Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
Elvis
Doesn't matter where you got it, The quote is from The Mail end of. The quote in The Mail claims the victim was somehow in on the joke and part of it. The quote from the BBC states it was intended as a 'great joke' by Maxwell and Andrew but not the victim.
Who you going to trust more, The Mail or the BBC?
You took The Mail quote to claim the victim didn't seem too upset.
BTW, never said.you read The Mail, just that the quote you posted was from it.
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 42 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 15 seconds ago
Gotta wonder if a young woman being trafficked by billionaires might be a bit intimidated even to the point of fearing for their lives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think they are deliberately missing that point. They've dug their trenches and refuse to budge.
The lady who was groped says in the same quote about the story that she was being coerced into giving sexualmassages after thinking she had an assistant job. Given the power of the people she was with and the situation where she was resisting doing those deeds, she probably didn't think she could say no to Prince Andrew holding her breast.
The other girl involved claims to have been sextrafficked. Epstein and Maxwell were found guilty of child sextrafficking. It doesn't really seem like a relationship where the girls feel empowered to decline something they don't want to do. Especially when the other person involved is a member of the British Monarchy.
Yet the narrative we are being fed from the quote from Elvis is one from the Mail where it is all a joke and the girls were happy in the situation. It's all OK if the sextraffickers intended something as a joke whether the girls think they can say no or not. He seems to be standing by it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Go back and read what I actually posted. I haven't tried to make light of anything. I've posted her direct quotes, and in view of the fact she doesn't seem too bothered by the incident, asked if she made any accusations at the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that's the whole point of my post. The view that she doesn't seem bothered by it has been applied by yourself. It isn't something she has said. It doesn't line up with what was released today and doesn't consider what I put in the post you replied to above.
You've basically proved my point that you've dug your trench and won't budge.
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not defending either. But when do English national newspapers print fake quotes and attribute them directly to a person?
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 6 minutes ago
Elvis
Doesn't matter where you got it, The quote is from The Mail end of. The quote in The Mail claims the victim was somehow in on the joke and part of it. The quote from the BBC states it was intended as a 'great joke' by Maxwell and Andrew but not the victim.
Who you going to trust more, The Mail or the BBC?
You took The Mail quote to claim the victim didn't seem too upset.
BTW, never said.you read The Mail, just that the quote you posted was from it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did the BBC interview her?
The whole argument Elvis and MU52 have, seems to be based on the girls involved not reporting anything at the time. It completely ignores the fact that these girls were either sextrafficked or put in compromised situations by people in a position of power. They were not in a situation where they would have felt comfortable saying no or reporting it at the time. It is completely reasonable that it would have taken them years to have the right situation where they feel comfortable speaking out against people with such power, wealth and influence.
The ignorance to this is actually a bit sad, as it means there are still people out there who will allow abuses of power so long as there is no physical evidence at the time or the victim doesn't immediately accuse. It is this sort of attitude that has allowed the likes of Epstein, Saville, Rolf Harris etc to operate for as long as they did.
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not defending either. But when do English national newspapers print fake quotes and attribute them directly to a person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't be this naïve.
The S*n erroneously quoting people at Hillsborough claimimg LFC fans urinated on and pickpocketed the dead victims of a tragedy is one high profile example.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 42 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 15 seconds ago
Gotta wonder if a young woman being trafficked by billionaires might be a bit intimidated even to the point of fearing for their lives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think they are deliberately missing that point. They've dug their trenches and refuse to budge.
The lady who was groped says in the same quote about the story that she was being coerced into giving sexualmassages after thinking she had an assistant job. Given the power of the people she was with and the situation where she was resisting doing those deeds, she probably didn't think she could say no to Prince Andrew holding her breast.
The other girl involved claims to have been sextrafficked. Epstein and Maxwell were found guilty of child sextrafficking. It doesn't really seem like a relationship where the girls feel empowered to decline something they don't want to do. Especially when the other person involved is a member of the British Monarchy.
