Cyprus-Forum.com

[erolz66]

The rest of view have betrayed humanity, and the greater good and sided with true evil. He fought for you and you didn’t even know it because the MSM programmed your feeble brains into mindless drones.

Yet you are the one here who repeatedly over weeks tried to claim a paedophile convicted of penetrating children had not in fact been convicted all but was just subject to malicious gossip and rumour. You have already proven your inability to see , accept or understand plain factual reality when that does not suit what you want to be true and proven and shown and your willingness to side with and try to defend the truest of evils. This is your legacy here.

[Paphitis]

Mate you support Trump because just as the rest of his supporters you are brain dead. Stop sitting on your brains just concentrate on being a multi millionaire heavily in debt flying ....aircraft. B6 the way do you still think the Idiot will have four more years in the WH ?

The brain dead are those who ignore all his accomplishments of Trump which are many, and take the bait hook line and sinker of what is an extremely false and unfair narrative to the detriment of justice, worker rights, the economy and the poor little fella on the street who got his first break in many years when Trump won office and made sweeping reforms which gave this little fella a bone with a bit of flesh for him to insatiate himself.

You are a lost and mindless drone.

At least the others are not so eager than you and ask questions, and what I say to them isn’t wasted.

[erolz66]

The brain dead are those who ignore all his accomplishments of Trump which are many, and take the bait hook line and sinker of what is an extremely false and unfair narrative to the detriment of justice, worker rights, the economy and the poor little fella on the street who got his first break in many years when Trump won office and made sweeping reforms which gave this little fella a bone with a bit of flesh for him to insatiate himself.

This is no more true than your claims that a convicted child sex abuser was in fact a respected member of the community who had been subjected to malicious gossip. None of it is true and you just do not care. You never have. You have already proven and shown there is no lie you will not believe and tell here, no evil act you will not try and dismiss and excuse if such is what suits your agenda. The definition of mindlessness is someone unable to differentiate truth from fiction and no one displays a tendency to do this more than you do Paphitis. Just more reality that you will simply ignore.

[Paphitis]

The brain dead are those who ignore all his accomplishments of Trump which are many, and take the bait hook line and sinker of what is an extremely false and unfair narrative to the detriment of justice, worker rights, the economy and the poor little fella on the street who got his first break in many years when Trump won office and made sweeping reforms which gave this little fella a bone with a bit of flesh for him to insatiate himself.

This is no more true than your claims that a convicted child sex abuser was in fact a respected member of the community who had been subjected to malicious gossip. None of it is true and you just do not care. You never have. You have already proven and shown there is no lie you will not believe and tell here, no evil act you will not try and dismiss and excuse if such is what suits your agenda. The definition of mindlessness is someone unable to differentiate truth from fiction and no one displays a tendency to do this more than you do Paphitis. Just more reality that you will simply ignore.

Who? And when?

You mean Cardinal Pell?

Sorry but I never said such a thing at all. I never defended or supported any convicted paedophile.

Cardinal Pell was the only person I defended when he was convicted. Why? Because I knew he was innocent and literally crucified on malicious lies to bring down the Catholic Church. He was convicted on hearsay.

And now, he has been acquired by the Federal Court because the Victorian Courts were corrupt and convicted him because the public wanted him convicted. In other words, it was one of the greatest mistrials in judicial history.

Yeh I will defend an innocent man. The Cardinal was and is innocent,

As for other child molesterers, I do not defend those whether they were respected or not, the question is one of innocence not that they were respected.

Pell was innocent. The guy could molest anyone if he tried.

Not only was the Cardinal exonerated from the great injustice, but he is back at the Vatican wearing his cloak as a Cardinal alongside the Pope.

[erolz66]

Cardinal Pell was the only person I defended when he was convicted. Why? Because I knew he was innocent and literally crucified on malicious lies to bring down the Catholic Church. He was convicted on hearsay.

Just more lies. I can and if forced will show where you repeatedly claimed that multiple teachers at elite Australian fee paying schools, all already convicted in courts of law for child sex offenses, had not in fact been convicted, were upstanding members of the community subject to malicious gossip. You did this over and over and over again despite being provided with all the evidence of what these people had done and the convictions they eventually received for such crimes. All because you did not want to accept a reality that did not suit you. This is what you do. It is what Trump does. Reality not what you want it to be - just lie anyway and say that it is.

