MeddleHe wasn’t was he? Like anyone else, he was expressing his opinion of his personal experience, to which he is entitled, whether you agree with him, or not, as would seem to be the case.
Richard Dawkins is entirely entitled to have an opinion. However, comparing a relatively strict Christian upbringing to child sexual abuse, and then suggesting the former is more serious than the latter, is disgusting. It trivialises child sexual abuse, and if you think that having to learn the names of minor prophets is worse than being groped, prodded or otherwise violated by an individual under whose pastoral care you resided as a child, then you have a very odd outlook on life. Dawins used his experience to suggest that childhood religious indoctrination is somehow the far worse of the two offences, and therefore the real crime is trying to raise your children with your own religious beliefs. Therefore we are focusing on the wrong area, apparently. He could have steered well clear of that subject, or framed it in a far less antagonistic manner.
MeddleHe wasn’t was he? Like anyone else, he was expressing his opinion of his personal experience, to which he is entitled, whether you agree with him, or not, as would seem to be the case.
Richard Dawkins is entirely entitled to have an opinion. However, comparing a relatively strict Christian upbringing to child sexual abuse, and then suggesting the former is more serious than the latter, is disgusting. It trivialises child sexual abuse, and if you think that having to learn the names of minor prophets is worse than being groped, prodded or otherwise violated by an individual under whose pastoral care you resided as a child, then you have a very odd outlook on life. Dawins used his experience to suggest that childhood religious indoctrination is somehow the far worse of the two offences, and therefore the real crime is trying to raise your children with your own religious beliefs. Therefore we are focusing on the wrong area, apparently. He could have steered well clear of that subject, or framed it in a far less antagonistic manner.
MeddleI am not supporting any of the above but I do like justice to be served and base its findings on real evidence and not just hearsay, make sure the evidence can be backed up and make sure there is no link between accusers and corroboration happening
To quote the CPS;
“Having completed our review, we have concluded there is sufficient evidence and it is in the public interest for Mr Harris to be charged … The decision has been taken in accordance with the code for crown prosecutors and the DPP’s interim guidelines on prosecuting cases of child sexual abuse. We have determined that there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and that a prosecution is in the public interest”
I dare say that you need more than hearsay to get that sort of response out of CPS. I thought the prosecution services were always reluctant to investigate crimes anyway? I find it hard work to keep up with the conflicting tropes spewed across the bottom of the right wing spectrum. The Police took a while to show up to my house after I was burgled, so therefore the Police don’t investigate crimes to keep the crime stats looking low, but they spent all their resources trying to pin noncing charges on dead radio DJs because the victims all want to earn a quick buck because of the PC Brigade… …the real paedos are in Rotherham… do I have it right yet?
I hope these high profile cases do not detract away from abuse happening today
If anything they have the reverse effect as they serve to encourage victims to come forward, be the assaults the work of shamed BBC radio presenters or the man down the street. To go off on a slight tangent, I’m always amazed how posters online feel the justice system works. Firstly that all police resources are diverted into prosecuting old white men on noncing charges, using the least possible evidence, and secondly that victims of said abuse are in it for the money and (usually) making it up. Your first, attrociously written, paragraph suggests as much. You go so far as to try and discredit the neice of Jimmy Savile, as though all accusations lined up against Savile will fall like a house of cards if this one testament happens to be bogus. And, how do you reckon your (oft repeated) opinion that child sexual abuse victims are in it for the money does not detract away from abuse happening today? Beats me!
And again;
I feel the evidence should all be placed under a court and looked into deeply because as with Savile where they put adverts in the press to aledged victims to come forward its very easy to get people just weighing in with a slight bending of truths if there is a cash bid in it
Again, why do people insist on pointing out the obvious; as though none of this evidence would have ended up ‘under a court’ unless you pointed it out on an Internet forum? Do you reckon the justice system needs a gentle nudge from ‘Angry of Clacton-on-Sea’ because they don’t have any sort of system in place? How would you know when evidence has or has not been placed ‘under a court’ in the first place? Because you read about it in some crap newspaper somewhere? Perhaps you would try and exploit a historic case for personal financial gain, but you shouldn’t try and pin your own sloppy set of morals onto others, especially those that have been living with the aftermath of sexual abuse for decades. If nothing else it shows how you personally trivialise child sex abuse in your own head, which is perhaps part of the problem with getting victims today to talk about current abuse. You do know the emotional black mail involved here right? You wouldn’t happen to be talking out your **** would you?
This reminds me of the time Richard Dawkins suggested that his own sexual abuse at the hands of a priest was nothing to get upset about, and that, if anything, being forced to study christian doctrine was the real abuse. When was Dawkins elected as the single spokesperson for child sexual abuse, and when did a evolutionary biologist (and general sh!t-stirrer) become the arbiter for abuse in general? News to me.
Troubling.
