The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
Well, it looks like he got away with it, anyway.
I don't think anybody is too surprised that a Tony Blair appointee didn't find fault with Tony Blair but, still, it's annoying.
Roll on a proper inquiry into Iraq.
I don't think anybody is too surprised that a Tony Blair appointee didn't find fault with Tony Blair but, still, it's annoying.
Roll on a proper inquiry into Iraq.
Page:
Belldandy wrote:
> Flockhart wrote:
> Belldandy wrote:
> Flockhart wrote:
> the hutton report was about who was responsible for dr kellys
> death,right?
> and kelly killed himself because he was exposed as a
> whistleblower,right?
> now who exposed him?
> the level of government zealotism going on here is beyond belief.
>
>
> Oh for fecks sake. GILLIGAN MADE UP MOST OF WHAT HE CLAIMED DR KELLY
> TOLD HIM YOU IDIOT. HE IS NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER. If Gilligan had never
> made the false claims then no FASC hearing, no need for any of us to
> hear about Kelly.
>
> yes im sure they just met up for a coffee,discussed the weather and
> didnt mention at all the issue of the 45 minute claim which dr kelly
> was well known to be unhappy with.
>
> Ye gods are you stupid or is this just an attempt at baiting?
>
> THE 45 MINUTE CLAIM WAS MADE UP YOU PLONKER. THE BBC HAS FOOTAGE
> WHERE KELLY SAYS HE BELIEVES IRAQ HAS WMD. GILLIGAN MADE IT UP.
that was 6 months previous he was talking publicly and for the government,it is widely accepted by everyone apart from you that he was known to be unhappy when he spoke to gilligan last summer.
> Flockhart wrote:
> Belldandy wrote:
> Flockhart wrote:
> the hutton report was about who was responsible for dr kellys
> death,right?
> and kelly killed himself because he was exposed as a
> whistleblower,right?
> now who exposed him?
> the level of government zealotism going on here is beyond belief.
>
>
> Oh for fecks sake. GILLIGAN MADE UP MOST OF WHAT HE CLAIMED DR KELLY
> TOLD HIM YOU IDIOT. HE IS NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER. If Gilligan had never
> made the false claims then no FASC hearing, no need for any of us to
> hear about Kelly.
>
> yes im sure they just met up for a coffee,discussed the weather and
> didnt mention at all the issue of the 45 minute claim which dr kelly
> was well known to be unhappy with.
>
> Ye gods are you stupid or is this just an attempt at baiting?
>
> THE 45 MINUTE CLAIM WAS MADE UP YOU PLONKER. THE BBC HAS FOOTAGE
> WHERE KELLY SAYS HE BELIEVES IRAQ HAS WMD. GILLIGAN MADE IT UP.
that was 6 months previous he was talking publicly and for the government,it is widely accepted by everyone apart from you that he was known to be unhappy when he spoke to gilligan last summer.
Flockhart wrote:
> Belldandy wrote:
> Flockhart wrote:
> the hutton report was about who was responsible for dr kellys
> death,right?
> and kelly killed himself because he was exposed as a
> whistleblower,right?
> now who exposed him?
> the level of government zealotism going on here is beyond belief.
>
>
> Oh for fecks sake. GILLIGAN MADE UP MOST OF WHAT HE CLAIMED DR KELLY
> TOLD HIM YOU IDIOT. HE IS NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER. If Gilligan had never
> made the false claims then no FASC hearing, no need for any of us to
> hear about Kelly.
>
> yes im sure they just met up for a coffee,discussed the weather and
> didnt mention at all the issue of the 45 minute claim which dr kelly
> was well known to be unhappy with.
Ye gods are you stupid or is this just an attempt at baiting?
THE 45 MINUTE CLAIM WAS MADE UP YOU PLONKER. THE BBC HAS FOOTAGE WHERE KELLY SAYS HE BELIEVES IRAQ HAS WMD. GILLIGAN MADE IT UP.
> Belldandy wrote:
> Flockhart wrote:
> the hutton report was about who was responsible for dr kellys
> death,right?
> and kelly killed himself because he was exposed as a
> whistleblower,right?
> now who exposed him?
> the level of government zealotism going on here is beyond belief.