Yet the narrative we are being fed from the quote from Elvis is one from the Mail where it is all a joke and the girls were happy in the situation. It's all OK if the sextraffickers intended something as a joke whether the girls think they can say no or not. He seems to be standing by it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Go back and read what I actually posted. I haven't tried to make light of anything. I've posted her direct quotes, and in view of the fact she doesn't seem too bothered by the incident, asked if she made any accusations at the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that's the whole point of my post. The view that she doesn't seem bothered by it has been applied by yourself. It isn't something she has said. It doesn't line up with what was released today and doesn't consider what I put in the post you replied to above.
You've basically proved my point that you've dug your trench and won't budge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. You've just misinterpreted my post. Why do you think I asked if she had tried to bring charges? Its because I was surprised at her words/tone about it being a joke and everyone laughing. Hence my point about her not appearing to be bothered about the incident. In the same article I read she goes on to say how she respects Maxwell and is quite matter of fact about taking money for sexual favours.
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 14 minutes ago
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://heavy.com/news/2019/11/johanna-sjoberg/
I wasn't aware of the story back in 2007 when The Mail ran it. I was travelling the world, blissfully unaware.
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 6 minutes ago
The whole argument Elvis and MU52 have, seems to be based on the girls involved not reporting anything at the time. It completely ignores the fact that these girls were either sextrafficked or put in compromised situations by people in a position of power. They were not in a situation where they would have felt comfortable saying no or reporting it at the time. It is completely reasonable that it would have taken them years to have the right situation where they feel comfortable speaking out against people with such power, wealth and influence.
The ignorance to this is actually a bit sad, as it means there are still people out there who will allow abuses of power so long as there is no physical evidence at the time or the victim doesn't immediately accuse. It is this sort of attitude that has allowed the likes of Epstein, Saville, Rolf Harris etc to operate for as long as they did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What argument? I merely asked the question as to whether she tried to bring charges and notes that from her quotes she didn't seem too bothered by the incident. I dont know how many times I have to say the same thing.
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not defending either. But when do English national newspapers print fake quotes and attribute them directly to a person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't be this naïve.
The S*n erroneously quoting people at Hillsborough claimimg LFC fans urinated on and pickpocketed the dead victims of a tragedy is one high profile example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were they direct quotes attributed to a named person?
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 14 minutes ago
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://heavy.com/news/2019/11/johanna-sjoberg/
I wasn't aware of the story back in 2007 when The Mail ran it. I was travelling the world, blissfully unaware.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Conveniently left the rest of the quote where she states;
"was groomed for it,” she said of her experience, “I made a pact with the devil in exchange for excitement and glamour. I was only a college student. I was hard-up and foolish."
Why would you leave this part out I wonder?
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not defending either. But when do English national newspapers print fake quotes and attribute them directly to a person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't be this naïve.
The S*n erroneously quoting people at Hillsborough claimimg LFC fans urinated on and pickpocketed the dead victims of a tragedy is one high profile example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were they direct quotes attributed to a named person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not named people no, quoted anonymously from people allegedly at the match under the the infamous headline 'The truth'. Also quotes from police officers re ticket less fans, the opening of gate C etc.
Daily mail have printed retractions for direct quotes which were fake.
But it's besides the point isn't it. That interview could have been conducted and spun any way they wanted to. There's no concept of tone or context to it. So it's ridiculous to even post it here as some kind of evidence that it was just 'a joke'
I don't know why mu52 didn't just say I'm not interested in this and fack off instead of creating an embarrassing 13 page argument.
Oh and heavy.com as a reliable source that's quoting The Mail second hand FFS
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 16 minutes ago
The whole argument Elvis and MU52 have, seems to be based on the girls involved not reporting anything at the time. It completely ignores the fact that these girls were either sextrafficked or put in compromised situations by people in a position of power. They were not in a situation where they would have felt comfortable saying no or reporting it at the time. It is completely reasonable that it would have taken them years to have the right situation where they feel comfortable speaking out against people with such power, wealth and influence.