MeddleI am not supporting any of the above but I do like justice to be served and base its findings on real evidence and not just hearsay, make sure the evidence can be backed up and make sure there is no link between accusers and corroboration happening
To quote the CPS;
“Having completed our review, we have concluded there is sufficient evidence and it is in the public interest for Mr Harris to be charged … The decision has been taken in accordance with the code for crown prosecutors and the DPP’s interim guidelines on prosecuting cases of child sexual abuse. We have determined that there is sufficient evidence for a realistic prospect of conviction and that a prosecution is in the public interest”
I dare say that you need more than hearsay to get that sort of response out of CPS. I thought the prosecution services were always reluctant to investigate crimes anyway? I find it hard work to keep up with the conflicting tropes spewed across the bottom of the right wing spectrum. The Police took a while to show up to my house after I was burgled, so therefore the Police don’t investigate crimes to keep the crime stats looking low, but they spent all their resources trying to pin noncing charges on dead radio DJs because the victims all want to earn a quick buck because of the PC Brigade… …the real paedos are in Rotherham… do I have it right yet?
I hope these high profile cases do not detract away from abuse happening today
If anything they have the reverse effect as they serve to encourage victims to come forward, be the assaults the work of shamed BBC radio presenters or the man down the street. To go off on a slight tangent, I’m always amazed how posters online feel the justice system works. Firstly that all police resources are diverted into prosecuting old white men on noncing charges, using the least possible evidence, and secondly that victims of said abuse are in it for the money and (usually) making it up. Your first, attrociously written, paragraph suggests as much. You go so far as to try and discredit the neice of Jimmy Savile, as though all accusations lined up against Savile will fall like a house of cards if this one testament happens to be bogus. And, how do you reckon your (oft repeated) opinion that child sexual abuse victims are in it for the money does not detract away from abuse happening today? Beats me!
And again;
I feel the evidence should all be placed under a court and looked into deeply because as with Savile where they put adverts in the press to aledged victims to come forward its very easy to get people just weighing in with a slight bending of truths if there is a cash bid in it
Again, why do people insist on pointing out the obvious; as though none of this evidence would have ended up ‘under a court’ unless you pointed it out on an Internet forum? Do you reckon the justice system needs a gentle nudge from ‘Angry of Clacton-on-Sea’ because they don’t have any sort of system in place? How would you know when evidence has or has not been placed ‘under a court’ in the first place? Because you read about it in some crap newspaper somewhere? Perhaps you would try and exploit a historic case for personal financial gain, but you shouldn’t try and pin your own sloppy set of morals onto others, especially those that have been living with the aftermath of sexual abuse for decades. If nothing else it shows how you personally trivialise child sex abuse in your own head, which is perhaps part of the problem with getting victims today to talk about current abuse. You do know the emotional black mail involved here right? You wouldn’t happen to be talking out your **** would you?
This reminds me of the time Richard Dawkins suggested that his own sexual abuse at the hands of a priest was nothing to get upset about, and that, if anything, being forced to study christian doctrine was the real abuse. When was Dawkins elected as the single spokesperson for child sexual abuse, and when did a evolutionary biologist (and general sh!t-stirrer) become the arbiter for abuse in general? News to me.
Troubling.
MeddleI still don’t understand why both LBC radio and Classic FM deem it newsworthy any time Nigel Farage opens his mouth. :sleeping: For such a small party, UKIP get brilliant coverage, which I can only assume goes down really well on this forum. Remind me again, who has more seats in the House of Commons, UKIP or Plaid Cymru? UKIP or the SNP?
MeddleI still don’t understand why both LBC radio and Classic FM deem it newsworthy any time Nigel Farage opens his mouth. :sleeping: For such a small party, UKIP get brilliant coverage, which I can only assume goes down really well on this forum. Remind me again, who has more seats in the House of Commons, UKIP or Plaid Cymru? UKIP or the SNP?
MeddleTo those of us who are nowhere near a branch of WH Smith during the day, can anybody shed any specifics? I’m trusting the Maryland is considered an extinct species but some wreckage turned up somewhere and has become a hot potato?
MeddleSome sort of twin-engined twin-tail thing sitting at the end of the runway at Edinburgh airport. I was passing on the train and the aircraft wasn’t there yesterday morning, but had been parked up by the afternoon. Looked a bit like a Short Skyvan but my girlfriend refutes this though be both agree on the basic design. I only saw it for a fraction of a second, so all help welcome! The train passes by the airport’s boneyard as well, which is interesting.
MeddleSouth Africa has seen three Shackletons scrapped within the last few years, Long Marston is under threat from housing, St Mawgan has been discussed, and the Paphos examples are only there due to someone at the Airport realising their historic value and making sure the redevelopments didn’t see them become part of the foundations.
I didn’t realise three had been scrapped in South Africa. I knew about the Ysterplaat example, and Pelican 16 (not really scrapped), but the other two are news to me. St Mawgan and Ysterplaat are both close to the sea, which isn’t good for airframes, at a guess. The excuse for scrapping the Ysterplaat example was cited as long term corrosion, so how is the St Mawgan machine holding up? I would consider the Long Marston example as long since lost anyway, they never finished assembling it on site in the first place, and the Paphos machines look fairly bad in recent photos.
