Jump to content
Melbourne Football

TTDIM: Things that don't irk me


bazzatron
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, malloy said:

Lol are you actually comparing believing in Christ to a fictional story as some sort of win over atheism.

 

Actually I am not comparing the story of Christ to any story but to an actual beautiful piece of art that is a fictional perfectly re-constructed re-writing of the story of Christ... 

You do realize that "The Lion and The Witch and Wardrobe" was deliberately written for a Group of Jewish Children to explain the main narrative of the New Testament, all the exact same themes are there to a tee... TBH as a Agnostic Catholic who can at best hope for a Cool Christ for me if Christianity turns out to be right I think Aslan is easier to picture as what I think God would be like. (A lot less cross than how people perceive Roman Catholic God)

Aslan - dies and come backs to life then leaves to look over another place...

Lucy - Is the youngest and thus closet and most Spiritually connected to Aslan she is the Disciple John... the last Disciple standing by his side as he dies.

Edmund - Betrays Aslan like Judas, however is then forgiven when Aslan comes back as Judas would have been if he had not hung himself...

Peter - Becomes the High King Peter and is the rock Aslan leaves the Kingdom resting on like how Simon-Peter the Apostle became the First Pope.

Its not a win, but the fact is if that if Person as a Child knocked on the back of a Wardrobe at one point in their life  "they were showing a tiny leap of faith" in believing in something else than what Atheists believe might exist: Which is nothing and that "faith" is stupid and not a part of their lives.

And the humorous thing is they were knocking to see if the could entire into a world (As you label it.. purely a fictional story) that is a play by play the narrative of Christ. Which then in turns shows how they are still just taking another leap of Faith again these days to leap to the conclusion without knowing their has to be nothing at all when you die without a doubt.

Also no kid reads through the Narnia Series without hoping too see Aslan as much as possible.

Edited by cadete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, cadete said:

Actually I am not comparing the story of Christ to any story but to an actual beautiful piece of art that is a fictional perfectly re-constructed re-writing of the story of Christ... 

You do realize that "The Lion and The Witch and Wardrobe" was deliberately written for a Group of Jewish Children to explain the main narrative of the New Testament, all the exact same themes are there to a tee... TBH as a Agnostic Catholic who can at best hope for a Cool Christ for me if Christianity turns out to be right I think Aslan is easier to picture as what I think God would be like. (A lot less cross than how people perceive Roman Catholic God)

Aslan - dies and come backs to life then leaves to look over another place...

Lucy - Is the youngest and thus closet and most Spiritually connected to Aslan she is the Disciple John... the last Disciple standing by his side as he dies.

Edmund - Betrays Aslan like Judas, however is then forgiven when Aslan comes back as Judas would have been if he had not hung himself...

Peter - Becomes the High King Peter and is the rock Aslan leaves the Kingdom resting on like how Simon-Peter the Apostle became the First Pope.

Its not a win, but the fact is if that if Person as a Child knocked on the back of a Wardrobe at one point in their life  "they were showing a tiny leap of faith" in believing in something else than what Atheists believe might exist: Which is nothing and that "faith" is stupid and not a part of their lives.

And the humorous thing is they were knocking to see if the could entire into a world (As you label it.. purely a fictional story) that is a play by play the narrative of Christ. Which then in turns shows how they are still just taking another leap of Faith again these days to leap to the conclusion without knowing their has to be nothing at all when you die without a doubt.

Also no kid reads through the Narnia Series without hoping too see Aslan as much as possible.

The story you are comparing it to is irrelevant, but for the fact it is fictional. You have essentially drawn a connection between kids (with minds that have not fully developed) believing something that is false that they later realise is false as they get older to religion (I know its an easy connection make as they have the same amount of objective evidence supporting the narrative as factual).

Lol. Are you using a Russell's Teapot argument to justify the belief in an afterlife? Not believing something due to lack of evidence is in no way comparible to believing something that you have no evidence for, but cannot be irrefutably disproven due to the nature of the claim (i.e. there is an afterlife, but you will only have proof that it exists after you die).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, NewConvert said:

Einstein:

"the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this. "

Which ties in with the The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe which was written for 10 year olds.

 

This quote source shows its inaccuracy... The Bible is the most defining story of Humanity ever written sinces the Classics... if was composed along the way prior to Christ it's preserverance just adds to this fact.

Contatry to what Mr Malloy says "I have no firm beliefs at all on an afterlife or God even existing". 

However: Without the Bible we have no Modern Literature as the Bible is bigger influence to fiction than The Beatles are to rock.

In fact we would have had no Reformation if it wasn't for people honoring the Bible, which would have seen no advancement in the thinking that lead to Liberal Democracy and by consequence prob then the Industrial Revolution itself.

As in the very thing the West used to take over the world, which people then hold up as some higher being of life that those from other cultures cannot assimilate too. (Not my belief - But I'm smart enough to realize The West people so strongly wish to defend comes from the Bible,)

Einstein did not bother with Literature and certainly not really with morals (He was actually a far bit of a dick to those close to him) so his thoughts on the Bible mean little to Me. Also the "Lion The Wichita and the Wardrobe" by nobody whose anything about Literature would simply call "just a children book" it holds up as major piece of Literature Achievement in its own right and huge contribution to Literature in general.

Dismissing Religion existence is one thing - Dismissing the Bible as a Vehicle for Social Change in World History is pretty ridiculous.