[Paphitis]

Cardinal Pell was the only person I defended when he was convicted. Why? Because I knew he was innocent and literally crucified on malicious lies to bring down the Catholic Church. He was convicted on hearsay.

Just more lies. I can and if forced will show where you repeatedly claimed that multiple teachers at elite Australian fee paying schools, all already convicted in courts of law for child sex offenses, had not in fact been convicted, were upstanding members of the community subject to malicious gossip. You did this over and over and over again despite being provided with all the evidence of what these people had done and the convictions they eventually received for such crimes. All because you did not want to accept a reality that did not suit you. This is what you do. It is what Trump does. Reality not what you want it to be - just lie anyway and say that it is.

No I didn’t!

I only defended what I knew to be fact - that Cardinal Pell was innocent and I was proven correct.

I would never defend any teacher or preacher who is in fact guilty and was convicted with evidence and beyond any doubt.

I defended the reputation of the schools and institutions that my very children attend and are the same institutions that you were trying to accuse and defame as I believe them to be great institutions and entrust them with the custody of my children during school hours for the purposes of providing them with the best education possible.

[erolz66]

Cardinal Pell was the only person I defended when he was convicted. Why? Because I knew he was innocent and literally crucified on malicious lies to bring down the Catholic Church. He was convicted on hearsay.

Just more lies. I can and if forced will show where you repeatedly claimed that multiple teachers at elite Australian fee paying schools, all already convicted in courts of law for child sex offenses, had not in fact been convicted, were upstanding members of the community subject to malicious gossip. You did this over and over and over again despite being provided with all the evidence of what these people had done and the convictions they eventually received for such crimes. All because you did not want to accept a reality that did not suit you. This is what you do. It is what Trump does. Reality not what you want it to be - just lie anyway and say that it is.

No I didn’t!

I only defended what I knew to be fact - that Cardinal Pell was innocent and I was proven correct.

I would never defend any teacher or preacher who is in fact guilty and was convicted with evidence and beyond any doubt.

I defended the reputation of the schools and institutions that my very children attend and are the same institutions that you were trying to accuse and defame as I believe them to be great institutions and entrust them with the custody of my children during school hours for the purposes of providing them with the best education possible.

Just like Trump you are an inveterate liar. Look at this post cyprus47149-110.html#p889767

I name a specific individual - John Hamilton Buckley a former Geelong teacher and list the crimes he was CONVICTED for and you come back immediately without doing any research at all with an entirely untrue defence of this person claiming things like

"These people were never charged or found guilty or convicted."

LIE number one in defence of a convicted paedophile. This person and the others I cited were tried and convicted in Australian courts of law and I had already repeatedly given the evidence of these convictions.

"I'm really sorry but I do not believe any child was penetrated at Geelong."

Denial of reality in defence of a convicted paedophile. A court of law convicted this sick person for such penetration. This person was one of FIVE former Geelong staff convicted of child sex offense spanning a period of 30 years and ALL of them were found guilty in courts of law.

"there were only allegations of child abuse and findings that the school mishandled those allegations."

LIE number two in defence of convicted paedophiles. All five former staff members were convicted in courts of law. Yet you just lie and deny this factual reality because it did not suit you.

There is a big difference between a Royal Commission and the High Court of Australia.

The royal commission was set up BECAUSE so many former teachers at elite Australian public schools had already been CONVICTED of such crimes. You twist this reality in to your LIES all in defence of a convicted paedophiles for no other reason that you want reality to be different from how it is.

[Paphitis]

Cardinal Pell was the only person I defended when he was convicted. Why? Because I knew he was innocent and literally crucified on malicious lies to bring down the Catholic Church. He was convicted on hearsay.

Just more lies. I can and if forced will show where you repeatedly claimed that multiple teachers at elite Australian fee paying schools, all already convicted in courts of law for child sex offenses, had not in fact been convicted, were upstanding members of the community subject to malicious gossip. You did this over and over and over again despite being provided with all the evidence of what these people had done and the convictions they eventually received for such crimes. All because you did not want to accept a reality that did not suit you. This is what you do. It is what Trump does. Reality not what you want it to be - just lie anyway and say that it is.