MeddleIs every Shackleton at risk then? :rolleyes: Long Marston (though this one is practically compost by now), St Mawgan, Paphos, Manchester, The Coca Cola one in South Africa, any other Shack left outdoors… It seems a healthy element for pretty much every Shack left in the world to have a cutting torch hovering in the shadows just off stage right. Next week someone’s uncle’s hairdresser’s mate will have heard that PIMA are shrinking their collection and their Shack will be off to the land of woks before the year is out. :stupid:
The Manchester example is the closest to me, so I was counting on it being there a few more years! Realistically I am probably more likely to see the Paphos machines any time soon, though I’ve heard that Limassol is pretty much like Manchester but with more sunshine and small time Russian mobsters. Of course it would be nice for the Manc Shack to trundle up the road to East Fortune, especially given that I’ve heard they are trying to scrape together a Cold War hangar and the Shacks saw a lot of use up here and… :sleeping:
MeddleDo you know if that was a Rush job then ? 😀
Very good. :applause:
As I forgot to mention it the first time, I think the Typhoon looks great in that scheme.
MeddleWith the Geddy Lee CF-18 taking up the rear…
MeddleThanks all, again, for filling in the gaps. I watched the videos in Mauld’s post and they are great! I was expecting to see a family member in the Merlin run, but alas it didn’t come to pass. I seem to recall seeing a Piper Cub or similar being moved on the ground, as if through the crowd. Does this ring a bell?
MeddleI have fallen foul of Trip Advisor too many times to even deem them worth a look anymore. Is any museum perfect? As I have stated previously there is much which could be improved but given what they have and how they have improved over the years I think it’s a unique display of the all the facets of the Battle of Britain, with much else besides. And if the rules on photography do not suit, then don’t go. It’s that simple. But going and then complaining is simply pathetic. As for the staff/volunteers – I have going for many years and do not recognise the criticisms made.
As I am nowhere near Kent I have to rely on online reports of the museum at Hawkinge. I’ve heard about their no camera rule before, but it doesn’t seem such a crazy request given recent activities at Solent Sky. Some dirty laundry is there for all to view on Trip Advisor, with the manager counter-commenting against one negative review. Speaking of Trip Advisor, Arthur’s Seat in Edinburgh has an entry (!) which has clocked up some one star reviews (!!), such as;
Unfortunately, unless you come prepared with walking gear, you probably won’t make it up. We got 1/4 up in trainers, to realise if we went any further we’d get stuck or end up coming down on our bums. Its such a shame there wasn’t a solid route all the way up – we went to get the sun rise, so this kind of ruined our day a bit (oh nature! it was even sunny!)
and…
Roller coaster we had heard about we could not find. It was too high and at the top no seat. With the name Arthur’s seat we had expected a chair for photographs
and…
Unless you are really determined to see what’s there, then I wouldn’t bother. It’s a very long climb, the final stretch is extremely hazardous. If an accident occurred up there it would be a mountain rescue team and possibly helicopter to the rescue!! There are no signs pointing you in the right direction and there are several paths up to the top, some more treacherous than others. Don’t forget that if you manage to get up there you also have to come down!!
To use a popular synecdoche, opinions are like assholes; everybody has one.
MeddleMany thanks all. 1999 to 2000 seems appropriate, and I imagine I saw G-HURR and PL965 then (not a double seater after all). From memory the static aircraft were positioned on the North/South runway and initially you could walk amongst them. I then remember being behind a barrier at the end of the same runway with the Dragon Rapide being the closest aircraft to the flight line. The Nanchang CJ-6 took off and then subsequently vanished for quite a length of time. My grandparents called it a ‘Ruskie’, which is where I got the Yak link from. 😉 The Harrier did its hovering trick somewhere to the West of the crowd line from what I recall. The weather was overcast for this event.
I think I’m actually thinking of two events. One was in bright sunshine and the Utterly Butterly team showed up with their wing walkers. We were encouraged, perhaps a few too many times, to wave and jump about as much as possible so that they could see us from the air. The restoration hangar was open to the public, as it wasn’t normally back then, and there was a paper aeroplane building competition in there which I did quite well at. Some chap had a Merlin engine on the back of a trailer with a chopped prop mounted. This was perhaps the Millenium air show as the weather looks good in the videos on Youtube. Again I had some photos I took at the time, but I don’t know where they all went. I’m now surprised at how little of these two events I put in the memory banks, or perhaps we went home in time for dinner? My grandparents ran a tight ship! I certainly wasn’t at either of these events for multiple days. From memory there was an almost completely unrelated fairground setup on the North of the site with blaring music, etc.
Last time I was at East Fortune, a few months back now, it was the festival of… kites. :sleeping: I have tickets for myself and the inlaws to go to the Festival of Flight in July. I hope the weather is on our side!
Sign In
