 |
|
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bruno
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
|
| Post subject: Message to the VPT Left on behalf of Craig Thomson ... |  |
|
I thought I would post this guys plea given so many here are big supporters of him.
So ... David, Culprit, WPT, Tannin, Alec J Hiddel etc, it's time to dig deep. The account number to deposit funds into is detailed at the bottom.
Craig Thomson Legal Defence Fund
Dear Friends,
The purpose of this web page is to provide details of an account which accepts donations for my legal defence. This approved account has been established by two supporters who have kindly agreed to act as the signatories.
I have made it clear on numerous occasions in the media that I am innocent of all allegations made against me before the courts.
I strongly believe in the constitution and that people are innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.
Unfortunately these common law principles and accepted constitutional rights of every Australian have been abused by prominent politicians under parliamentary privilege and by some commentators.
I know that like me, a great majority of people believe in the rights of all Australians to defend themselves in a court of law. To help me defend myself against these wrongful charges, your donations are greatly appreciated. The account details are below.
Many thanks.
Sincerely
CRAIG THOMSON
ACCOUNT DETAILS:
Commonwealth Bank
Account Name: Mark Worthington & Rodney Allan
BSB: 06 2504
A/C No: 1055 0760 |
|
|
|
 |
David 
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Since when was Craig Thomson left-wing? Isn't he a member of the NSW Right?
If so — considering the Labor right are slightly to the left of Joh Bjelke-Petersen — I would have thought you'd be his closest ideological ally on here, Bruno.
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Bruno
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | Since when was Craig Thomson left-wing? Isn't he a member of the NSW Right?
If so — considering the Labor right are slightly to the left of Joh Bjelke-Petersen — I would have thought you'd be his closest ideological ally on here, Bruno. |
I don't know what Craig Thomson's alleged crimes have to do with his political ideology, David.
What I do know is the VPT Left have been vociferous defenders of him.
I thought you especially would like to contribute to his legal defense. Although, I'd suggest you make doubly sure that's indeed what your money actually goes towards before contributing. Who know's, maybe your contribution will instead end up going towards a house purchase in Kerr Street, Fitzroy. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Bruno wrote: | | What I do know is the VPT Left have been vociferous defenders of him. |
Quotes or it didn't happen!
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Tannin 
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Pfft! Since when did David change spots and turn into a left-wing poster? Not to mention a couple of others you mention, who are very milk and water mild-left types. And as for Alec J Hiddel, since when did he post at all in the VPT? What happened? Did he make a lightning visit last week or something?
Summary: the usual Bruno rubbish. Nothing to see here. Move along please.
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Bruno
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | Pfft! Since when did David change spots and turn into a left-wing poster? Not to mention a couple of others you mention, who are very milk and water mild-left types. And as for Alec J Hiddel, since when did he post at all in the VPT? What happened? Did he make a lightning visit last week or something?
Summary: the usual Bruno rubbish. Nothing to see here. Move along please. |
No. You don't get off that easy. I was ridiculed from pillar to post on here for my views on Craig Thomson and Gillard's willingness to put her head in the sand over the issue.
Is there really any point debating here given after I inevitably win a debate (i.e. once the passage of time proves my thinking to be correct) that people like you can simply turn around and infer "I didn't argue that, spend your day going through hundreds of threads to prove I argued it".
Weak as piss, the lot of you.
As per my footer .... |
|
|
|
|
Tannin
Can't remember
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Location: Huon Valley Tasmania
|
| Post subject: | |
|
There are three possibilities here:
- 1: the person with opinion worth listening to: will provide proof with genuine, relevant quotes in suitable context.
- 2: The clueless nonentity: will shut up now.
- 3: The loudmouth wanker: will carry on with blather and slander regardless of any and all calls on him to provide actual evidence of his wild and stupid claims.
Let's say nothing more for now. We will just sit back and let events show us which of these three possibilities is the truth. (Hint: one of them in an unbackable favourite, but you never know when a long shot will get up to confound the punters.)
_________________
�Let's eat Grandma.� Commas save lives! |
|
|
|
|
Bruno
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Tannin wrote: | There are three possibilities here:
- 1: the person with opinion worth listening to: will provide proof with genuine, relevant quotes in suitable context.
- 2: The clueless nonentity: will shut up now.
- 3: The loudmouth wanker: will carry on with blather and slander regardless of any and all calls on him to provide actual evidence of his wild and stupid claims.