Edited by cadete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, cadete said:

This quote source shows its inaccuracy... The Bible is the most defining story of Humanity ever written sinces the Classics... if was composed along the way prior to Christ it's preserverance just adds to this fact.

Contatry to what Mr Malloy says "I have no firm beliefs at all on an afterlife or God even existing". 

However: Without the Bible we have no Modern Literature as the Bible is bigger influence to fiction than The Beatles are to rock.

In fact we would have had no Reformation if it wasn't for people honoring the Bible, which would have seen no advancement in the thinking that lead to Liberal Democracy and by consequence prob then the Industrial Revolution itself.

As in the very thing the West used to take over the world, which people then hold up as some higher being of life that those from other cultures cannot assimilate too. (Not my belief - But I'm smart enough to realize The West people so strongly wish to defend comes from the Bible,)

Einstein did not bother with Literature and certainly not really with morals (He was actually a far bit of a dick to those close to him) so his thoughts on the Bible mean little to Me. Also the "Lion The Wichita and the Wardrobe" by nobody whose anything about Literature would simply call "just a children book" it holds up as major piece of Literature Achievement in its own right and huge contribution to Literature in general.

Dismissing Religion existence is one thing - Dismissing the Bible as a Vehicle for Social Change in World History is pretty ridiculous.

I think you may need to re-read what you wrote - its a bit confusing.

No arguing that the Bible (Old and New Testaments) have had a profound influence on Western thought, culture and civilization. Indeed it is impossible to understand Western history without understanding Christianity.

However you ascribe too much to Christianity. Archimedes one the greatest mathematicians of all times was a pagan and created incredibly sophisticated machinery. So the idea that the industrial revolution would not have happened without the Reformation is stretching it a bit. Human ingenuity was always there. Our Liberal Democracy owes far more to the Viking Thing than it does to the Greek Democracy or religious liberty.

Einstein may not have bothered with Literature but having fled Germany because he was a Jew and like so many Jews had to confront the question of whether there is a deity or not, his response was on the question of religion itself. I have no knowledge whether he read "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe".  And BTW all religions have to deal with the issue of a "just war". Reading Wikipedia they claim that Christian theologians have been contributing to this debate for nearly 2000 years - curiosuly the Church itself only adopted it in 1992.

Furthermore Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has this to say about Einstein:

" Albert Einstein (1879–1955) is well known as the most prominent physicist of the twentieth century. Less well known, though of comparable importance, are his contributions to twentieth-century philosophy of science".

So I wouldn't dismiss his critique as someone who was illiterate in Literature. But I do agree with you that he was an arsehole to those nearest to him.

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 18/12/2018 at 9:46 PM, NewConvert said:

I think you may need to re-read what you wrote - its a bit confusing.

No arguing that the Bible (Old and New Testaments) have had a profound influence on Western thought, culture and civilization. Indeed it is impossible to understand Western history without understanding Christianity.

However you ascribe too much to Christianity. Archimedes one the greatest mathematicians of all times was a pagan and created incredibly sophisticated machinery. So the idea that the industrial revolution would not have happened without the Reformation is stretching it a bit. Human ingenuity was always there. Our Liberal Democracy owes far more to the Viking Thing than it does to the Greek Democracy or religious liberty.

Einstein may not have bothered with Literature but having fled Germany because he was a Jew and like so many Jews had to confront the question of whether there is a deity or not, his response was on the question of religion itself. I have no knowledge whether he read "The Lion, The Witch and the Wardrobe".  And BTW all religions have to deal with the issue of a "just war". Reading Wikipedia they claim that Christian theologians have been contributing to this debate for nearly 2000 years - curiosuly the Church itself only adopted it in 1992.

Furthermore Standford Encyclopedia of Philosophy has this to say about Einstein:

" Albert Einstein (1879–1955) is well known as the most prominent physicist of the twentieth century. Less well known, though of comparable importance, are his contributions to twentieth-century philosophy of science".

So I wouldn't dismiss his critique as someone who was illiterate in Literature. But I do agree with you that he was an arsehole to those nearest to him.

 

 

 

 

 

The reformation was a major breakthrough in how western people thought about the world.

The questioning of the Church (something that had not been done for over 500 years / Kings who claimed to Titles as being appointed by Christ even tried to remain in line most of the time with Rome ) allowed people to start asking even bigger questions with new freedom. Luther had balls to ask such a question.

Hence with a question thag was neve even be considered allowrd then logically The Enlightment followed which I would apply as the kickstart for the Industrial Revolution.

Also your right about the Classical World and it's achievements.. Ironically though The Renaissance used Christianity and the Bible as a Vechile to re-establish at lot of the achievements of Greece and Rome.

The Bible constantly keeps popping into Western History. Liberal Democracy started with the Magna Carta / so Norman's (Who were Vikings who saw themselves as Franks) despiting that the King was not above the law... Even if God Appointed him.

Further still Henry the VIII only adopted Protestantism for pragmatic reasons of Government. He was actually very anti Lutheran until he wanted a divorce. Yet the still the impact of that decision was huge.

With the Magna Carta already in place and the War of the Roses destroying England's men for decades just for It's Nobles Egos it was the Bible that caused the English Civil War.

Of course a lot of people died again unnecessarily but the Puritans inspired by new concepts on the Bible ultimately after Cromwell was gone left a different country.