The ignorance to this is actually a bit sad, as it means there are still people out there who will allow abuses of power so long as there is no physical evidence at the time or the victim doesn't immediately accuse. It is this sort of attitude that has allowed the likes of Epstein, Saville, Rolf Harris etc to operate for as long as they did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said.
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not defending either. But when do English national newspapers print fake quotes and attribute them directly to a person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't be this naïve.
The S*n erroneously quoting people at Hillsborough claimimg LFC fans urinated on and pickpocketed the dead victims of a tragedy is one high profile example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were they direct quotes attributed to a named person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not named people no, quoted anonymously from people allegedly at the match under the the infamous headline 'The truth'. Also quotes from police officers re ticket less fans, the opening of gate C etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok so not a direct quote then. Try again.
Do you actually think The Mail made. up quotes from person that they had interviewed and who would be reading the article?
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 6 minutes ago
The whole argument Elvis and MU52 have, seems to be based on the girls involved not reporting anything at the time. It completely ignores the fact that these girls were either sextrafficked or put in compromised situations by people in a position of power. They were not in a situation where they would have felt comfortable saying no or reporting it at the time. It is completely reasonable that it would have taken them years to have the right situation where they feel comfortable speaking out against people with such power, wealth and influence.
The ignorance to this is actually a bit sad, as it means there are still people out there who will allow abuses of power so long as there is no physical evidence at the time or the victim doesn't immediately accuse. It is this sort of attitude that has allowed the likes of Epstein, Saville, Rolf Harris etc to operate for as long as they did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What argument? I merely asked the question as to whether she tried to bring charges and notes that from her quotes she didn't seem too bothered by the incident. I dont know how many times I have to say the same thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think the fact you keep saying the same thing is the point. You keep going back to the fact that you think she wasn't bothered by it and didn't report it at the time.
You keep ignoring the power dynamic and the fact she was groomed. You ignore that the other girl involved was sextrafficked. It even says in your link you posted that she felt she was groomed and is ashamed. It says in the papers today that she believes sexual activity happened between Prince Andrew and the other sextrafficked girl.
As with MU52, I'll leave it there with you. I think the fact you don't understand those things and won't budge on your position makes carrying on pointless.
The Mail recently published Piers Morgan's claim to ahbe never hacked a phone at the Mirror in full but decided not publish the judge's ruling that stated it was impossible he didn't know as it was so widespread.
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 14 minutes ago
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://heavy.com/news/2019/11/johanna-sjoberg/
I wasn't aware of the story back in 2007 when The Mail ran it. I was travelling the world, blissfully unaware.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Conveniently left the rest of the quote where she states;
"was groomed for it,” she said of her experience, “I made a pact with the devil in exchange for excitement and glamour. I was only a college student. I was hard-up and foolish."
Why would you leave this part out I wonder?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the being groomed part relates to Epstein and Maxwell. Not Prince Andrew, which is who/what we were discussing.
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 4 minutes ago
Oh and heavy.com as a reliable source that's quoting The Mail second hand FFS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So which of the quotes that The Mail and heavy.com.used are fake? Just the ones that you don't like? Or are the ones that you do like also fake? Did The Mail even interview her? Or dis they make the whole thing up in your opinion?
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 14 minutes ago
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://heavy.com/news/2019/11/johanna-sjoberg/
I wasn't aware of the story back in 2007 when The Mail ran it. I was travelling the world, blissfully unaware.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Conveniently left the rest of the quote where she states;
"was groomed for it,” she said of her experience, “I made a pact with the devil in exchange for excitement and glamour. I was only a college student. I was hard-up and foolish."
