I think this guy is pretty popular with a certain cohort on this forum? Certainly a good few posters here with similar views.
https://twitter.com/truth_checkers/status/1670512091885711360
He was very good in Britannia.
Itâs called the Bet365 now.
1 Like
Bad news for @glenshane @Tierneevin1979 @maroonandwhite @Thomas_Brady @gaillimhmick.
Your âalpha maleâ hero is in deep shit.
1 Like
This is what youâre dealing with
https://twitter.com/miffythegamer/status/1671100996498468868?t=qCFGg4YKTtR6oMDPQ9MDjA&s=19
Andrew Tate is a hero of the online right wing.
None of this is in any way surprising. The Republican party and the US âconservativeâ cult beloved of a significant cohort of posters here is basically a front for sex crime and paedophilia. Itâs the same with their allies in Europe.
Christ, they want men to inspect girlsâ genitalia before allowing them play sport.
This is the agenda pushed by the usual cranks on this forum.
They always project.
Whoâs she supposed to be?
Will this be like the Amber Heard court case where you will only accept the verdict youâve yourself arrived at before the trial and without seeing any evidence ?
Amber Heard was the victim of a spectacular carriage of misjustice and a chilling attack on free speech which was driven by celebrity fan worship and a vast campaign of internet disinformation.
Johnny Depp is a wife beater and a deluded thug.
Itâs gas how some people will go all #metoo when Nicola Gallagher speaks out and then turn around and defend the acting equivalent of Rory Gallagher.
The cognitive dissonance is fascinating.
So thatâs a yes then.
No need for courts or judges - you can decide cases by feel and instinct and where somebody sits in your personal bias.
Not accepting decisions of courts you donât like isâŚâŚ.fascist.
7 Likes
Do you accept this?
Amber Heard did no more than refer to the verdict of this trial and that she was a victim of domestic abuse. Which she was.
You clearly believe that extremely wealthy celebrities should be able to undermine justice thorough their money and through the online cult of social media fan worship.
That is not a belief in justice, it is a belief in mob rule.
The Hollywood actor Johnny Depp has lost his high-stakes libel action in the London courts against the Sun after the newspaper described him as a âwife beaterâ.
The high court dismissed the claim by the Pirates of the Caribbean star for compensation at the end of one of the most widely followed libel trials of the century. His lawyers said he would most likely appeal against the âperverse and bewildering decisionâ.
In the 129-page ruling, the judge, Mr Justice Nicol, said: âThe claimant [Depp] has not succeeded in his action for libel ⌠The defendants [the Sun and News Group Newspapers] have shown that what they published in the meaning which I have held the words to bear was substantially true.
The judge added: âI have found that the great majority of alleged assaults of Ms Heard by Mr Depp have been proved to the civil standard.â
Challenging and not accepting court decisions based on what youâve seen in your social media feed is Donald Trump/Boris Johnson supporter shite. Nothing you disagree with is ever accepted and everything you donât agree with is a conspiracy and fake news
You are ignoring and refusing to accept another court decision that you donât agree with.
5 Likes
You didnât answer the question.
Do you accept the UK courtâs verdict that the reporting that called Johnny Depp a wife beater was true?
Itâs extremely curious how you avoided that question. Well done on getting the four woman haters to like your post though.
I can only accept all court decisions. Sometimes I may feel a sentence is lenient but you ultimately have to say a judge is better placed to decide and is following precedent
The alternative is cases being decided by social media mobs based on their Twitter feed.
I prefer the, you may call it old fashioned, way of allowing a judge or a jury to be presented with the evidence/case of the plaintiff/prosecution which the defence/defendant can test and rebut
Your approach is the same as Trump
supporters who wonât accept any verdict in a case not in accordance with the one they arrived at when they first heard of the proceedings.
Your approach is a fascist approach where courts are not respected.
So do you accept itâs accurate to call Johnny Depp a wife beater?
One court heard evidence and said he was. One court heard evidence and decided he wasnât.
Now Iâve answered two questions answer my question - why do you adopt a fascist approach to court decisions and reject any decision not in accordance with your bias and instinct
You still havenât answered the question.
Itâs gas the way you deliberately misrepresent everybody who disagrees with you (and youâve made a thoroughly clichĂŠd persona of being deliberately wrong about almost everything) and then you call them fascists because they quite rightly object to a disgraceful court verdict which was an utterly chilling attack both on free speech and on women.
To you, anybody who believes OJ Simpson is a double murderer is a âfascistâ. Anybody who believed the Birmingham Six and the Guildford Four were innocent was a âfascistâ.
To do that, you have to disagree with appalling court verdicts. Disagreeing with appalling court verdicts is the hallmark of democracy.
Meanwhile, youâre all over other threads claiming you know more than medical science.
These are ludicrous, shrieking positions and they make you look like the fool you are.
The lack of self awareness is laugh out loud hilarious but thatâs always been your calling card.
Another fascist, Trumpian goal post shift. All court decisions are questionable now. Wow. You are a lot closer to the Trump voter than you care to imagine.
Whatâs your view on voter fraud - Iâm sure you can find some reference to it occurring in recent history.
You continue to decide cases based on your gut instinct and bias. Thatâs the fascist way.
Iâll stick with a judge and jury hearing evidence presented in accordance with rules of evidence and law. Thatâs the democratic way.
Good evening.
4 Likes
Youâre lashing out again after being out debated. Shrieking that anti-fascists are fascist is Fluvio the Mussolini supporterâs speciality.
Anyway youâre a Fine Gaeler so that makes it even funnier.
Itâs remarkable the projection you display in your posts.
Itâs hard to think of anything more fascist than cheerleading the mob rule decision to rule in favour of a very rich and famous celebrity against a woman who quite rightly referred to herself as a victim of domestic abuse.
A victim of domestic abuse at the hands of a man the UK courts quite rightly upheld as a wife beater.
When a victim cannot say they are a victim without the threat of ruination by a rich and famous celebrity and their online mob, that is fascism.
And you support that.
Donât think people have forgotten the way you wanted the complainant in the Jackson/Olding trial ruined. You have long form for this sort of thing.