They had created a country with the words most powerful parliament and a King with very little power to those on compared to his cousins on the continent - Chalk and Cheese really when compared to The Sun King and Habsburgs. 

It was no surprise that at this time Ships of the two most Protestant Countries in England and Holland?Amsterdam) became the first to rule the Seas and re-establish how they could be used for previously unforeseen Trading and consequently Merchant Wealth that finally smashed the idiocy of  Feudalism for ever.

 

Edited by cadete
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, cadete said:

The reformation was a major breakthrough in how western people thought about the world.

The questioning of the Church (something that had not been done for over 500 years / Kings who claimed to Titles as being appointed by Christ even tried to remain in line most of the time with Rome ) allowed people to start asking even bigger questions with new freedom. Luther had balls to ask such a question.

Hence with a question thag was neve even be considered allowrd then logically The Enlightment followed which I would apply as the kickstart for the Industrial Revolution.

Also your right about the Classical World and it's achievements.. Ironically though The Renaissance used Christianity and the Bible as a Vechile to re-establish at lot of the achievements of Greece and Rome.

The Bible constantly keeps popping into Western History. Liberal Democracy started with the Magna Carta / so Norman's (Who were Vikings who saw themselves as Franks) despiting that the King was not above the law... Even if God Appointed him.

Further still Henry the VIII only adopted Protestantism for pragmatic reasons of Government. He was actually very anti Lutheran until he wanted a divorce. Yet the still the impact of that decision was huge.

With the Magna Carta already in place and the War of the Roses destroying England's men for decades just for It's Nobles Egos it was the Bible that caused the English Civil War.

Of course a lot of people died again unnecessarily but the Puritans inspired by new concepts on the Bible ultimately after Cromwell was gone left a different country.

They had created a country with the words most powerful parliament and a King with very little power to those on compared to his cousins on the continent - Chalk and Cheese really when compared to The Sun King and Habsburgs. 

It was no surprise that at this time Ships of the two most Protestant Countries in England and Holland?Amsterdam) became the first to rule the Seas and re-establish how they could be used for previously unforeseen Trading and consequently Merchant Wealth that finally smashed the idiocy of  Feudalism for ever.

 

By and large I agree with some caveats. First the questioning of the power of the Pope had begun long before Luther. When you read about schisms and their followers all across Europe, this was a direct questioning of the Vatican. However two things were in Luthers favour: The Medicis and greed. With the Vatican taking a slice or in many case the whole cake by not paying taxes locally, the Medicis became incredibly wealthy and powerful. Way up north in Germany the local royalty were getting mightly pissed off at seeing their money going to an indulgent corrupt papacy. Thus instead of burning Luther like in previous decades this time they used his theses to revolt.

Interestingly only the aristocracy converted to Protestanism. It was only in the 20th century (post WWII) that the Protestants finally outnumbered the Catholics.

As far as seafearing goes, you seem to have forgotten that it was the Spanish that sailed West to the Americas and the Portuguese who sailed south around Africa and into Asia. Of course I should not forget that the Arabs controlled teh Mediterranean and Asia Minor seas all the way to Indonesia. This was long before the Dutch and English had set sail.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 20/12/2018 at 8:25 PM, NewConvert said:

By and large I agree with some caveats. First the questioning of the power of the Pope had begun long before Luther. When you read about schisms and their followers all across Europe, this was a direct questioning of the Vatican. However two things were in Luthers favour: The Medicis and greed. With the Vatican taking a slice or in many case the whole cake by not paying taxes locally, the Medicis became incredibly wealthy and powerful. Way up north in Germany the local royalty were getting mightly pissed off at seeing their money going to an indulgent corrupt papacy. Thus instead of burning Luther like in previous decades this time they used his theses to revolt.

Interestingly only the aristocracy converted to Protestanism. It was only in the 20th century (post WWII) that the Protestants finally outnumbered the Catholics.

As far as seafearing goes, you seem to have forgotten that it was the Spanish that sailed West to the Americas and the Portuguese who sailed south around Africa and into Asia. Of course I should not forget that the Arabs controlled teh Mediterranean and Asia Minor seas all the way to Indonesia. This was long before the Dutch and English had set sail.

 

The Dutch and English took things a lot further than the Seafaring of the Mediterranean Countries...

The create Industries of proper trade.

Anyway we quoting are reading from the same books here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 4 weeks later...

TTDIM: In their first Season I said that WSW would not be able to contain their supporter base long term, I used the Northern Spirit as an example of another Sydney side who had massive crowds early on who then being fickle Sydneysiders dropped off and eventually the club died.

A few forum members at the time mentioned this prediction quite a few times in WSW second season to make me look a fool... guys like @FB. and @MaliMate.

Well I got that one wrong. :D

 

wsw.jpeg

Edited by cadete
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, cadete said:

TTDIM: In their first Season I said that WSW would not be able to contain their supporter base long term, I used the Northern Spirit as an example of another Sydney side who had massive crowds early on who then being fickle Sydneysiders dropped off and eventually the club died.

A few forum members at the time mentioned this prediction quite a few times in WSW second season to make me look a fool... guys like @FB. and @MaliMate.

Well I got that one wrong. :D

 

wsw.jpeg

It would depress anyone to play in an 83,000 capacity stadium. Even Victory's crowd of 16,000 looked very bare at AAMI over the weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

It would depress anyone to play in an 83,000 capacity stadium. Even Victory's crowd of 16,000 looked very bare at AAMI over the weekend.