Why would you leave this part out I wonder?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the being groomed part relates to Epstein and Maxwell. Not Prince Andrew, which is who/what we were discussing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it's OK to grope someone who has been groomed, so long as you don't do the grooming?
Definitely stepping away now.
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 26 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 14 minutes ago
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://heavy.com/news/2019/11/johanna-sjoberg/
I wasn't aware of the story back in 2007 when The Mail ran it. I was travelling the world, blissfully unaware.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Conveniently left the rest of the quote where she states;
"was groomed for it,” she said of her experience, “I made a pact with the devil in exchange for excitement and glamour. I was only a college student. I was hard-up and foolish."
Why would you leave this part out I wonder?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the being groomed part relates to Epstein and Maxwell. Not Prince Andrew, which is who/what we were discussing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were being groomed to be shex toys to your prince and his ilk. i.e. sick fvks.
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 16 minutes ago
The whole argument Elvis and MU52 have, seems to be based on the girls involved not reporting anything at the time. It completely ignores the fact that these girls were either sextrafficked or put in compromised situations by people in a position of power. They were not in a situation where they would have felt comfortable saying no or reporting it at the time. It is completely reasonable that it would have taken them years to have the right situation where they feel comfortable speaking out against people with such power, wealth and influence.
The ignorance to this is actually a bit sad, as it means there are still people out there who will allow abuses of power so long as there is no physical evidence at the time or the victim doesn't immediately accuse. It is this sort of attitude that has allowed the likes of Epstein, Saville, Rolf Harris etc to operate for as long as they did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Apart from the fact that she did say no to Epstein. She refused to do anything sexual with him. Then at a later date changed her mind because she wanted the money he offered her.
Sign in if you want to comment
Epstein List to be released
Page 13 of 24
14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18
posted on 4/1/24
Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
posted on 4/1/24
Elvis
Doesn't matter where you got it, The quote is from The Mail end of. The quote in The Mail claims the victim was somehow in on the joke and part of it. The quote from the BBC states it was intended as a 'great joke' by Maxwell and Andrew but not the victim.
Who you going to trust more, The Mail or the BBC?
You took The Mail quote to claim the victim didn't seem too upset.
BTW, never said.you read The Mail, just that the quote you posted was from it.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 42 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 15 seconds ago
Gotta wonder if a young woman being trafficked by billionaires might be a bit intimidated even to the point of fearing for their lives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think they are deliberately missing that point. They've dug their trenches and refuse to budge.
The lady who was groped says in the same quote about the story that she was being coerced into giving sexualmassages after thinking she had an assistant job. Given the power of the people she was with and the situation where she was resisting doing those deeds, she probably didn't think she could say no to Prince Andrew holding her breast.
The other girl involved claims to have been sextrafficked. Epstein and Maxwell were found guilty of child sextrafficking. It doesn't really seem like a relationship where the girls feel empowered to decline something they don't want to do. Especially when the other person involved is a member of the British Monarchy.
Yet the narrative we are being fed from the quote from Elvis is one from the Mail where it is all a joke and the girls were happy in the situation. It's all OK if the sextraffickers intended something as a joke whether the girls think they can say no or not. He seems to be standing by it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Go back and read what I actually posted. I haven't tried to make light of anything. I've posted her direct quotes, and in view of the fact she doesn't seem too bothered by the incident, asked if she made any accusations at the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that's the whole point of my post. The view that she doesn't seem bothered by it has been applied by yourself. It isn't something she has said. It doesn't line up with what was released today and doesn't consider what I put in the post you replied to above.
You've basically proved my point that you've dug your trench and won't budge.
posted on 4/1/24
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not defending either. But when do English national newspapers print fake quotes and attribute them directly to a person?
posted on 4/1/24
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 6 minutes ago
Elvis
Doesn't matter where you got it, The quote is from The Mail end of. The quote in The Mail claims the victim was somehow in on the joke and part of it. The quote from the BBC states it was intended as a 'great joke' by Maxwell and Andrew but not the victim.
