BS: the demise of the boring thread

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Seaham cemetry
Date: 27 May 14 - 05:25 AM

I looked at this thread as the title intrigued me.

All I can recall now I have scanned to the end is two recent quotes from Alex Akaneaton.

"His faith in equality meaning "marriage" rights for homosexuals is a wonder to behold."

"Most(by far), believe the natural parents have a right to express opinions on the long term effect of a mad social experiment on their children."

No wonder the likes of Steve Shaw, Musket and others lament the lack of moderation on this website. It isnt blocked by my NHS server, so would get through parental locks too. (I get it on my military server for that matter when I am serving.) Hence the need for active moderation. There is no problem with wishing to influence law and pointing out laws that you are uncomforatble with, but making an argument in favour of hate and bigotry?

That is embarrassing for anyone for whom debate on this thread is desirable.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 May 14 - 05:14 AM

A lovely bit from Keith saying Murdoch never interfered in editorial policy.

I do not remember that.
Please remind me.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 May 14 - 05:08 AM

Series of attacks?
I just asked why your name was not on the lists as you claimed.
How is that an "attack" never mind a series of them?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Musket
Date: 27 May 14 - 05:02 AM

so etching..... I really must turn off the autocorrect on this ruddy iPad....

Just had a few mins of boredom, so scanned through the UKIP thread. Now, that was only a year ago yet wasn't boring. The demise of the boring thread?

Well.. A lovely bit from Keith saying Murdoch never interfered in editorial policy. A weird bit from me on the basis of trying to debate with Akenaton rather than dismissing him out of hand. In fact, the only thing in common with recent threads is those who want to push a point making out Dave doesn't understand statistics.

Which is a pity. Because speaking as someone who claims to or at least helps form pretty fundamental decisions from analysing them, I reckon Dave is the only person here who has consistently interpreted them objectively and formed a conclusion from them, rather than use them to reiterate prior position.

I knew it was a good idea to elevate him to Messiah Emeritus with Gnomish Atrributes.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Musket
Date: 27 May 14 - 03:55 AM

Thanks Dave. Why Keith started this series of attacks on me in the first place is neither here nor there, not do I know why. I assume I put him right on so etching and he doesn't like that. It is only recently that I have set out to deserve his vitriol, because you can't educate pork, you can't reason with fools and to be frank, he stifles debate with his dogmatic stupidity.

I decided to not put up with this, and his crassness has been the result.

Regarding professional names, I admit I am one of many people who protect their private lives. I used my real name when I was chairman of an NHS Trust but when I moved over to the dark side, it was deemed a good idea to do this. That much I keep quiet about. Why? Well, Keith, his pet worm and Goofus are good reasons for starters, before you look at the unhinged people who stalk those who they see as in charge of something they feel strongly about.

The professional side of me has responsibility that the private person doesn't. Be buggered to being stifled in this, a forum for giving your real views. This is the real me, and Ian Mather is giving Ian Mather's views. I may be influenced by what I see, hear and deliberate in my professional life, but you get the real me, not the one that has to be diplomatic. The professional me wouldn't argue the toss with ignorance. Far too busy arguing with ideology and expectation, both of which are honourable and get their information from reliable sources.

Keith's lack of knowledge of the folk would is rather interesting too. I used to think most folk performers working under assumed names were for tax reasons (ha ha) but of course, many join Equity which requires individual names and many just like a more snazzy name. When I was in a punk band, I too had a daft name and with the advent of iTunes, the odd PRS type cheque has been dropping on the doorstep from those times and I have had to get the daft name registered on my bank account... (Not enough to drop a Rolls Royce into a swimming pool. In fact, last year, it paid for Mrs Musket and I to have a weekend away. My fault for being a crap song writer...)

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 27 May 14 - 03:01 AM

You make it sound a commonplace for members to have a Mudcat name, a real name and another fake one.
How many have you known?

I personally know at least 4 people that have a 'professional' name for one reason or another. We have all heard of dozens more from the world of showbiz and literature. Mudcat name in this scenario is a red herring - Everyone knows Musket's name anyway.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 27 May 14 - 01:20 AM

Any other presentation of the other side you'd care to share with us Goofus?

What about racial segregation? Or are we too blinkered to see the fault in that too?

Akenaton said above that gay families are a social experiment. It isn't a matter of giving an opposing view , more a matter of pointing out how outrageously wrong such bitter hatred is.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 27 May 14 - 01:16 AM

Dave, I am not saying "liar" but I am very sceptical.
You make it sound a commonplace for members to have a Mudcat name, a real name and another fake one.
How many have you known?
It may be common among rock stars and pop. icons to have stage names, but not in the folk world.