Things have been in decline for a long time at WSW, both in supporter numbers and the once media famous RBB has disintegrated into a complete mess. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
On 26/02/2019 at 6:04 PM, kingofhearts said:

But he started a charity and that, he's a good bloke leave him alone.

Charity?

Actually it was Compensation Panel for Victims of Child Abuse due to the Catholic Church, the first in the world. He was the first senior cleric in the world to say these atrocities had happened and that people needed to be recognized as Victims and be compensated properly.

There were five cases of alleged Child Abuse by Pell - Automatically four were thrown out of Court as beyond stupid.

Then there is this one case which had a Mistrial, obviously you do not you know what the vote among the Jury was before the mistrial as you dont shit about anything but it was: 12 not guilty and 1 who claimed he was guilty. So they had to go to another Trial with twelve people subjected to the media's guilty verdict already placed upon him.

There were 137 witnesses say it did not happen including all the other Choir Members, yet still in a six minute window (When some else was there the whole time) in his vestments he is meant to have molested two boys (One who before he died claimed the other bloke was lying his whole life). There is one person saying it happened.

Those are facts... that is why people are saying we need to wait for the case to play out. Of course you dont know these facts because you dont know shit.

On 26/02/2019 at 5:14 PM, kingofhearts said:

The whole Catholic church can fuck off.

You are short balding little dumb as fuck Keyboard Warrior, why dont you come into the Imp again like when you came to collect you money of me scared and nervous as shit and come and say to my face and mates there that are Catholic and tell us all Catholics can get fucked because of one person in one court case. (As everyone on here knows - what I write on the Internet I will say in Real Life).

I take solace in the fact that I know that if you have gotten a root or some woman to bare your company for longer than a couple of days that at best they would be four.

Edited: For Accuracy. Hence "TheKing of the No Decent Heart's" personal description has not been.

Edited by cadete
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Harrison said:

I think it was 10-2. 

Yeah, you are right and I edited my post.. believe me I know someone whose pretty high in Judiciary and it was looking like 11 - 1.

I'm surprised that nobody else thinks things are not a lot better off. Australia's top Crime writer wrote with Pedophiles they don't just randomly pick it up at 53 (The age of his accusation that was thrown out) and they almost always perform grooming.

The Police went hell for leather to find anything. They went so hard the only cases.the DPP has not prosecuted In Victoria for fucken years (And we had a nuts DPP in the 90s) and the Police have to have gone to the extreme length of going with it themselves were these five cases.

If the DPP would not procede that means if the case was before a Judge it would also have been tossed. (So if it had been iheard in NSW - Like Chris Dawson's Cass will be in front of a Judge for his case because of the Media Attention)

Of course Dawson however he has not had four other false cases of him being a Murder tossed out as crap or 137 witnesses for his whereabouts when his wife disappeared.

If this was anybody else would it not seem odd that their a such a large number of cases about the bloke that four had to be tossed as rubbish and easily dismissed alongside this case. That just maybe the Media had a role to play, suxh as Age Journalists posting on Instagram "Pell Hunting" outside court in the morning of his first Court Appearance.

Also if he was someone who demanded blowjobs from a Choir Boy in sex minutes whilst Molesting another Boy at the same (in a fuck load of Archbishop Vestements that require anothet person to help remove them) then why would he turn the spotlight on the Catholic Church and admit, address and declare things needed to be done by Child Abuse in the Church. Start up a huge compensation panel and pay millions in compo plus Mental Health Services.

Is the guy really that much of a Machievllian Evil Mastermind. Honestly how has he fooled people of being that fucken evil for so long? That's pretty much a evil as someone could be since 1950 and it's in his 80s his evil us exposed in a case that he was almost found not guilty in...

Also considering his most disliked person in Australia to do as such. It seems his hated by some ppl so much that it gives them sheer delight like the Kaiser on here over the moon that a child has been molest. 

Then again several of jurors did laugh during the case... Seems normal for such subject matter. Also seems a bit odd that this wasn't reported - would that not scar the victim?

Also it's a bit odd for the King of Hearts to be so pumped up himself about Molestation but we have always had some weird fuckers on here before. Also I do remember my GF at the time thinking who the fuck is that weirdo.he crept up to me to collect his cash on the bet he made...

Also why did 137 witnesses say he entered the room with his Deputy. Surely one of the choir boys would say otherwise. I was at school with those dudes and the fucken hated being in the Choir with a passion. In fact this dude may have been in my year level.

They only did it cos it got them a free scholarship to an APS school. They also were treated as outsiders and given shit for it, in fact some remind of our Charlemagne of Knowledge on here.

Also why did the other guy (who died of a Herion Overdose) say time after time nothing ever happened when interviewed. Anyone meet someone with a Herion Addiction? They pretty much would say anything for money, esp a lot of money.

So the summary is:

5 cases, 4 thrown out within minutes, one case almost thrown at 10 to 2.

Then a new case.:

1. Which had 137 ppl saying it didn't happen.

2. One of the supposed victims whose now dead always saying it didn't happen.

3. Pell of course saying it did not happen like he did about the four other cases that were thrown out as just crap.

4. One person, saying that all the above is wrong and he was forced to give a blowjob as Pell molested another bloke (who denies happened at the time) in a six minute window.