Who you going to trust more, The Mail or the BBC?
You took The Mail quote to claim the victim didn't seem too upset.
BTW, never said.you read The Mail, just that the quote you posted was from it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Did the BBC interview her?
posted on 4/1/24
The whole argument Elvis and MU52 have, seems to be based on the girls involved not reporting anything at the time. It completely ignores the fact that these girls were either sextrafficked or put in compromised situations by people in a position of power. They were not in a situation where they would have felt comfortable saying no or reporting it at the time. It is completely reasonable that it would have taken them years to have the right situation where they feel comfortable speaking out against people with such power, wealth and influence.
The ignorance to this is actually a bit sad, as it means there are still people out there who will allow abuses of power so long as there is no physical evidence at the time or the victim doesn't immediately accuse. It is this sort of attitude that has allowed the likes of Epstein, Saville, Rolf Harris etc to operate for as long as they did.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not defending either. But when do English national newspapers print fake quotes and attribute them directly to a person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't be this naïve.
The S*n erroneously quoting people at Hillsborough claimimg LFC fans urinated on and pickpocketed the dead victims of a tragedy is one high profile example.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 42 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 15 seconds ago
Gotta wonder if a young woman being trafficked by billionaires might be a bit intimidated even to the point of fearing for their lives.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think they are deliberately missing that point. They've dug their trenches and refuse to budge.
The lady who was groped says in the same quote about the story that she was being coerced into giving sexualmassages after thinking she had an assistant job. Given the power of the people she was with and the situation where she was resisting doing those deeds, she probably didn't think she could say no to Prince Andrew holding her breast.
The other girl involved claims to have been sextrafficked. Epstein and Maxwell were found guilty of child sextrafficking. It doesn't really seem like a relationship where the girls feel empowered to decline something they don't want to do. Especially when the other person involved is a member of the British Monarchy.
Yet the narrative we are being fed from the quote from Elvis is one from the Mail where it is all a joke and the girls were happy in the situation. It's all OK if the sextraffickers intended something as a joke whether the girls think they can say no or not. He seems to be standing by it.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Go back and read what I actually posted. I haven't tried to make light of anything. I've posted her direct quotes, and in view of the fact she doesn't seem too bothered by the incident, asked if she made any accusations at the time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well that's the whole point of my post. The view that she doesn't seem bothered by it has been applied by yourself. It isn't something she has said. It doesn't line up with what was released today and doesn't consider what I put in the post you replied to above.
You've basically proved my point that you've dug your trench and won't budge.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Nope. You've just misinterpreted my post. Why do you think I asked if she had tried to bring charges? Its because I was surprised at her words/tone about it being a joke and everyone laughing. Hence my point about her not appearing to be bothered about the incident. In the same article I read she goes on to say how she respects Maxwell and is quite matter of fact about taking money for sexual favours.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 14 minutes ago
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://heavy.com/news/2019/11/johanna-sjoberg/
I wasn't aware of the story back in 2007 when The Mail ran it. I was travelling the world, blissfully unaware.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 6 minutes ago
The whole argument Elvis and MU52 have, seems to be based on the girls involved not reporting anything at the time. It completely ignores the fact that these girls were either sextrafficked or put in compromised situations by people in a position of power. They were not in a situation where they would have felt comfortable saying no or reporting it at the time. It is completely reasonable that it would have taken them years to have the right situation where they feel comfortable speaking out against people with such power, wealth and influence.
The ignorance to this is actually a bit sad, as it means there are still people out there who will allow abuses of power so long as there is no physical evidence at the time or the victim doesn't immediately accuse. It is this sort of attitude that has allowed the likes of Epstein, Saville, Rolf Harris etc to operate for as long as they did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What argument? I merely asked the question as to whether she tried to bring charges and notes that from her quotes she didn't seem too bothered by the incident. I dont know how many times I have to say the same thing.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not defending either. But when do English national newspapers print fake quotes and attribute them directly to a person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't be this naïve.