>
>
> Oh for fecks sake. GILLIGAN MADE UP MOST OF WHAT HE CLAIMED DR KELLY
> TOLD HIM YOU IDIOT. HE IS NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER. If Gilligan had never
> made the false claims then no FASC hearing, no need for any of us to
> hear about Kelly.
>
> yes im sure they just met up for a coffee,discussed the weather and
> didnt mention at all the issue of the 45 minute claim which dr kelly
> was well known to be unhappy with.
Ye gods are you stupid or is this just an attempt at baiting?
THE 45 MINUTE CLAIM WAS MADE UP YOU PLONKER. THE BBC HAS FOOTAGE WHERE KELLY SAYS HE BELIEVES IRAQ HAS WMD. GILLIGAN MADE IT UP.
Belldandy wrote:
> Flockhart wrote:
> the hutton report was about who was responsible for dr kellys
> death,right?
> and kelly killed himself because he was exposed as a
> whistleblower,right?
> now who exposed him?
> the level of government zealotism going on here is beyond belief.
>
>
> Oh for fecks sake. GILLIGAN MADE UP MOST OF WHAT HE CLAIMED DR KELLY
> TOLD HIM YOU IDIOT. HE IS NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER. If Gilligan had never
> made the false claims then no FASC hearing, no need for any of us to
> hear about Kelly.
yes im sure they just met up for a coffee,discussed the weather and didnt mention at all the issue of the 45 minute claim which dr kelly was well known to be unhappy with.
> Flockhart wrote:
> the hutton report was about who was responsible for dr kellys
> death,right?
> and kelly killed himself because he was exposed as a
> whistleblower,right?
> now who exposed him?
> the level of government zealotism going on here is beyond belief.
>
>
> Oh for fecks sake. GILLIGAN MADE UP MOST OF WHAT HE CLAIMED DR KELLY
> TOLD HIM YOU IDIOT. HE IS NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER. If Gilligan had never
> made the false claims then no FASC hearing, no need for any of us to
> hear about Kelly.
yes im sure they just met up for a coffee,discussed the weather and didnt mention at all the issue of the 45 minute claim which dr kelly was well known to be unhappy with.
Plus, Light, seeing as you are a fan of questions, please explain to me how Dr Kelly was a whistleblower?
Because, you twit, you are generalising and I have not said that about "everyone" else.
Now apart from desperate attempts at nit picking and your general fury that the report wasn't your wet dream do you have anything decent to say?
You seem to like supporting Flockhast so why not back him/her up eh? Or is he/she just a convenient leaning post or example?
Now apart from desperate attempts at nit picking and your general fury that the report wasn't your wet dream do you have anything decent to say?
You seem to like supporting Flockhast so why not back him/her up eh? Or is he/she just a convenient leaning post or example?
Belldandy wrote:
>
>
> Oh for fecks sake. GILLIGAN MADE UP MOST OF WHAT HE CLAIMED DR KELLY
> TOLD HIM YOU IDIOT. HE IS NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER. If Gilligan had never
> made the false claims then no FASC hearing, no need for any of us to
> hear about Kelly.
Heh. Who can tell me how the above paragraph reconciles with what Bell wrote in this below paragraph;
Belldandy wrote:
>
> Now you see this is the best way to put a question. Notice how
> what he is asking is clear, unobstructed by ranting, name calling
> etc?
It's almost as if Bell is applying one rule to himself, and another to everyone else....
Incidentally, who wants to take bets that Bell will respond to this post but will ignore the one asking him to clarify why his use of a summary is somehow different to everyone elses?
>
>
> Oh for fecks sake. GILLIGAN MADE UP MOST OF WHAT HE CLAIMED DR KELLY
> TOLD HIM YOU IDIOT. HE IS NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER. If Gilligan had never
> made the false claims then no FASC hearing, no need for any of us to
> hear about Kelly.
Heh. Who can tell me how the above paragraph reconciles with what Bell wrote in this below paragraph;
Belldandy wrote:
>
> Now you see this is the best way to put a question. Notice how
> what he is asking is clear, unobstructed by ranting, name calling
> etc?
It's almost as if Bell is applying one rule to himself, and another to everyone else....
Incidentally, who wants to take bets that Bell will respond to this post but will ignore the one asking him to clarify why his use of a summary is somehow different to everyone elses?
Belldandy wrote:
>
> *sigh* Go and read what I said.
>
My, we ARE touchy about being questioned, aren't we?
