Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Like I said excusing and obfuscating.

 

Don't be silly now. There is absolutely no obfuscation on my part. Demonstrate thus or hold your tongue. It's my opinion, that simply differs from yours. You are going to have to accept that, just as I accept that you are being overly dramatic to the point of hysteria.

5 minutes ago, JonnyF said:

 

Sounds like you should change your username to NowThenNowThen. 

 

A late starter were you @JonnyF?

Explains why you ended up in Thailand...

Most 14 to 16 year olds are sexually active.

1 minute ago, NowNow said:

 

Don't be silly now. There is absolutely no obfuscation on my part. Demonstrate thus or hold your tongue. It's my opinion, that simply differs from yours. You are going to have to accept that, just as I accept that you are being overly dramatic to the point of hysteria.

Your posts are the demonstration.

 

There’s a law, Edwards broke the law.

 

 

Just now, NowNow said:

 

A late starter were you @JonnyF?

Explains why you ended up in Thailand...

Most 14 to 16 year olds are sexually active.

Ah personal attack and slurring innuendo.

 

 

Now all you have to do is explain what the alleged sexual activity of teenagers in Thailand has to do with the crimes for which the nonse Edwards was convicted in a UK court.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Your posts are the demonstration.

 

There’s a law, Edwards broke the law.

 

 

 

Yes and he was sentenced for it. It's only the curtain twitchers crying about it and baying for his blood. It's patently ridiculous.

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

Ah personal attack and slurring innuendo.

 

 

Now all you have to do is explain what the alleged sexual activity of teenagers in Thailand has to do with the crimes for which the nonse Edwards was convicted in a UK court.

 

Is @JonnyF a teenager in Thailand? Who mentioned teenagers in Thailand other than yourself? You are so overly excited, that you cannot even take the time to comprehend what you read. Take a breath, you are behaving hysterically.

10 minutes ago, NowNow said:

 

A late starter were you @JonnyF?

Explains why you ended up in Thailand...

Most 14 to 16 year olds are sexually active.

 

Sexually active? Maybe?

 

But not raped on camera for the likes of Huw Edwards viewing pleasure.

 

PS they were 13 to 15. 

4 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Ah personal attack and slurring innuendo.

 

 

Now all you have to do is explain what the alleged sexual activity of teenagers in Thailand has to do with the crimes for which the nonse Edwards was convicted in a UK court.

 

@Chomper Higgot Take a step back. You are so 'frantic' that you've taken it upon yourself to reply on @JonnyF's behalf. But you weren't quite so virtuous when clicking on the laughing emoticon when he made his Jimmy Saville joke.  Obviously that didn't register as a  "personal attack and slurring innuendo" to you.

So how about you grow and accept that people can have a different opinion?

5 minutes ago, NowNow said:

Is @JonnyF a teenager in Thailand?

 

Thankfully not with your ilk lurking...

Just now, JonnyF said:

 

Sexually active? Maybe?

 

But not raped on camera for the likes of Huw Edwards viewing pleasure.

 

PS they were 13 to 15. 

 

How do you know they were raped on camera? Have you viewed the material? I haven't. 

4 minutes ago, NowNow said:

 

Is @JonnyF a teenager in Thailand? Who mentioned teenagers in Thailand other than yourself? You are so overly excited, that you cannot even take the time to comprehend what you read. Take a breath, you are behaving hysterically.

My bad.

 

Now all you have to do is explain what allegations of most 14 to 16 year olds being sexually actively has to do with the crimes fit which the nonse Edwards was convicted.

 

 

1 minute ago, JonnyF said:

 

Thankfully not with your ilk lurking...

 

Ilk? I don't mix with the undereducated locals at all. Can we say the same for you?

1 minute ago, NowNow said:

 

Ilk? I don't mix with the undereducated locals at all. Can we say the same for you?

 

But you think the rape of 13-15 year olds is "Meh". 

 

I think we are done here, I need to take a shower. 

1 minute ago, Chomper Higgot said:

My bad.

 

Now all you have to do is explain what allegations of most 14 to 16 year olds being sexually actively has to do with the crimes fit which the nonse Edwards was convicted.

 

 

 

Of course. 14 to 16 year olds on video. 14 o 16 years olds being sexually active. I didn't read anything about there being adults in the videos. Did you?

Just now, JonnyF said:

 

But you think the rape of 13-15 year olds is "Meh". 

 

I think we are done here, I need to take a shower. 

 

Raped by whom? Have you seen the material?

What I see here is mostly hysteria...devoid of facts.

4 minutes ago, NowNow said:

 

Of course. 14 to 16 year olds on video. 14 o 16 years olds being sexually active. I didn't read anything about there being adults in the videos. Did you?

That doesn’t answer my question.

 

You stated most 14 to 16 year olds are sexually active.

 

My question again.

 

What has that got to do with the 

crimes for which the nonse Edwards was convicted?

 

 

 

Edited September 25, 20241 yr by Chomper Higgot

Just now, Chomper Higgot said:

That doesn’t answer my question.

 

You stated most 14 to 16 year olds are sexually active.

 

My question again.

 

What has that got to do with the 

actively has to do with the crimes for which the nonse Edwards was convicted?

 

 

 

 

 

Perhaps you should answer it in the way that you want it answered. You obviously don't like MY reply. So conjure up your own. 14 to 16 year olds really isn't that big of a deal. Unsavoury? Yes. But hardly the crime of the century watching teenagers.

At 14, I was already meeting girls in clubs. 15 and I was living with a woman ten years older.