The S*n erroneously quoting people at Hillsborough claimimg LFC fans urinated on and pickpocketed the dead victims of a tragedy is one high profile example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were they direct quotes attributed to a named person?
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 14 minutes ago
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://heavy.com/news/2019/11/johanna-sjoberg/
I wasn't aware of the story back in 2007 when The Mail ran it. I was travelling the world, blissfully unaware.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Conveniently left the rest of the quote where she states;
"was groomed for it,” she said of her experience, “I made a pact with the devil in exchange for excitement and glamour. I was only a college student. I was hard-up and foolish."
Why would you leave this part out I wonder?
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not defending either. But when do English national newspapers print fake quotes and attribute them directly to a person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't be this naïve.
The S*n erroneously quoting people at Hillsborough claimimg LFC fans urinated on and pickpocketed the dead victims of a tragedy is one high profile example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were they direct quotes attributed to a named person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not named people no, quoted anonymously from people allegedly at the match under the the infamous headline 'The truth'. Also quotes from police officers re ticket less fans, the opening of gate C etc.
posted on 4/1/24
Daily mail have printed retractions for direct quotes which were fake.
But it's besides the point isn't it. That interview could have been conducted and spun any way they wanted to. There's no concept of tone or context to it. So it's ridiculous to even post it here as some kind of evidence that it was just 'a joke'
I don't know why mu52 didn't just say I'm not interested in this and fack off instead of creating an embarrassing 13 page argument.
posted on 4/1/24
Oh and heavy.com as a reliable source that's quoting The Mail second hand FFS
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 16 minutes ago
The whole argument Elvis and MU52 have, seems to be based on the girls involved not reporting anything at the time. It completely ignores the fact that these girls were either sextrafficked or put in compromised situations by people in a position of power. They were not in a situation where they would have felt comfortable saying no or reporting it at the time. It is completely reasonable that it would have taken them years to have the right situation where they feel comfortable speaking out against people with such power, wealth and influence.
The ignorance to this is actually a bit sad, as it means there are still people out there who will allow abuses of power so long as there is no physical evidence at the time or the victim doesn't immediately accuse. It is this sort of attitude that has allowed the likes of Epstein, Saville, Rolf Harris etc to operate for as long as they did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 56 seconds ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 7 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Kobbie The King Mainoo (U10026)
posted 10 minutes ago
Not sure what’s worse, defending Prince Andrew or the Daily Mail.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm not defending either. But when do English national newspapers print fake quotes and attribute them directly to a person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't be this naïve.
The S*n erroneously quoting people at Hillsborough claimimg LFC fans urinated on and pickpocketed the dead victims of a tragedy is one high profile example.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Were they direct quotes attributed to a named person?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Not named people no, quoted anonymously from people allegedly at the match under the the infamous headline 'The truth'. Also quotes from police officers re ticket less fans, the opening of gate C etc.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok so not a direct quote then. Try again.
Do you actually think The Mail made. up quotes from person that they had interviewed and who would be reading the article?
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 6 minutes ago
The whole argument Elvis and MU52 have, seems to be based on the girls involved not reporting anything at the time. It completely ignores the fact that these girls were either sextrafficked or put in compromised situations by people in a position of power. They were not in a situation where they would have felt comfortable saying no or reporting it at the time. It is completely reasonable that it would have taken them years to have the right situation where they feel comfortable speaking out against people with such power, wealth and influence.
The ignorance to this is actually a bit sad, as it means there are still people out there who will allow abuses of power so long as there is no physical evidence at the time or the victim doesn't immediately accuse. It is this sort of attitude that has allowed the likes of Epstein, Saville, Rolf Harris etc to operate for as long as they did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
What argument? I merely asked the question as to whether she tried to bring charges and notes that from her quotes she didn't seem too bothered by the incident. I dont know how many times I have to say the same thing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think the fact you keep saying the same thing is the point. You keep going back to the fact that you think she wasn't bothered by it and didn't report it at the time.