> The summary was the live one given by Lord Hutton on live tv with no
> additional commentary from any media organisation. He picked out the
> key points and answered the key questions. That is NOT a news report.
> I was not being evasive I just assumed you could read and were aware
> of him giving that summary...
Right...so how is your relying on a summary given by Lord Hutton any different than a summary given by, say, ananova for example? After all, they gave a summary of the points raised by Lord Hutton in his report. As did pretty much all internet based news organisations. So wouldn't you agree that, as all they did was provide summaries, they aren't news reports either?
I ask because I would imagine most here have based their opinions on summaries given. You've been scathing of them, yet all you've done yourself is given an opinion based on a summary. What's the difference?
>
> *sigh* Go and read what I said.
>
My, we ARE touchy about being questioned, aren't we?
> The summary was the live one given by Lord Hutton on live tv with no
> additional commentary from any media organisation. He picked out the
> key points and answered the key questions. That is NOT a news report.
> I was not being evasive I just assumed you could read and were aware
> of him giving that summary...
Right...so how is your relying on a summary given by Lord Hutton any different than a summary given by, say, ananova for example? After all, they gave a summary of the points raised by Lord Hutton in his report. As did pretty much all internet based news organisations. So wouldn't you agree that, as all they did was provide summaries, they aren't news reports either?
I ask because I would imagine most here have based their opinions on summaries given. You've been scathing of them, yet all you've done yourself is given an opinion based on a summary. What's the difference?
Flockhart wrote:
> the hutton report was about who was responsible for dr kellys
> death,right?
> and kelly killed himself because he was exposed as a
> whistleblower,right?
> now who exposed him?
> the level of government zealotism going on here is beyond belief.
Oh for fecks sake. GILLIGAN MADE UP MOST OF WHAT HE CLAIMED DR KELLY TOLD HIM YOU IDIOT. HE IS NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER. If Gilligan had never made the false claims then no FASC hearing, no need for any of us to hear about Kelly.
> the hutton report was about who was responsible for dr kellys
> death,right?
> and kelly killed himself because he was exposed as a
> whistleblower,right?
> now who exposed him?
> the level of government zealotism going on here is beyond belief.
Oh for fecks sake. GILLIGAN MADE UP MOST OF WHAT HE CLAIMED DR KELLY TOLD HIM YOU IDIOT. HE IS NOT A WHISTLEBLOWER. If Gilligan had never made the false claims then no FASC hearing, no need for any of us to hear about Kelly.
Light wrote:
> Light wrote:
>
> Right; you'll have to forgive me as I didn't see that, but didn't
> you
> criticise everyone else who has posted in this thread for only
> relying on news reports? And yet you only relined on a summary of
> the
> main points yourself, correct?
>
>
> Hello Bell. Could you answer the above question please? Only it
> reads
> like you're being evasive. If you could clarify please.
*sigh* Go and read what I said.
The summary was the live one given by Lord Hutton on live tv with no additional commentary from any media organisation. He picked out the key points and answered the key questions. That is NOT a news report. I was not being evasive I just assumed you could read and were aware of him giving that summary...
> Light wrote:
>
> Right; you'll have to forgive me as I didn't see that, but didn't
> you
> criticise everyone else who has posted in this thread for only
> relying on news reports? And yet you only relined on a summary of
> the
> main points yourself, correct?
>
>
> Hello Bell. Could you answer the above question please? Only it
> reads
> like you're being evasive. If you could clarify please.
*sigh* Go and read what I said.
The summary was the live one given by Lord Hutton on live tv with no additional commentary from any media organisation. He picked out the key points and answered the key questions. That is NOT a news report. I was not being evasive I just assumed you could read and were aware of him giving that summary...
> Light wrote:
>
> Right; you'll have to forgive me as I didn't see that, but didn't
> you
> criticise everyone else who has posted in this thread for only
> relying on news reports? And yet you only relined on a summary of
> the
> main points yourself, correct?
>
>
> Hello Bell. Could you answer the above question please? Only it reads
> like you're being evasive. If you could clarify please.
>
> Right; you'll have to forgive me as I didn't see that, but didn't
> you
> criticise everyone else who has posted in this thread for only
> relying on news reports? And yet you only relined on a summary of
> the
> main points yourself, correct?
>
>
> Hello Bell. Could you answer the above question please? Only it reads
> like you're being evasive. If you could clarify please.
Page: