(12-19-2025, 06:30 AM)FlyersFan Wrote: The BBC wasn't just 'wrong'.
It purposely and with agenda tried to harm a person.
And it tried to make it so that person couldn't get a job.
And it tried to influence elections against that person.
All with lies they purposely did.
That's not just 'being wrong'.

If it were you they went after ... you they lied about ... 
you they tried to frame for something you didn't do .... you
that they tried to stop from getting a job you wanted ... you'd 
want them held accountable, right?   You'd want them to 
admit they purposely did it and make them stop so they don't 
ever do it again.   Right?

The BBC was lying and socially 
engineering and manipulating the public at the expense of 
an innocent person.   Yes .. innocent.  Trump didn't do what
they tried to make it look like he did.

Trump sucks.   But the BBC was wrong.   
Two things can be right at the same time.   
Trumps lawsuit is over the top, but he does that all the time.
He exaggerates and goes big, and then settles for much less
having made a point.

Then im sure Trump will be able to prove defamation under actual U.S. law.

Because your argument assumes intent, coordination, and proven falsehood without actual evidence.

Being wrong, biased, or even unfair, is not the same as deliberately lying or framing somebody.

For that, you need clear proof of knowingly false statements made with malicious intent.

And many of the claims made were based on documented actions and statements from the man himself, even if they were reported somewhat inaccurately.

Lawsuits don't establish truth Flyers, courts, and actual evidence do that.

And if Trump pushes that far, disclosure will indeed rear its head.

It's just another distraction from the incoming Epstein files and pictures if we are honest. 

(12-19-2025, 06:43 AM)andy06shake Wrote: Because your argument assumes intent, coordination, and proven falsehood without actual evidence.

Because common sense says that's what happened.
Have you seen the side by side of what Trump said verses what the BBC falsely spliced together?
(I'd post it here but I don't know how)
That was no accident.
That took coordination.
That took intent.
People wouldn't just do it for no reason.
Obviously they had agenda.
That may not be enough for a court of law .... but for humans with common sense it is.


I"m finding the postings on DI by those who live in England to be perplexing.   Their hate for Trump is greater than their hate of being lied to and manipulated and socially engineered by their press.   They are okay with being treated like that as long as the purpose is to 'get Trump'.   Yes Trump sucks ... but the lack of concern about being purposely lied to and manipulated by the press is concerning and perplexing.  You all should be having a fit against the BBC for what they did to you.  And you aren't.

(12-19-2025, 06:51 AM)FlyersFan Wrote: Because common sense says that's what happened.
Have you seen the side by side of what Trump said verses what the BBC falsely spliced together?
(I'd post it here but I don't know how)
That was no accident.
That took coordination.
That took intent.
People wouldn't just do it for no reason.
Obviously they had agenda.
That may not be enough for a court of law .... but for humans with common sense it is.


I"m finding the postings on DI by those who live in England to be perplexing.   Their hate for Trump is greater than their hate of being lied to and manipulated and socially engineered by their press.   They are okay with being treated like that as long as the purpose is to 'get Trump'.   Yes Trump sucks ... but the lack of concern about being purposely lied to and manipulated by the press is concerning and perplexing.  You all should be having a fit against the BBC for what they did to you.  And you aren't.

Then it can't be from me as i don't live in England. 

And that's conspiracy-by-vibe, 101, not actual ""evidence"".

Common sense, coordination, and intent are ""assertions"" not proof.

And the media edits clips constantly for length and clarity.

Good luck proving in a court of law that implies actual deception.

Disliking Trump doesn't require accepting lies.

He opens his mouth, and those come out as you well know.

The real failure here is confusing political grievance with media literacy.

And being angry isn't the same as being right.

Again, good luck in an actual court of law, not that it will go that far once disclosure becomes a thing. 

(12-19-2025, 07:00 AM)andy06shake Wrote: Then it can't be from me as i don't live in England. 

And that's conspiracy-by-vibe, 101, not actual ""evidence"".

England, UK, Scotland, Ireland, Wales ... it all mushes together to me.  
Same part of the world being fed the same BBC lies.
And none there seem to care that  they are being lied to because
their hate for Trump is greater than their hate of being lied to.