 

You and @JonnyF have lived sheltered lives 😊

3 minutes ago, NowNow said:

 

 

Perhaps you should answer it in the way that you want it answered. You obviously don't like MY reply. So conjure up your own. 14 to 16 year olds really isn't that big of a deal. Unsavoury? Yes. But hardly the crime of the century watching teenagers.

At 14, I was already meeting girls in clubs. 15 and I was living with a woman ten years older.

 

You and @JonnyF have lived sheltered lives 😊

And there’s your excusing and obfuscation.

 

Edwards isn’t a 14 year old, he’s a middle aged adult.

 

“Unsavory”, no, not unsavory illegal.

 

 

 

 

Sentenced for harming pixels. Pixels get harmed when human eyes look at them.

Just now, JackGats said:

Sentenced for harming pixels. Pixels get harmed when human eyes look at them.

The causal link between consumption of child pornography and child sexual abuse has already been established and is recognized in the law.

 

 

3 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The causal link between consumption of child pornography and child sexual abuse has already been established and is recognized in the law.

 

 

 

That's poor, even for you 😊

 

14 to 16 year olds are already having sex. What evidence do you have of child abuse?

I'm not saying there isn't child abuse, but already we are a far cry from the malicious accusations with regard to 7 to 9 year olds.

The difference is that I didn't jump onto the hysterical bandwagon nor exhibit any bias.

Unlike @JonnyF with his obsession with right and left and yourself, just histrionics with little desire for actual facts.

14 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The causal link between consumption of child pornography and child sexual abuse has already been established and is recognized in the law.

 

 

Oh yeah, I'm sure the "children" got abused (whatever that means) especially the 15-year old rugby player who filmed himself rogering the local hoodrat.

16 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

And there’s your excusing and obfuscation.

 

Edwards isn’t a 14 year old, he’s a middle aged adult.

 

“Unsavory”, no, not unsavory illegal.

 

 

 

 

 

If you will insist on using 'big words', perhaps you should 'brush up' on their actual meanings.

 

 

Obfuscation: The action of making something obscure, unclear, or unintelligible.

 

Demonstrate that in the post that you quoted.

21 minutes ago, NowNow said:

 

If you will insist on using 'big words', perhaps you should 'brush up' on their actual meanings.

 

 

Obfuscation: The action of making something obscure, unclear, or unintelligible.

 

Demonstrate that in the post that you quoted.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/obfuscate

Introducing arguments that obfuscate the main issue  (most[?] 14 to 16 years are sexually active) into  a discussion's on the conviction of middle aged nonce.

 

Which is precisely why I asked you what your alleged sexual activity of 14 to 16 year olds has to do with the conviction of the middle aged nonce Edwards.

 

 

 

 

 

11 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

...

 

Which is precisely why I asked you what your alleged sexual activity of 14 to 16 year olds has to do with the conviction of the middle aged nonce Edwards.

 

 

 

 

 

You mean what does it have to do with another (middle-aged) man being put through hell just for looking at patterns of electrons on a screen.

15 minutes ago, Chomper Higgot said:

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/obfuscate

Introducing arguments that obfuscate the main issue  (most[?] 14 to 16 years are sexually active) into  a discussion's on the conviction of middle aged nonce.

 

Which is precisely why I asked you what your alleged sexual activity of 14 to 16 year olds has to do with the conviction of the middle aged nonce Edwards.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nice to see that you eventually changed your spelling of nonse to nonce. 😊 You should perhaps have left it at the nonsense it was.

 

A 'nonce' ,in your prison parlance, is a rapist or child molester. Do you have any evidence or accusations to make in that regard or is this just more evidence of your histrionics?

 

Introducing arguments that obfuscate the main issue? Sexually active 14 to 16 year olds IS the main issue. Some who chooses to watch videos of them might be a bit strange to you or me, but is hardly a hardened criminal.  A light sentence was appropriate, if not an outright dismissal. Pre-teens would be and should be treated differently.

 

5 minutes ago, JackGats said:

You mean what does it have to do with another (middle-aged) man being put through hell just for looking at patterns of electrons on a screen.

A middle aged man imprisoned for crimes involving child pornography, specifically:

 

“Huw Edwards was found to have: 41 IIOC comprise 7 Category A images (6x moving and 1x still), 12 Category B images (all moving) and 22 Category C images (1x moving and 21x still).  The estimated ages for the children present in the Category A images is generally around 13 to 15 with two of the moving images showing a child aged around 7 to 9.  The estimated ages for the children present in the Category B images is generally around 12 to 14, and for the Category C images generally around 12 to 15.”

 

https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/ex-broadcaster-sentenced-possessing-indecent-images-children

2 minutes ago, NowNow said:

 

Nice to see that you eventually changed your spelling of nonse to nonce. 😊 You should perhaps have left it at the nonsense it was.

 

A 'nonce' ,in your prison parlance, is a rapist or child molester. Do you have any evidence or accusations to make in that regard or is this just more evidence of your histrionics?

 

Introducing arguments that obfuscate the main issue? Sexually active 14 to 16 year olds IS the main issue. Some who chooses to watch videos of them might be a bit strange to you or me, but is hardly a hardened criminal.  A light sentence was appropriate, if not an outright dismissal. Pre-teens would be and should be treated differently.

 

It’s not the end of society I associate with and certainly not one I defend.

 

But I will accept making a spelling error, something that pales into insignificance compared to excusing and obfuscating the crimes of a convicted nonce.

 

Refer to my post immediately above for the age range of children on the pornography for which Edwards was convicted.

 

 

Edited September 25, 20241 yr by Chomper Higgot

1 hour ago, Chomper Higgot said:

The causal link between consumption of child pornography and child sexual abuse has already been established and is recognized in the law.

 

 

There is no such link of course.