To avoid any confusion you mean only contents that have gone through the courts right as they're greater risk? This thread is littered with statements that one could claim defamation on even if it would be easily rebutted.
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
To avoid any confusion you mean only contents that have gone through the courts right as they're greater risk? This thread is littered with statements that one could claim defamation on even if it would be easily rebutted.
Jeremy Corbyn: Ministers had herd immunity strategy for coronavirus
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53846319
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-53846319
Aides feared Jeremy Corbyn was sabotaging his own campaign in Labour’s chaotic ride to disaster
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...in-labours-chaotic-ride-to-disaster-9n829p8hl
https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/...in-labours-chaotic-ride-to-disaster-9n829p8hl
It’s become very clear where The Guardian’s politics lies, but it’s pretty incredible that when they speak to Patrick Heneghan (director of elections in 2017) and hear him admit that they created a secret group funnelling money to factional allies, they then non-critically present this as denying/refuting the narrative that the leadership was ‘stabbed in the back’ in 2017.
Also, it turns out there are other WhatsApp messages that somehow turn the 2017 exit poll reactions of “opposite to what I had been working towards for the last couple of years”, “silent and grey faced”, “we have to be upbeat and not show it” and “awful” into super excited and joyful.
Yeah that made me laugh when the only one he could quote is "amazing, amazing, amazing", which could quite easily appear in a negative context.
e.g hypothetically…
amazing, amazing, amazing
can't believe this lot have pulled off a hung parliament
the opposite of everything i've been working towards.
Edit: Also just to further point out The Guardian's agenda. How is it possible to write up an article giving Patrick Heneghan's side of the story, without mentioning that he told Michael Crick where Diane Abbott was when she had been crying in the toilets. Scum.
Good spin from the media on the admission from a figure within the party that they did commit fraud and secretly channelled funds to centrist candidates in safe seats.
Hope legal action is taken against those responsible
What law has been broken?
There’s an allegation of fraudulent activity. The leader’s office assigned funds for a specific purpose which was then secretly funnelled elsewhere by those wreckers and they concealed the activity.
The allegation is they broke party rules isnt it?
Who was defrauded?
Criminal-fraud-in-England-and-Wales-December2015.pdf
Last edited:
You are a sucker for punishment. You surely remember the debacle last time you tried to understand a legal process.
Well done mate, you’ve successfully posted a definition of fraud. Not sure what your point is but I’m proud nevertheless.
And you said he was accused of fraudulant activity... so is this your accusation or do you have links to other people
And who has he defrauded... how under the guidence has he committed fraud
Because making false allegations of criminal charges on public forums seems to be the default setting for corbyn fan boys these days
1. Observes that the Corbyn thread has been bumped.
2. Considers the possibility that it won't have immediately summoned @sun_tzu and might therefore not have turned into a shitshow.
3.As a consequence of above and the fallibility of human optimism takes a look at said thread.
4. Observes @sun_tzu shitshow and leaves thread, safe in the knowledge that the some things are immutable
Jezbollah!
2. Considers the possibility that it won't have immediately summoned @sun_tzu and might therefore not have turned into a shitshow.
3.As a consequence of above and the fallibility of human optimism takes a look at said thread.
4. Observes @sun_tzu shitshow and leaves thread, safe in the knowledge that the some things are immutable
Jezbollah!
Hmmm, if I said people have been accused of fraudulent activity, I think it should be quite clear to anyone with basic literacy skills that it’s an accusation that has already been made, i.e. it is not an original allegation by me.
As you seem to lack those skills, I’ll have to make it really simple for you. Based on the leaked report (and which subsequent admissions reinforce), Unite, among others, stated they felt there is prima facie evidence of fraud and false accounting. I eagerly await some shite response about unicorns and anti-Semitism.
Cease and desist... Libel.. jezbollah...
Please stop overusing ellipses.
Got a link to those allegations as the post you quoted said breaking party rules
Erm...no
Do you always need to be spoonfed? You managed to research and find what fraud is (well done again for that), I’m sure you can do a bit of digging on this yourself
His brother is a raving lunatic.
I just think your making stuff up and potentially putting the caf in legal issues they shouldt be
Please provide links so I can forward those to lawyers rather that your post on the caf
No, he’s not making it up. This is currently in the news.
You did this the other day with me and used the same shield of ‘putting the caf in legal issues’. Stop doing that.
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp....our-officials-of-sabotaging-election-campaign
No there was an article saying internal rules beoken
He says fraud
I have linked to the uk fraud rules and questioned that is lts not fraud under UK legal definitions
As such link to these articles and I will refer them to the relevant lawyers
Or if its not fraud admit that and delete the posts rather that put naill in legal trouble
Its not to much to expect that if people accuse people of a crime they have evidence and if not they accept that the their accusations bring legal reprocrussions on the site owners and as such they may wish to refrain in unfounded accusations on public platforms because well its kinda the law
“In their submission to the party inquiry called to examine the leaked report, Corbyn and his former colleagues claimed the alleged diversion of some party funds during the 2017 election could even constitute fraud.”
Could... which as I say i have posted the legal uk definition...i can't seen that no provable financial or other loss therefore not fraud
Please post likns to people saying fraud as that is what was alleged on this site
So post me links to reports for lawyers to action as the previous poster allegaed fraud allegations not potential fraud...legally pretty different
Do you know what allegation means?
Please stick to the topic.
People are entitled to post their opinions, and when challenged, they're entitled to respond with explanation. Bickering and abuse is not helpful.
Reporting an accusation of possible fraud in the media, or fiscal misconduct is not a legal problem - but please be clear where/who the allegation comes from. Providing legitimate media sources always helps.
People are entitled to post their opinions, and when challenged, they're entitled to respond with explanation. Bickering and abuse is not helpful.
Reporting an accusation of possible fraud in the media, or fiscal misconduct is not a legal problem - but please be clear where/who the allegation comes from. Providing legitimate media sources always helps.
Hold on, there was no abuse whatsoever in the post of mine that was deleted. Did you delete the right post? For context the post was “Bobby posted that there had been an allegation of fraud, you asked by whom as you thought he may have made it up, I’ve sent you the link explaining and how it’s related to Corbyn” - This in the Corbyn thread, it wasn’t off topic and their was no abuse.
And a legitimate media source was provided.
Bit odd they deleted posts but left those incoherent ramblings about fraud and the forum getting sued which are clearly nonsense and derailed any serious discussion that could have taken place.
Apologies if I accidentally deleted any ports containing new information - I deleted a page full of posts that appeared to be going nowhere constructive, and that based on past experience would have ended with a bunch of warnings.
As to what wasn't deleted - a question was raised about redirection of funds and possible fraud, and that was answered with a link to the allegations, and some background information. My intention was to leave posts that offered context to that exchange - that's not an endorsement of their contents. In other news, I'm not perfect.
As to what wasn't deleted - a question was raised about redirection of funds and possible fraud, and that was answered with a link to the allegations, and some background information. My intention was to leave posts that offered context to that exchange - that's not an endorsement of their contents. In other news, I'm not perfect.
They rigged the result of the vote by *checks notes* voting for their preferred choice. Scandalous. Such a damning indictment of British media that genuinely dense people like Hodges can forge a successful career within it.
Bloody hell, I must have missed this one at the time. Imagine what the result could have been in 2017 with a normal press.
I don't even think the Mail or Express would ask such a stupid question
Shame on LBC