staff is trying to allow him to be harassed or worse which would be reprehensible. The prison should take reasonable steps to insure the prisoners general safety and well being.
If true, this looks like the prison staff is trying to allow him to be harassed or worse which would be reprehensible. The prison should take reasonable steps to insure the prisoners general safety and well being.
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Well, it wasn't gonna be a man, now was it?A woman has become the first person in Denmark to be charged with wearing a face veil in public
-
- .
- Posts: 15449
- Joined: Sun Mar 24, 2013 12:38 pm
- Contact:
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Oh, fuck off. In Iran, you get 15 years in prison for not wearing the damn thing.Human Rights Watch has labelled the ban "discriminatory" and said it was the "latest in a harmful trend.
-
- .
- Posts: 6555
- Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
He also claims that he was held in solitary for an extended period, which the Prison Service have denied.free thoughtpolice wrote: ↑ btw. TR maintains that his cell was directly adjacent to a mosque and a main walkway in the prison.
If true, this looks like the prison staff is trying to allow him to be harassed or worse which would be reprehensible. The prison should take reasonable steps to insure the prisoners general safety and well being.
-
- .
- Posts: 6555
- Joined: Sat Sep 01, 2012 8:51 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
I made the original claim here, and I am with you: I could have sworn I heard it on either this video or his few brief words to Sky as he left the jail. We're either mad, or we've read a comment by some Tommy supporter and have absorbed it as truth. I'd rather the first option than to be so stupid that the second is true.John D wrote: ↑ Or was the video re-edited so that now TR does not make the original claim. I swear I heard him say he refused to take more money from his family. I don't think I made this up.... so.... did someone edit the original video? I am starting to think that is exactly what happened. TR made one statement that said is family wanted to give him money to buy more food but he refused, because it wasn't his family's fault. I really doubt I made this up in my head. I fucking hate the internet.
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
In more whale news, the local vandal dolphin/whale that has been doing the the local fishery a good deed by swimming around Comox Bay and eating the seals that are a total nuisance and committing genocide on the local salmon. The (deep state) fuckers lured him out of the bay because the local boaters were somewhat inconvenienced as well as the weekend fireworks display.
https://www.mycomoxvalleynow.com/39429/ ... ecordings/
https://www.mycomoxvalleynow.com/39429/ ... ecordings/
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
I’m assuming wages were out of the question while in solitary defensive lockdown.Shatterface wrote: ↑ Anyone can send money to a prisoner. They can keep up to £500 in their account. If Robinson is too proud to accept a few quid to buy something above what the prison supplies for every other prisoner maybe he shouldn't grovel when it comes time to crowd fund his appeal.
http://i.imgur.com/MGecvfy.jpg
Your stupidity is a never ending source of amusement.
-
- .
- Posts: 11165
- Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2012 4:27 pm
Re: Fuck off, Jamie!
Classy!Your stupidity is a never ending source of amusement.