Let's say nothing more for now. We will just sit back and let events show us which of these three possibilities is the truth. (Hint: one of them in an unbackable favourite, but you never know when a long shot will get up to confound the punters.) |
There is a fourth option which could save you, me and the rest of the electorate a lot of time.
Part 1) This involves Craig Thomson doing the right thing and immediately resigning from Parliament in disgrace.
Part 2) This involves the PM admitting it was a gross mis-judgement on her part to put her head in the sand for so long over this issue and doing the right thing by stepping down as PM with immediate effect ... also in disgrace.
Now, you either can agree with the above and support calls for an early election, OR you can state right here, right now your support for Craig Thomson, union bosses who spend members money on hookers, a PM who is okay with this... and if you feel so inclined, send money to messers Worthington and Allan on behalf of the member for Dobell. |
|
|
|
|
3.14159 
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I'll gladly contribute my 2 cents worth....
Why the early election Bozo?
Thompson is not a member of the Labour Party and The Government does not rely on his vote to stay in power.
Logic and reality seem to have no place in your any of your arguments.
Who is A J Hiddle...etc,..a comedian?.
Last edited by 3.14159 on Wed May 01, 2013 2:14 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
|
|
|
luvdids 
Joined: 22 Mar 2008
Location: work
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Bruno wrote: | | Tannin wrote: | There are three possibilities here:
- 1: the person with opinion worth listening to: will provide proof with genuine, relevant quotes in suitable context.
- 2: The clueless nonentity: will shut up now.
- 3: The loudmouth wanker: will carry on with blather and slander regardless of any and all calls on him to provide actual evidence of his wild and stupid claims.
Let's say nothing more for now. We will just sit back and let events show us which of these three possibilities is the truth. (Hint: one of them in an unbackable favourite, but you never know when a long shot will get up to confound the punters.) |
There is a fourth option which could save you, me and the rest of the electorate a lot of time.
Part 1) This involves Craig Thomson doing the right thing and immediately resigning from Parliament in disgrace.
Part 2) This involves the PM admitting it was a gross mis-judgement on her part to put her head in the sand for so long over this issue and doing the right thing by stepping down as PM with immediate effect ... also in disgrace.
Now, you either can agree with the above and support calls for an early election, OR you can state right here, right now your support for Craig Thomson, union bosses who spend members money on hookers, a PM who is okay with this... and if you feel so inclined, send money to messers Worthington and Allan on behalf of the member for Dobell. |
Looks like the favourite romped it in. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| Bruno wrote: | | Tannin wrote: | Pfft! Since when did David change spots and turn into a left-wing poster? Not to mention a couple of others you mention, who are very milk and water mild-left types. And as for Alec J Hiddel, since when did he post at all in the VPT? What happened? Did he make a lightning visit last week or something?
Summary: the usual Bruno rubbish. Nothing to see here. Move along please. |
No. You don't get off that easy. I was ridiculed from pillar to post on here for my views on Craig Thomson and Gillard's willingness to put her head in the sand over the issue.
Is there really any point debating here given after I inevitably win a debate (i.e. once the passage of time proves my thinking to be correct) that people like you can simply turn around and infer "I didn't argue that, spend your day going through hundreds of threads to prove I argued it".
Weak as piss, the lot of you.
As per my footer .... |
You're clearly just attention-seeking, but I'm bored at the moment so I'll indulge you.
Gillard's position since day one has been that due process should be allowed to run its course before Thomson is presumed to be guilty. That's a position I vehemently agree with. You would too if you had any respect for our legal system or valued the concept of the presumption of innocence.
Otherwise, I have no opinion on his guilt or innocence. Sure, it doesn't look good, but if we've learned anything from the Slipper affair it should be that politics is a murky, nasty business. It is not beyond the realm of credibility that he could have been set up. Neither, of course, is it beyond the realm of credibility that he could be guilty as sin. It is best, therefore, that this be decided in a court of law.
I've voiced my distaste for pre-emptive sackings on many occasions on here. This is no exception.
I'm all for the establishment of a defence fund if his supporters think his case warrants one. For what it's worth, I don't count myself among their number, and I doubt that many others on here do either.
Like Abbott, your obsession with Thomson is solely an attempt to destabilise and delegitimise this government. It has no other purpose. The fact is that the fate of Craig Thomson is far, far less important to the 'VPT Left' — many of whom are not even Labor supporters — than it is to you. Why do you think that might be?