If it is true, it would have been more honest to reply to Jim, "My name is Ian Mather. I never hid behind anything but I am still hiding behind anonymity because that is not my real name either."

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 May 14 - 11:42 PM

Piltdown man.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 May 14 - 11:16 PM

Once again, Steve, you are billowing nonsense....and there is nothing wrong with presenting both sides...because they both do the same thing, in regards to how they see themselves, and the other side. You taking offense to that, is self-proving, of what I posted, and is self-defeating of the point you are trying to make...ie. "It's the 'other guys' who are 'wrong'...my side is 'blameless'..we're perfectly normal!!"

Check it out!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 May 14 - 09:43 PM

Wondrously enough, Piltdown man still seems to be around......

In fact, a couple of specimens.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Steve Shaw
Date: 26 May 14 - 09:16 PM

Of course, homosexuals and heterosexuals are both normal, gfs.

Except neither of them think that the other is...

GfS

Typical mindless, curmudgeonly, distempered, sweeping, unsupportable statement from the bigoted and brainless one. None of the gay and straight people I know and love are ever judgemental about the people of the other orientation, not ever. There is wonderful tolerance and acceptance ever-burgeoning in this world of ours, and troglodytic backwoodsmen like you and Ake are simply not going to prevail. You are outmoded, outdated and outvoted. Busted, disgusted, can't be trusted. Yesterday's men. Sick.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ed T
Date: 26 May 14 - 08:41 PM

"Except neither of them think that the other is..."
Well, possibly a minority think that way?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Don Firth
Date: 26 May 14 - 08:38 PM

Steve, Paul, Philip, Jamie, and Eric are some of the most normal guys I know. By the way, they all happen to be homosexual.

Some "straight" guys I acquainted with are so kinky it boggles the imagination.

By the way, some of them are on this thread.

Don Firth (not staying, just passing through.....)

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 26 May 14 - 08:23 PM

"There must be some way out of here," said the joker to the thief
"There's too much confusion, I can't get no relief
Businessmen, they drink my wine, plowmen dig my earth
None of them along the line know what any of it is worth"

"No reason to get excited," the thief, he kindly spoke
"There are many here among us who feel that life is but a joke
But you and I, we've been through that, and this is not our fate
So let us not talk falsely now, the hour is getting late"...

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 May 14 - 06:23 PM

Except neither of them think that the other is...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ed T
Date: 26 May 14 - 05:33 PM

Of course, homosexuals and heterosexuals are both normal, gfs.

Some on the fringes, those with "underlying prejudicial issues", those who have been marginalized in the past and those adhering to the past, seem not to "get it". Hopefully, they can move on with others and get over their "hang ups".

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 May 14 - 03:26 PM

You're the ones into 'social engineering'....What's the matter?..What's good for the 'goose' isn't good for the pander???...or was that gander?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Musket
Date: 26 May 14 - 01:58 PM

Go and practice thought experiments on your teddy bear Goofus, there's a good chap.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 26 May 14 - 08:37 AM

"Gay is normal. Bigotry isn't."

Now just convince homosexuals that heterosexuals are normal, and 'bigotry isn't', as well!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ed T
Date: 26 May 14 - 08:31 AM

"In law, an involuntary termination of parental rights permanently prohibits a parent from having any legal rights to the child, including the right to custody of the child, the right to visit or have any contact with the child, and the right to have any input in decisions made regarding the child. "

This rare action is taken by most states where parents, or their relatives, demonstrate no genuine concern for their childrens welfare, as most caring parents do. Actions to terminate parential rights are legally complex, rare, take all alternative actions into consideration and are based on the childs best interests - not those of the parents. Once finalized, as the term states, all parental legal rights and future decisons on the childs lives are "terminated".




Termination of parential rights in law 

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 26 May 14 - 07:57 AM

Oh for heavens sake, Keith. Is this going to be another accusation of lying? I am the worlds worse at picking up on meanings but it is obvious, even to me, that Ian means he does not hide behind anonymity ON HERE. Nothing whatsoever to do with his professional career. I know many people who publish works under an assumed name for various reasons.

When arguments get to this level of nit picking they are really not worth having.

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 May 14 - 07:36 AM

When Jim Carrol accused you of hiding behind anonymity, you replied, "My name is Ian Mather by the way. I have never hid behind anything."

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: akenaton
Date: 26 May 14 - 05:00 AM

That may be your interpretation of the judges comments Ian, but it certainly is not mine, or the view large number of people with whom I have discussed the matter.

Most(by far), believe the natural parents have a right to express opinions on the long term effect of a mad social experiment on their children.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 26 May 14 - 03:40 AM

And Cliff Richard is Harry Webb.