And King of Hearts jumping on the forum to rejoice. When your shitty Mason Footy Club play the cats come say hello. I will behind the goals, standing with the Cats fans.

 

 

 

 

Edited by cadete
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, cadete said:

Yeah, you are right and I edited my post.. believe me I know someone whose pretty high in Judiciary and it was looking like 11 - 1.

I'm surprised that nobody else thinks things are not a lot better off. Australia's top Crime writer wrote with Pedophiles they don't just randomly pick it up at 53 (The age of his accusation that was thrown out) and they almost always perform grooming.

The Police went hell for leather to find anything. They went so hard the only cases.the DPP has not prosecuted In Victoria for fucken years (And we had a nuts DPP in the 90s) and the Police have to have gone to the extreme length of going with it themselves were these five cases.

If the DPP would not procede that means if the case was before a Judge it would also have been tossed. (So if it had been iheard in NSW - Like Chris Dawson's Cass will be in front of a Judge for his case because of the Media Attention)

Of course Dawson however he has not had four other false cases of him being a Murder tossed out as crap or 137 witnesses for his whereabouts when his wife disappeared.

If this was anybody else would it not seem odd that their a such a large number of cases about the bloke that four had to be tossed as rubbish and easily dismissed alongside this case. That just maybe the Media had a role to play, suxh as Age Journalists posting on Instagram "Pell Hunting" outside court in the morning of his first Court Appearance.

Also if he was someone who demanded blowjobs from a Choir Boy in sex minutes whilst Molesting another Boy at the same (in a fuck load of Archbishop Vestements that require anothet person to help remove them) then why would he turn the spotlight on the Catholic Church and admit, address and declare things needed to be done by Child Abuse in the Church. Start up a huge compensation panel and pay millions in compo plus Mental Health Services.

Is the guy really that much of a Machievllian Evil Mastermind. Honestly how has he fooled people of being that fucken evil for so long? That's pretty much a evil as someone could be since 1950 and it's in his 80s his evil us exposed in a case that he was almost found not guilty in...

Also considering his most disliked person in Australia to do as such. It seems his hated by some ppl so much that it gives them sheer delight like the Kaiser on here over the moon that a child has been molest. 

Then again several of jurors did laugh during the case... Seems normal for such subject matter. Also seems a bit odd that this wasn't reported - would that not scar the victim?

Also it's a bit odd for the King of Hearts to be so pumped up himself about Molestation but we have always had some weird fuckers on here before. Also I do remember my GF at the time thinking who the fuck is that weirdo.he crept up to me to collect his cash on the bet he made...

Also why did 137 witnesses say he entered the room with his Deputy. Surely one of the choir boys would say otherwise. I was at school with those dudes and the fucken hated being in the Choir with a passion. In fact this dude may have been in my year level.

They only did it cos it got them a free scholarship to an APS school. They also were treated as outsiders and given shit for it, in fact some remind of our Charlemagne of Knowledge on here.

Also why did the other guy (who died of a Herion Overdose) say time after time nothing ever happened when interviewed. Anyone meet someone with a Herion Addiction? They pretty much would say anything for money, esp a lot of money.

So the summary is:

5 cases, 4 thrown out within minutes, one case almost thrown at 10 to 2.

Then a new case.:

1. Which had 137 ppl saying it didn't happen.

2. One of the supposed victims whose now dead always saying it didn't happen.

3. Pell of course saying it did not happen like he did about the four other cases that were thrown out as just crap.

4. One person, saying that all the above is wrong and he was forced to give a blowjob as Pell molested another bloke (who denies happened at the time) in a six minute window.

And King of Hearts jumping on the forum to rejoice. When your shitty Mason Footy Club play the cats come say hello. I will behind the goals, standing with the Cats fans.

 

 

 

 

Logged on for the first time in a while in the hope I'd find a post from you on this. 

 

This is a stitch up of the highest order. There is no fucking way you could find the guy guilty given the evidence. My alma mater better reinstate Pell to the honour board when he is rightfully found not guilty on appeal.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, cadete said:

Charity?

Actually it was Compensation Panel for Victims of Child Abuse due to the Catholic Church, the first in the world. He was the first senior cleric in the world to say these atrocities had happened and that people needed to be recognized as Victims and be compensated properly.

There were five cases of alleged Child Abuse by Pell - Automatically four were thrown out of Court as beyond stupid.

Then there is this one case which had a Mistrial, obviously you do not you know what the vote among the Jury was before the mistrial as you dont shit about anything but it was: 12 not guilty and 1 who claimed he was guilty. So they had to go to another Trial with twelve people subjected to the media's guilty verdict already placed upon him.

There were 137 witnesses say it did not happen including all the other Choir Members, yet still in a six minute window (When some else was there the whole time) in his vestments he is meant to have molested two boys (One who before he died claimed the other bloke was lying his whole life). There is one person saying it happened.

Those are facts... that is why people are saying we need to wait for the case to play out. Of course you dont know these facts because you dont know shit.

You are short balding little dumb as fuck Keyboard Warrior, why dont you come into the Imp again like when you came to collect you money of me scared and nervous as shit and come and say to my face and mates there that are Catholic and tell us all Catholics can get fucked because of one person in one court case. (As everyone on here knows - what I write on the Internet I will say in Real Life).

I take solace in the fact that I know that if you have gotten a root or some woman to bare your company for longer than a couple of days that at best they would be four.

Edited: For Accuracy. Hence "TheKing of the No Decent Heart's" personal description has not been.

 

3 hours ago, cadete said:

Yeah, you are right and I edited my post.. believe me I know someone whose pretty high in Judiciary and it was looking like 11 - 1.

I'm surprised that nobody else thinks things are not a lot better off. Australia's top Crime writer wrote with Pedophiles they don't just randomly pick it up at 53 (The age of his accusation that was thrown out) and they almost always perform grooming.

The Police went hell for leather to find anything. They went so hard the only cases.the DPP has not prosecuted In Victoria for fucken years (And we had a nuts DPP in the 90s) and the Police have to have gone to the extreme length of going with it themselves were these five cases.

If the DPP would not procede that means if the case was before a Judge it would also have been tossed. (So if it had been iheard in NSW - Like Chris Dawson's Cass will be in front of a Judge for his case because of the Media Attention)

Of course Dawson however he has not had four other false cases of him being a Murder tossed out as crap or 137 witnesses for his whereabouts when his wife disappeared.

If this was anybody else would it not seem odd that their a such a large number of cases about the bloke that four had to be tossed as rubbish and easily dismissed alongside this case. That just maybe the Media had a role to play, suxh as Age Journalists posting on Instagram "Pell Hunting" outside court in the morning of his first Court Appearance.

Also if he was someone who demanded blowjobs from a Choir Boy in sex minutes whilst Molesting another Boy at the same (in a fuck load of Archbishop Vestements that require anothet person to help remove them) then why would he turn the spotlight on the Catholic Church and admit, address and declare things needed to be done by Child Abuse in the Church. Start up a huge compensation panel and pay millions in compo plus Mental Health Services.

Is the guy really that much of a Machievllian Evil Mastermind. Honestly how has he fooled people of being that fucken evil for so long? That's pretty much a evil as someone could be since 1950 and it's in his 80s his evil us exposed in a case that he was almost found not guilty in...

Also considering his most disliked person in Australia to do as such. It seems his hated by some ppl so much that it gives them sheer delight like the Kaiser on here over the moon that a child has been molest. 

Then again several of jurors did laugh during the case... Seems normal for such subject matter. Also seems a bit odd that this wasn't reported - would that not scar the victim?

Also it's a bit odd for the King of Hearts to be so pumped up himself about Molestation but we have always had some weird fuckers on here before. Also I do remember my GF at the time thinking who the fuck is that weirdo.he crept up to me to collect his cash on the bet he made...

Also why did 137 witnesses say he entered the room with his Deputy. Surely one of the choir boys would say otherwise. I was at school with those dudes and the fucken hated being in the Choir with a passion. In fact this dude may have been in my year level.

They only did it cos it got them a free scholarship to an APS school. They also were treated as outsiders and given shit for it, in fact some remind of our Charlemagne of Knowledge on here.

Also why did the other guy (who died of a Herion Overdose) say time after time nothing ever happened when interviewed. Anyone meet someone with a Herion Addiction? They pretty much would say anything for money, esp a lot of money.

So the summary is:

5 cases, 4 thrown out within minutes, one case almost thrown at 10 to 2.

Then a new case.:

1. Which had 137 ppl saying it didn't happen.

2. One of the supposed victims whose now dead always saying it didn't happen.

3. Pell of course saying it did not happen like he did about the four other cases that were thrown out as just crap.

4. One person, saying that all the above is wrong and he was forced to give a blowjob as Pell molested another bloke (who denies happened at the time) in a six minute window.

And King of Hearts jumping on the forum to rejoice. When your shitty Mason Footy Club play the cats come say hello. I will behind the goals, standing with the Cats fans.

 

 

 

 

He's back! The det goes bang.How many days will we argue about this for shall you say? 3? Just like the old times

1) This meeting at the pub issue we had for our bet, and your interpretation of it is so wrong I don't even know where to start. Was I nervous? Yes, because at the time I was much younger (19 in fact), and meeting someone like yourself in real life (a much older "man") who has threatened violence against me many times on here who knew what the fuck you were capable of. From what I remember of the conversation however, it was quite normal and we talked about watching celtic at the imp (?), I met boffins and than I left. 

You are literally the biggest shit talker I have ever seen, and these constant empty threats don't make you look tough in fact, they make you just look like the big pussy that you are. You can't even get your facts straight, because i am actually roughly 185cm (just under 6 foot 1) and my hair whilst not luscious and long as it now, was quite decent. So who the fuck did you meet than? You are a manipulative liar and it just discredits what you say, so stop with the bullshit. It's like you have this chip on your shoulder and you constantly just have to keep acting like a tough guy. Grow up you baby, you're a grown man for God sake.

2) The more pertinent issue of course is George Pell. Those comments were made with tongue in cheek because I knew you and I had a massive argument a while ago when I was a teen and we were both quite stoic on our viewpoints. I hate the Catholic church and have a personal interest in this case because I know people who have been affected be these fucking monsters so i'll say it again: The whole catholic church can fuck off.  When I first heard the news I was at work, hence why my post was 7 words long. As more information has come out are their inconsistencies?Absolutely. Things that don't sit right? Sure. For those reasons and more, lets let the legal system take course, the appeal system to work and go from there. It's like you never give people a chance to have a change of opinion.  I don't claim to know it all (unlike some people) but I just cannot believe that he is not blameless for at least some of what has gone on.

When I think of George Pell I constantly of him walking with that scumbag Gerald Ridsale, and it really makes my blood boil. Feel free to criticise me for being short sighted and bias, I'm more than happy to take that because of my personal stake in the issue. I wish he would've done more at the time this was happening, and for that I can never forgive him. If you knew the people I knew and how lives their lives have ended up, you would know my frustration with the whole church. The fact you would even suggest that I am 'pumped up for Molestation' and am happy that has happened- I don't even know what to say to a comment like that, but than again, only you would stoop so low to insult someone on the internet because that is exactly who you are. Its a pity because you seem quite intelligent, but your such a vitriolic, spiteful person that you can't even have a debate without turning into some triggered little pussy.

But hey, I have a lovely girlfriend (a little bit higher than the 4 out of 10 ya gave me champ) a shit soccer team and a good job. Its not all bad, not all good but I'm happy. I just live with the knowledge that you can't live without me, that you'll even come to a club forum (that you openly no longer support remember)  like some jilted ex who can't stay away because you are so lonely and have a personal go at me over a 7 word comment. So good on ya, I look forward to your reply, and Catholics can get fucked :up: 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So I haven't been paying too much attention to the whole thing, but I keep seeing references to 6 minutes without any background in the news, how has it been established that on a day 20+ years ago that there were precisely 6 minutes that the offences could have occured in?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

23 hours ago, bt50 said:

Alex Jones on Rogan today. Quite possibly the greatest podcast in human history.

Agreed, it was truly magical. 

Eddie Bravo fuckin with him was the funniest thing I've seen in a while. Alex Jones is possibly the great living meme in internet history. God bless him.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Taking the risk of re-igniting the furor expressed above, today's Guardian has their court reporter who sat through the Pell trial answer some common questions which have been raised. I found the definition of beyond reasonable doubt to be interesting:

Unlike the US, Australia does not have a definition. Australia takes the approach that to define the terms is to diminish them. In Victoria, jurors can ask the judge for some guidance as to how to interpret “beyond reasonable doubt” if they are stuck, but this question was not asked by jurors in Pell’s case. However, jurors are given very strong directions by the chief judge about factors to consider.

Jurors were told it was not enough to believe the complainant, or to think that Pell committed the abuse. Jurors were told they had to believe the abusing happened beyond reasonable doubt, otherwise it was not safe to convict and they must find Pell not guilty. They were also told repeatedly and on multiple days they were not to make Pell a scapegoat for the Catholic church and its failures to children. They were warned almost daily against doing their own research into Pell or talking about the case, and were told they could go to jail if they did so. These were not points made in passing. They were drilled into jurors by the chief judge.

Also the reporter states that no one knows the split of the first trial. It is illegal to divulge such information and the common assertion that it was 10:2 cannot be substantiated.

The full link is here:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/mar/02/cardinal-george-pells-conviction-the-questions-that-remain

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, NewConvert said:

Taking the risk of re-igniting the furor expressed above, today's Guardian has their court reporter who sat through the Pell trial answer some common questions which have been raised. I found the definition of beyond reasonable doubt to be interesting:

Unlike the US, Australia does not have a definition. Australia takes the approach that to define the terms is to diminish them. In Victoria, jurors can ask the judge for some guidance as to how to interpret “beyond reasonable doubt” if they are stuck, but this question was not asked by jurors in Pell’s case. However, jurors are given very strong directions by the chief judge about factors to consider.

Jurors were told it was not enough to believe the complainant, or to think that Pell committed the abuse. Jurors were told they had to believe the abusing happened beyond reasonable doubt, otherwise it was not safe to convict and they must find Pell not guilty. They were also told repeatedly and on multiple days they were not to make Pell a scapegoat for the Catholic church and its failures to children. They were warned almost daily against doing their own research into Pell or talking about the case, and were told they could go to jail if they did so. These were not points made in passing. They were drilled into jurors by the chief judge.

Also the reporter states that no one knows the split of the first trial. It is illegal to divulge such information and the common assertion that it was 10:2 cannot be substantiated.

The full link is here:

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2019/mar/02/cardinal-george-pells-conviction-the-questions-that-remain

Believe me I know the number of the split. Anyone who knows my background on here is not going to doubt that.

Also I think by now you would have noticed most of the stuff I post in regards to sources I can't name turns out to be correct. (Esp in regards to Politics/The Law).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's bothered me is the media claimed that "compelling evidence was provided in court" to convict Pell but never talked about what this evidence was, unless i missed it. (channel 7 or 9 on tv on the day of the announcement)

It's  a "he said - he said" argument from an event 20 years ago and if cadete is right about one of the 2 victims denied it in interviews + 130 witnesses (whether these are credible or not, whether for the sake to protect the image of the church and Pell or genuine belief he could not have done it) and a 10 - 2 jury in favour of 'not guilty' in the first run, I guess it could have been a heavily media bias influence to have him convicted.

I'm just genuinely curious what kind of evidence was presented to make it believable to convict him. Maybe it's all there for me to research and make up my own opinion which I haven't bothered to.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Young Polak said:

What's bothered me is the media claimed that "compelling evidence was provided in court" to convict Pell but never talked about what this evidence was, unless i missed it. (channel 7 or 9 on tv on the day of the announcement)

It's  a "he said - he said" argument from an event 20 years ago and if cadete is right about one of the 2 victims denied it in interviews + 130 witnesses (whether these are credible or not, whether for the sake to protect the image of the church and Pell or genuine belief he could not have done it) and a 10 - 2 jury in favour of 'not guilty' in the first run, I guess it could have been a heavily media bias influence to have him convicted.

I'm just genuinely curious what kind of evidence was presented to make it believable to convict him. Maybe it's all there for me to research and make up my own opinion which I haven't bothered to.

The testimony cannot be published by law - not even for court records (this is to protect the vulnerable specially children). The barristers can quote from the testimony during court proceedings and the press can report those quotes but of course barristers are going to be highly selective with their quotes and it won't be the whole testimony. The questioning happened 20 years ago however teh second victim became a drug addict who took his own life in 2014 - you can draw the dots if you want to but I don't know what was presented to the jury with regards to the second victim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Shahanga said:

Got the Chamberlain conviction written all over it.

Nah.

The original Chamberlain conviction was done on forensics when a scientist stated in court that no dingo could have made those types of tears in the fabric. He was later discredited. The second crucial piece of evidence emerged many years later when a cardigan (IIRC) was found in the bush which meant that new evidence was found. DNA proved that the cardigan was Azaria Chamberlain's and that definitely bore the hallmarks of dingo bites (including DNA). At the re-trial local Aboriginal trackers were called and they said that to them the whole thing was baffling as it has always been known that dingos took babies.

So no resemblance for me. And unless Pell's team can come up with an alternative witness (new evidence) or some new evidence I cannot see the resemblance.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 hours ago, NewConvert said:

Nah.

The original Chamberlain conviction was done on forensics when a scientist stated in court that no dingo could have made those types of tears in the fabric. He was later discredited. The second crucial piece of evidence emerged many years later when a cardigan (IIRC) was found in the bush which meant that new evidence was found. DNA proved that the cardigan was Azaria Chamberlain's and that definitely bore the hallmarks of dingo bites (including DNA). At the re-trial local Aboriginal trackers were called and they said that to them the whole thing was baffling as it has always been known that dingos took babies.

So no resemblance for me. And unless Pell's team can come up with an alternative witness (new evidence) or some new evidence I cannot see the resemblance.

You must be the only person in Australia who doesn’t think the media frenzy was associated with the conviction.

that frenzy and flimsy evidence is a combination I haven’t seen again until the Pell case.

And no I’m not a catholic but I am interested in justice and hate to see the conviction of those whose guilt seems unprovable. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Shahanga said:

You must be the only person in Australia who doesn’t think the media frenzy was associated with the conviction.

that frenzy and flimsy evidence is a combination I haven’t seen again until the Pell case.

And no I’m not a catholic but I am interested in justice and hate to see the conviction of those whose guilt seems unprovable. 

On the contrary. A friend of mine even bought the t-shirt "the dingo did not do it" (or words to that effect).

And then there were the re-trials, just like in the Pell case - except that in Pell's case there was a media embargo, so the frenzy was not as intensive as was with the Chamberlain case.

UOTYH - people demanding that there be at least one more witness are echoing Sharia law. In Iran for any rape accusation to stick there must be at least two witnesses otherwise the verdict is unsafe as you can only rely on the word of teh victim.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, NewConvert said:

Nah.

The original Chamberlain conviction was done on forensics when a scientist stated in court that no dingo could have made those types of tears in the fabric. He was later discredited. The second crucial piece of evidence emerged many years later when a cardigan (IIRC) was found in the bush which meant that new evidence was found. DNA proved that the cardigan was Azaria Chamberlain's and that definitely bore the hallmarks of dingo bites (including DNA). At the re-trial local Aboriginal trackers were called and they said that to them the whole thing was baffling as it has always been known that dingos took babies.

So no resemblance for me. And unless Pell's team can come up with an alternative witness (new evidence) or some new evidence I cannot see the resemblance.

I'm not sure that any DNA was found on Azaria's matinee jacket.

IMO the problem with both cases is indeed the media frenzy, and the public's demand for a conviction. In the case of Pell, the media continues to refer to both Pell and the Catholic church as if the latter was on trial as well as the individual. This is despite the frequent reminders from the judge that the church itself was not on trial.

My view is that in both cases it was almost impossible for the defendants to receive a fair trial. This was subsequently shown to be correct in the Chamberlain case. In Pell's case we have to wait for the appeal process to run its course.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, jw1739 said:

I'm not sure that any DNA was found on Azaria's matinee jacket.

IMO the problem with both cases is indeed the media frenzy, and the public's demand for a conviction. In the case of Pell, the media continues to refer to both Pell and the Catholic church as if the latter was on trial as well as the individual. This is despite the frequent reminders from the judge that the church itself was not on trial.

My view is that in both cases it was almost impossible for the defendants to receive a fair trial. This was subsequently shown to be correct in the Chamberlain case. In Pell's case we have to wait for the appeal process to run its course.

There is little we can do about the media frenzy. However, I am heartened by the number of people who pick this point up (including in this forum) and so therefore I am forming the opinion that it is being ignored by a lot of people. Of course the alternative trap is that because there is a media frenzy then Pell must be innocent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...
  • 3 months later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...