Independent Leyton Orient Forum

spen666 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:34 pm

Disoriented wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:32 pm

spen666 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:28 pm

He has been charged with failing to provide the PIN/Access codes to his electronic devices.

You may not want to accept it, but it has happened.


As for looking up to this person, why is correctly stating the offence someone is charged with and point thing out he has not yet been convicted mean I look up to someone?

It's called stating facts. I have not said anything about my opinion of this person ever

Great. Keep it to yourself then. Some things are better left unsaid.

Got a problem with people telling the truth? Does it get in the way of your spin and deception?

You said you had not offered your opinion of this person ‘ever’. Should we all await this stating of your opinion with baited breath? Since when is your ‘opinion’ the truth?

Thank gawd this thread about anti-Muslin terrorism didn't get deflected, eh.

Disoriented wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:39 pm

spen666 wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:34 pm

Disoriented wrote: ↑Fri Feb 21, 2020 8:32 pm

Great. Keep it to yourself then. Some things are better left unsaid.

Got a problem with people telling the truth? Does it get in the way of your spin and deception?

You said you had not offered your opinion of this person ‘ever’. Should we all await this stating of your opinion with baited breath? Since when is your ‘opinion’ the truth?

Pray tell where I have offered my opinion about this person.

Nice attempt to divert from the fact the offence they are charged with is failing to provide the police with the PIN/Lock Code for his electronic devices

He’s charged with a TERRORIST OFFENCE.

But you keep on sticking up for the racist, hate filled, alleged terrorist.

RedO wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2020 12:03 am He’s charged with a TERRORIST OFFENCE.

But you keep on sticking up for the racist, hate filled, alleged terrorist.

I've noticed that too. Wondering if he has a hate filled agenda or not.

Spen has showed himself up a lot recently. Despite his pathetic attempts at shielding his actual views, it’s not hard to see what he really is.

Wonder what he's got on there he doesn't want the OB to find

Whatever it is its got to be worth the 2 years he could get. Well either that or he fancies himself some of the Tommy Robinson style sweet sweet martyrdom

Sad news about that business in Germany, especially given a number of the victims were refugees that had already fled hatred

He’s probably got some dodgy stuff on his phone. These far-right types are usually into noncing or bumming too, the plod will probably find some teenage kids in there as well.

Stowaway wrote: ↑Sat Feb 22, 2020 8:52 am He’s probably got some dodgy stuff on his phone. These far-right types are usually into noncing or bumming too, the plod will probably find some teenage kids in there as well.

Nowt wrong with a bit of bumming

I thought your phone is your property and one of the issues the plod has was accessing them. Wasn’t there a case where they wanted access to an iPhone and had to take Apple to court as they refused to help them?

So Spen if a copper asks you to unlock your phone you have to it? So why then don't the old bill just put someone’s face up to the phone to unlock it with a thumb print? If you refuse you get charged with an terrorist offence? Am I reading that correctly?