I am my private self on these threads. My professional name isn't vanity so much as necessity.

Worm. The judge was right to criticise the social workers for pointing out the bigotry of the parents. This is related to my point to Keith above. Health and social care is non judgemental and the art of keeping your mouth shut when faced with bigotry is an art I too have had to learn. I spoke with someone from the ombudsman only the other day over a patient in a hospital who took umbrage when he was castigated for asking to be seen by white doctors and nurses. The human reaction of the hospital trust was being investigated not the bigotry of the patient. The complaints process of course didn't get closure.

But Ian Mather can point out your faults all day. And many of them are, in the opinion of just about every Mudcat member who has given an opinion, bigoted (inc two moderators) to "unfortunate." ( Keith.) Don't worry about Keith's view though, it's rarely evidence based.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 25 May 14 - 11:41 AM

Frankly, I just blew him off as ever having anything reliable to say...he's bullshitted just too much.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 25 May 14 - 09:14 AM

When Jim Carrol accused you of hiding behind anonymity, you replied, "My name is Ian Mather by the way. I have never hid behind anything."

Should we disbelieve that, or your claim that your name is on BMJ lists, or both?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: akenaton
Date: 25 May 14 - 08:15 AM

"On Friday, Sir James Munby, the most senior judge in the family court, ruled that the parents had no grounds to appeal under UK law.

He added that while any judge should "respect the opinions of those who come here from a foreign land", he had to judge matters according to English law and by reference to "the standards of reasonable men and women in contemporary English society".

However, he criticised local authority social workers for referring to the parents as "bigoted".

The ruling follows government pressure for families to ignore previous rules, which said adopted children should be placed with families from a similar religious or cultural background, in order to increase the number of children from ethnic minority backgrounds who were adopted.

The parents are likely to appeal against the judgement in the European Court of Human Rights, in a process that could take months."

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Musket
Date: 25 May 14 - 07:56 AM

They were removed from their traditional culture and in some ways that was sad. If a Roma family put themselves forward for adopting and passed the tests, I for one one would see a good all round solution. It was weighed against abusive parents who included physical violence and disregard for ensuring attendance in school and access to medical care on two occasions.

There is no question of liberal rights, whatever they are. UK law accepts that a family situation that can successfully raise children includes same sex couples, as thousands of people of gay parents will testify. The law doesn't distinguish as this case reiterates.

The law starts and finishes with the law. The opinion you certainly did express was to slur people for being same sex couples and to the law for seeing all people as having equal opportunity.

It's called having form.




Keith. My professional identity is separate from my domestic one, as with many people in high profile situations. The disgraceful slurs from idiots such as yourself being a good reason for doing so. The freedom to say what I think rather than the constraints of office are, as I said many times, cathartic. That said, quite a few people know both the bloke with a pint in a folk club and the prof at the lectern. Neither of me would wish to know you though, judging by your attitude and actions.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: akenaton
Date: 24 May 14 - 07:56 PM

I was not expressing any opinion, I was simply wondering where "liberal rights" start and finish.
The Roma couple said that their children could be psychologically damaged by the decision, and would be removed from their traditional culture.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 24 May 14 - 01:15 PM

You ought to lighten up.

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Musket
Date: 24 May 14 - 10:03 AM

The children have been taken from a couple. This is not done lightly.

The children are to be raised in a loving family environment, which has been assessed as being as such.

If you think a couple cannot raise children on account of their gender being similar, you are bigoted. Worse, you are beneath contempt. What evidence do you have that this couple looking for a child to adopt, are not suitable? There is a lack of willing families to give children the lives they need, and this couple need congratulating, not heckled by mindless scum.

This is getting silly. Not a single person on Mudcat shares your criminal thoughts. Give it a rest and allow Mudcat to debate issues without having to read your filth.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 24 May 14 - 10:01 AM

Musket, you told us last year what your name is, but it is not on any of those lists.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ed T
Date: 24 May 14 - 09:37 AM

I suspect few would suggest parenting or any other lessons from folks who were so bad at being parents that they had their children removed by government social representatives, and given out to strangers.

Considering the screening involved in placement, the kids will most likely experience a loving home atmosphere for the first time in their lives.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: akenaton
Date: 24 May 14 - 09:23 AM

What a "rights" quandary for the "liberals", who just seem determined to tie themselves in knots with the tangled strands of their ideology.

Roma couple had their two young children 4 and 1, removed by Social Services, who decided to put them up for adoption.
The Catholic couple wanted their kids to go to a Catholic family, but SS decided they would be placed with a homosexual couple.
SS called the natural mother and father "bigoted" for objecting to the decision.!!!!. Rights? who's rights?