I FIND IT ODD.

As for the 'evidence' ... I already said it's just COMMON SENSE
and it may not make it in a court of law but so what?   It's still 
obviously there ... the BBC lied and manipulated with intent and
agenda.   OBVIOUSLY.   What  they did was no 'error'.

(12-19-2025, 07:09 AM)FlyersFan Wrote: England, UK, Scotland, Ireland, Wales ... it all mushes together to me.  
Same part of the world being fed the same BBC lies.
And none there seem to care that  they are being lied to because
their hate for Trump is greater than their hate of being lied to.

I FIND IT ODD.

As for the 'evidence' ... I already said it's just COMMON SENSE
and it may not make it in a court of law but so what?   It's still 
obviously there ... the BBC lied and manipulated with intent and
agenda.   OBVIOUSLY.   What  they did was no 'error'.

You find Geography odd, that's nice. 

But once again, your argument rests on assumptions, not actual evidence.

"Common sense" is not a reliable test for truth.

Because it reflects prior beliefs.

And the BBC is not a single voice.

It's a collection of organisations with competing editors, oversight, and public corrections.

Intentional deception requires proof of coordination, motive, and outcome, not just mere inferences or dislike.

Disagreement with framing simply is not the same as lying.

And suspicion alone is not debunking.

Again, that's just a mere assertion.

Good luck in court with those. 

But you know yourself it will never go that far.

Trump's simply looking for another payout.

After all, that's what he does. 

(12-19-2025, 07:09 AM)FlyersFan Wrote: England, UK, Scotland, Ireland, Wales ... it all mushes together to me.  
Same part of the world being fed the same BBC lies.
And none there seem to care that  they are being lied to because
their hate for Trump is greater than their hate of being lied to.

I FIND IT ODD.

As for the 'evidence' ... I already said it's just COMMON SENSE
and it may not make it in a court of law but so what?   It's still 
obviously there ... the BBC lied and manipulated with intent and
agenda.   OBVIOUSLY.   What  they did was no 'error'.

Do you know what I find odd?  That here, on a conspiracy site, there are people who don't believe the BBC is a mouthpiece for the deep state.     

Sorry, I don't have any evidence to back that up.  It's just one guy's opinion.

(12-19-2025, 07:20 AM)Roma Wrote: Do you know what I find odd?  That here, on a conspiracy site, there are people who don't believe the BBC is a mouthpiece for the deep state.     

Sorry, I don't have any evidence to back that up.  It's just one guy's opinion.

I think the BBC are nothing more than extortion cowboys. 

Fiddlin' bairns of the first order. 

But it doesn't mean they are guilty of what Trump or his minions are claiming.

As to opinions, everyone is entitled to those, even Donald Trump.

Unfortunaly it doesn't make those facts.

(12-19-2025, 07:19 AM)andy06shake Wrote: You find Geography odd, that's nice. 

But once again, your argument rests on assumptions, not actual evidence.

I didn't say I found Geography odd.   
You know that.
I said I find that all your reactions are odd.
Reactions to being lied to and manipulated.
Your hate for Trump outweighs your hate of the press lying to you.
That's what I said that I find odd.   

And once again ... I said my statement is based on common sense
and that doesn't go far in a court of law but that doesn't matter.
Anyone with a lick of common sense can see that the BBC did what
they did with purpose and intent.   It wasnt' an 'error'.

Trumps lawsuit is outrageous and won't get far.  
But what the BBC purposely did was outrageous as well.
And you guys simply don't care about what they did to you.

(12-19-2025, 07:29 AM)andy06shake Wrote: But it doesn't mean they are guilty of what Trump or his minions are claiming.

I'm not a 'Trump minion'.
And I say the same thing as Trump.
It's obvious the BBC manipulated and lied with agenda.
Common sense.    It was no 'error'.
He may suck beyond all sucking ... but he's correct on this.
His $$$ lawsuit isn't.  But his statement about the BBC is.

Tell the BBC to call Minter Ellison, they helped me in a defamation case against me.

Its an international firm so this advice covers US, UK and here in Australia.