You keep ignoring the power dynamic and the fact she was groomed. You ignore that the other girl involved was sextrafficked. It even says in your link you posted that she felt she was groomed and is ashamed. It says in the papers today that she believes sexual activity happened between Prince Andrew and the other sextrafficked girl.
As with MU52, I'll leave it there with you. I think the fact you don't understand those things and won't budge on your position makes carrying on pointless.
posted on 4/1/24
The Mail recently published Piers Morgan's claim to ahbe never hacked a phone at the Mirror in full but decided not publish the judge's ruling that stated it was impossible he didn't know as it was so widespread.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 14 minutes ago
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://heavy.com/news/2019/11/johanna-sjoberg/
I wasn't aware of the story back in 2007 when The Mail ran it. I was travelling the world, blissfully unaware.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Conveniently left the rest of the quote where she states;
"was groomed for it,” she said of her experience, “I made a pact with the devil in exchange for excitement and glamour. I was only a college student. I was hard-up and foolish."
Why would you leave this part out I wonder?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the being groomed part relates to Epstein and Maxwell. Not Prince Andrew, which is who/what we were discussing.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 4 minutes ago
Oh and heavy.com as a reliable source that's quoting The Mail second hand FFS
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So which of the quotes that The Mail and heavy.com.used are fake? Just the ones that you don't like? Or are the ones that you do like also fake? Did The Mail even interview her? Or dis they make the whole thing up in your opinion?
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 2 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 14 minutes ago
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://heavy.com/news/2019/11/johanna-sjoberg/
I wasn't aware of the story back in 2007 when The Mail ran it. I was travelling the world, blissfully unaware.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Conveniently left the rest of the quote where she states;
"was groomed for it,” she said of her experience, “I made a pact with the devil in exchange for excitement and glamour. I was only a college student. I was hard-up and foolish."
Why would you leave this part out I wonder?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the being groomed part relates to Epstein and Maxwell. Not Prince Andrew, which is who/what we were discussing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
So it's OK to grope someone who has been groomed, so long as you don't do the grooming?
Definitely stepping away now.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 26 seconds ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by FieldsofAnfieldRd (U18971)
posted 14 minutes ago
Elvis
Where did you get that quote from if not The Mail?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
https://heavy.com/news/2019/11/johanna-sjoberg/
I wasn't aware of the story back in 2007 when The Mail ran it. I was travelling the world, blissfully unaware.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Conveniently left the rest of the quote where she states;
"was groomed for it,” she said of her experience, “I made a pact with the devil in exchange for excitement and glamour. I was only a college student. I was hard-up and foolish."
Why would you leave this part out I wonder?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Because the being groomed part relates to Epstein and Maxwell. Not Prince Andrew, which is who/what we were discussing.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
They were being groomed to be shex toys to your prince and his ilk. i.e. sick fvks.
posted on 4/1/24
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 16 minutes ago
The whole argument Elvis and MU52 have, seems to be based on the girls involved not reporting anything at the time. It completely ignores the fact that these girls were either sextrafficked or put in compromised situations by people in a position of power. They were not in a situation where they would have felt comfortable saying no or reporting it at the time. It is completely reasonable that it would have taken them years to have the right situation where they feel comfortable speaking out against people with such power, wealth and influence.
The ignorance to this is actually a bit sad, as it means there are still people out there who will allow abuses of power so long as there is no physical evidence at the time or the victim doesn't immediately accuse. It is this sort of attitude that has allowed the likes of Epstein, Saville, Rolf Harris etc to operate for as long as they did.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well said.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Apart from the fact that she did say no to Epstein. She refused to do anything sexual with him. Then at a later date changed her mind because she wanted the money he offered her.
Page 13 of 24
14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18