FULL STORY.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Ed T
Date: 23 May 14 - 08:02 PM

new research 

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 23 May 14 - 01:32 PM

Ebbie: ""...but, as noted in my previous post, there appears to be unsupported data as to WHEN those changes occur..." GfS
Quite likely they develop the hormonal changes when they decide to be gay."

'Deciding' to be a homosexual, has not been the issue...but that isn't the same as deciding not to be...as the testimony of Michael Spatze clearly illustrates.

Ebbie: "Whut?? "abnormalities of the brain?" "others born that way?"
Aren't you speaking of both? Or do you mean that the abnormalities occurred later?"

Don was the one who pulled up the brain differences, from studies he posted. As to when those differences happen he wasn't sure of, as he posted. However, the hormones affecting the nervous system through the receptors happen during gestation....much like babies who are addicted to certain drugs when they are born, because they had those substances during the fetus being formed...and the receptors got conditioned to 'needing' them.

Firth: "GfS, let me ask you this:   why do you object so strongly to the idea that sexual orientation could be the result of a gene or combination of genes?
True, they have not yet found a definitive "gay gene".

You answered your own question.

Firth:Senior Play like "You Can't Take It With You" and "Our Town,," and other productions were practically professional quality and many of those who acted, sang, and danced in these productions went on to Great Things. Movies, Broadway, Seattle and San Francisco Opera…….. Not all those who participated were gay, but a fair number of them were. Much higher percentage than the general population.

Suppress and alienate these folks and we ALL lose!"

And there is a great answer for that...ya' want the long answer or short one? (which I'll be happy to supply), Not withstanding, their talents is not the issue, which I acknowledge, and have posted as much....I'M NOT the one who doesn't think that their talent isn't worth passing on, or taking it out of the gene pool!!!...and once they flash that there IS something inside them, very much worth treasuring, and passing on, do they begin to reconsider.

Consider this post from '09....does it sound like I don't acknowledge their talent??...does it sound like 'bigotry' or 'homophobia'?? Not in the least!!!

From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 12 May 09 - 04:28 AM

You have heard homosexuals say, "I FEEL like a woman trapped in a mans body(and vice versa)"...Ok?....Who gets trapped??!!?? VICTIMS!!!! Yes, VICTIMS..and who is victimizing them?........a combination, of neglect, and their sensitivities. That's how powerful it was! Ever notice some of the most brilliant artists, are homosexual??...Why? Sensitivities, and learning to speak to the other side of themselves, giving them sometimes a wider perspective!
I had originally thought of sharing a story with you, about a friend of mine, I mentioned in another post, I guy I knew, who was the most brilliant, composer, sound engineer, laser engineer, it think I had ever met, up to that point..and still heads and shoulders above many since. He taught me volumes about sound, and composing, that still is ahead of the pack. He finally opened up to me, when he finally felt no threat from me, or condemnation, but rather objective, caring, interest in him,, and his true inner needs. He and his father were distant, due to a long history of mutual bitterness, and disapproval. This guy was in the USMC Marine Band, had scholarships for music, and could play a variety of instruments..and WELL!
When we talked about sensitivities, I pointed out to him, that being sensitive was a huge quality, and being as he knew that, and we both acknowledged it, and he was gifted with it, I asked him, if instead of either resenting it, or hiding it, why not nurture it, in a child of his own, being as he knew so very well, how valuable, and powerful it was. Just hearing that, tears welled up in his eyes, and he admitted that he always wanted to do that, but didn't think he could because he had been Homosexual so long, that he lost touch with that ability, of what he really always wanted to do.
Not long after, he found his partner, Mark had come down with something he just could shake...and not too long after, Mark died of AIDS. Mark had the same issues with his dad, and in that, they found 'common ground'.
Deeply saddened, bordering on mourning, we talked more, and he opened up more. I asked him if his father had ever heard his incredible recordings. He was resolved to the thought, that his dad wouldn't like them, be interested in them, or him, and so his father never heard it.
Making a long post shorter, I'll skip the details of our conversations,(unless anyone is curious), and he took his recordings, and masters, up, and was going to get 're-acquainted with his dad, in Sacramento...possibly with the hopes of reconciling with him. Turns out, he stayed up there with him for better part of a year....and then died from AIDS, with his father, taking care of him, to the end.
So Dale, (the guy), you told me, that you wish you could have known before, and sooner...so where ever you are out there,..I'm honoring your wish..to all the other 'Dales' out there. I told you I would have, if I would have know sooner too!
Now, dying of AIDS was not the issue, I was trying to underscore. He could have died, for any reason....The thing is, my children's generation, is also denied of that genius and that gene pool is forever lost...NEEDLESSLY!!!!!! THOUGHTLESSLY!!!
What I just related to you, is the absolute truth....and to all those who give me crap, about being a 'bigot' or 'hating' homosexuals..."