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Bruno
Joined: 19 Sep 2003
|
| Post subject: | |
|
| David wrote: | | Bruno wrote: | | Tannin wrote: | Pfft! Since when did David change spots and turn into a left-wing poster? Not to mention a couple of others you mention, who are very milk and water mild-left types. And as for Alec J Hiddel, since when did he post at all in the VPT? What happened? Did he make a lightning visit last week or something?
Summary: the usual Bruno rubbish. Nothing to see here. Move along please. |
No. You don't get off that easy. I was ridiculed from pillar to post on here for my views on Craig Thomson and Gillard's willingness to put her head in the sand over the issue.
Is there really any point debating here given after I inevitably win a debate (i.e. once the passage of time proves my thinking to be correct) that people like you can simply turn around and infer "I didn't argue that, spend your day going through hundreds of threads to prove I argued it".
Weak as piss, the lot of you.
As per my footer .... |
You're clearly just attention-seeking, but I'm bored at the moment so I'll indulge you.
Gillard's position since day one has been that due process should be allowed to run its course before Thomson is presumed to be guilty. That's a position I vehemently agree with. You would too if you had any respect for our legal system or valued the concept of the presumption of innocence.
Otherwise, I have no opinion on his guilt or innocence. Sure, it doesn't look good, but if we've learned anything from the Slipper affair it should be that politics is a murky, nasty business. It is not beyond the realm of credibility that he could have been set up. Neither, of course, is it beyond the realm of credibility that he could be guilty as sin. It is best, therefore, that this be decided in a court of law.
I've voiced my distaste for pre-emptive sackings on many occasions on here. This is no exception.
I'm all for the establishment of a defence fund if his supporters think his case warrants one. For what it's worth, I don't count myself among their number, and I doubt that many others on here do either.
Like Abbott, your obsession with Thomson is solely an attempt to destabilise and delegitimise this government. It has no other purpose. The fact is that the fate of Craig Thomson is far, far less important to the 'VPT Left' — many of whom are not even Labor supporters — than it is to you. Why do you think that might be? |
I think you want it both ways David. You say you don't support him, yet woe betide anyone who dares criticize him!
Either way, I well remember your thoughts on this David. Your argument basically went along the lines that elected officials or anyone in a position of trust and responsibility shouldn't be held to higher standards then your average mug punter. That the ONLY behavioral standards these people should have to meet are those behaviors which aren't illegal. Outrageous comments as what you are basically arguing for is the abolition of any industry standards.
This has nothing to do with Abbott. What it relates to is the fact that unlike people in the Legal, Medical or Financial fields, Politicians don't have to meet codes of conduct which requires standards that go beyond and above the law of the land. And this is the fault of BOTH sides of politics.
I have never said he should be thrown in jail prior to having his day in court. What I have said he should be struck off from Parliament in a way which is no different to how ASIC can ban people from providing a financial service or how the AMA can have a doctor struck off it's register. Given there is no body assigned to do this, it was up the PM to take control. She however put political survival ahead of keeping the Parliament and the Government respectable. A disgrace. |
|
|
|
|
David
I dare you to try
Joined: 27 Jul 2003
Location: Andromeda
|
| Post subject: | |
|
I'm all for a code of professional conduct for politicians. The only trouble is that Thomson, as you conveniently forget, was not a sitting MP when these incidents are alleged to have occurred. I obviously don't believe that professional codes of conduct should cover acts committed in other jobs or outside the workplace.
Nonetheless, if he's found guilty he'll probably be asked to stand down. Why are you unwilling to wait for that process to run its course?
_________________
All watched over by machines of loving grace |
|
|
|
|
Pies4shaw 
pies4shaw
Joined: 08 Oct 2007
|
| Post subject: | |
|
When (and if) there finally is a "VPT Left", I look forward to being introduced to it.
Reds under the bed much, Bruno? Your repeated party-political drivel is boring. Generally speaking, if you have nothing to say, it's better to say nothing. In recent times, you have been driving almost all room for intelligent thought out of the threads in which you post. It's a shame, really and does you little credit. |
|
|
|
|
3.14159
Joined: 12 Sep 2009
|
| Post subject: | |
|
Bozo said...
Is there really any point debating here given after I inevitably win a debate (i.e. once the passage of time proves my thinking to be correct).
Why do you post here?
To prove to your-self that your right?
Get some help.
Get some treatment
Come back when you get that massive chip off your shoulder. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum
|
|
The Rules
FAQ
Usergroups
Calendar
Search
Log in
Register