GfS

P.S. Sorry I was so late in getting back, but I've been swamped!

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: GUEST,Musket
Date: 23 May 14 - 11:09 AM

Funny how I am on the list you provided. For more than one year.

Talking of names, is it just Keith or is it Cllr Keith now?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 23 May 14 - 09:55 AM

Funny how BMJ don't know you are one of their reviewers.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Musket
Date: 23 May 14 - 08:14 AM

Let's start a thread where child molesters tell lies about me and moderators remove my replies.

It'll be ever so funny.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 22 May 14 - 04:50 PM

Carry on carping.

What a concept! Thanks, Spaw. I can just see Kenneth Williams as Keith. Musket could be played by Sid James. I quite fancy Charles Hawtry doing me, although he would have to wear a lot of padding. And who could be Ake? Well, who else, Barbara Windsor :-)

Cheers

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: catspaw49
Date: 22 May 14 - 04:23 PM

I'm glad to see the boring ass thread is alive and doing well as you have all well and nobly proven. The thread title scared me some as these have become the part and parcel of Mudcat BS replacing the stupid fun threads. Carry on carping.


Spaw

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: akenaton
Date: 22 May 14 - 01:11 PM

Its amazing how Ian squirms(like a worm?).

His ideology is so entrenched that he will deny all evidence which contradicts it, without offering one fact to support it.
His faith in equality meaning "marriage" rights for homosexuals is a wonder to behold.

A man of faith indeed.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 May 14 - 10:41 AM

We are not discussing the paper, but as AKE said,
"The paper was published by the National Centre for Biotechnology Information, under the auspices of the US National Library of Medicine and the National institute of Health.
The authors are reputable and have published many papers on medical issues.

Examining the correspondence between relationship identity and actual sexual risk behavior among HIV-positive men who have sex with men.

Blashill AJ, Wilson JM, O'Cleirigh CM, Mayer KH, Safren SA.
Author information (Blashill)
Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital, 1 Bowdoin Square, 7th Floor, Boston, MA, 02114, USA, [e-mail]. "

I am asking how you know this paper was submitted to BMJ why it was rejected when BMJ guarantees confidentiality.

BTW, you claimed to be a BMJ reviewer, but they have neglected to place your name on their lists.
http://www.bmj.com/about-bmj/resources-reviewers/bmj-reviewers

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 May 14 - 07:18 AM

I am not calling you a liar over this.
I am asking you how you know that the paper quoted by Ake had been submitted to and rejected by BMJ, and how you know the grounds for rejection including the libellous accusations against the authors.
Can we see the evidence please?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 May 14 - 05:14 AM

Dave, in the quote he states the reasons for BMJ's rejection as facts.
They were not.
He had no way of knowing any of that and now he does not claim to.
Judge and jury would have no doubt that his statement was false.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 May 14 - 05:01 AM

You stated, "It was rejected by BMJ on two counts. Failure to declare anti gay political donations by two of the authors and making unsubstantiated conclusions from the evidence. "

The truth is you do not even know if it was submitted to BMJ.
How could you?
If it was, you do not know why it was rejected.
How could you?
You do not know what donations any of the authors may or may not have received.
How could you?

If you did not make it all up, where did it come from?
That is all I have been asking you.
Why does that make you so abusive?

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 22 May 14 - 01:37 AM

You do not lie Dave.
A lie must be a deliberate attempt to deceive.

I do not believe Musket somehow accessed BMJ's database and breached their confidentiality on submissions.
In my opinion he made that up, but I do not make an accusation of lying.

I only do that when it is unequivocal and proved.

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Dave the Gnome
Date: 21 May 14 - 05:28 PM

I think a jury would conclude that he made it up.

They may well do, Keith. Juries are by nature laymen. A judge, proficient in legal matters would, I believe, inform the jury that all the evidence is circumstantial and the accused should remain innocent until proven guilty.

BTW - I realised that I did promise some time back that I would not post in this thread any more. Does that make a liar of me?

Oh - and 600 :-)

DtG

Subject: RE: BS: the demise of the boring thread
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 21 May 14 - 10:25 AM

FW, here is your quote, and if it is not made up where did it come from?

"It was rejected by BMJ on two counts. Failure to declare anti gay political donations by two of the authors and making unsubstantiated conclusions from the evidence. "