No I didn’t!

I only defended what I knew to be fact - that Cardinal Pell was innocent and I was proven correct.

I would never defend any teacher or preacher who is in fact guilty and was convicted with evidence and beyond any doubt.

I defended the reputation of the schools and institutions that my very children attend and are the same institutions that you were trying to accuse and defame as I believe them to be great institutions and entrust them with the custody of my children during school hours for the purposes of providing them with the best education possible.

Just like Trump you are an inveterate liar. Look at this post cyprus47149-110.html#p889767

I name a specific individual - John Hamilton Buckley a former Geelong teacher and list the crimes he was CONVICTED for and you come back immediately without doing any research at all with an entirely untrue defence of this person claiming things like

"These people were never charged or found guilty or convicted."

LIE number one in defence of a convicted paedophile. This person and the others I cited were tried and convicted in Australian courts of law and I had already repeatedly given the evidence of these convictions.

"I'm really sorry but I do not believe any child was penetrated at Geelong."

Denial of reality in defence of a convicted paedophile. A court of law convicted this sick person for such penetration. This person was one of FIVE former Geelong staff convicted of child sex offense spanning a period of 30 years and ALL of them were found guilty in courts of law.

"there were only allegations of child abuse and findings that the school mishandled those allegations."

LIE number two in defence of convicted paedophiles. All five former staff members were convicted in courts of law. Yet you just lie and deny this factual reality because it did not suit you.

There is a big difference between a Royal Commission and the High Court of Australia.

The royal commission was set up BECAUSE so many former teachers at elite Australian public schools had already been CONVICTED of such crimes. You twist this reality in to your LIES all in defence of a convicted paedophiles for no other reason that you want reality to be different from how it is.

Perhaps they weren’t tried or convicted. Accusations get flung around all the time.

Sorry but I am not at all familiar with any of these cases you claim to be pedophiles.

If they are, I have no problem at all with any conviction.

I am more concerned with you throwing slander against institutions like Geelong Grammar.

Recently, a Greek Priest in Australia was accused of sexual harassment as well. Well the truth of the matter is, some parents were pissed off with him and made allegations. It made the media abd the poor bugger had to go in hiding.

But he has also been acquired and I could never imagine that individual to be a predator. He is back at work now.

[erolz66]

Sorry but I am not at all familiar with any of these cases you claim to be pedophiles.

Just like Trump - " I do not know this person and have never met them" and yet there are multiple photos of them together. You argued about these SPECIFIC NAMED INDIVDUALS with me for pages and pages and pages of posts and it is all there in black and white and NOW you claim "Sorry but I am not at all familiar with any of these cases you claim to be pedophiles."

Think I might start Trumping you and referring to you not as Paphitis but as Paphetic.

[Paphitis]

Sorry but I am not at all familiar with any of these cases you claim to be pedophiles.

Just like Trump - " I do not know this person and have never met them" and yet there are multiple photos of them together. You argued about these SPECIFIC NAMED INDIVDUALS with me for pages and pages and pages of posts and it is all there in black and white and NOW you claim "Sorry but I am not at all familiar with any of these cases you claim to be pedophiles."

Think I might start Trumping you and referring to you not as Paphitis but as Paphetic.

Who are you talking about now. The photos of Trump and Epstein.

I have never defended Epstein at all, neither has Trump. Having a photo taken with a rich socialite means nothing. You can not attribute any of the filth to Trump because Trump never went to his island and never had sex with under age women or used his money to buy them.

He however, did at one stage evict Epstein from one of his premises for sexually assaulting or doing something indecent to one of Trumps female workers on that property.

Trump also instructed his AG to conduct a trial of the man, I don’t believe Trump was a fan of Epstein at all. Probably because Trump knew or was suspicious of the other filth that has not been discovered yet that could possibly land a former POTUS in hot water.

Now Trump is trying to also drag in a notable Royal from the UK to uncover the filth.

Trump is an authentic individual abd not afraid of any of you. That’s exactly why you are afraid of him.

Once again, I fully support the extradition of Prince Andrew to the US to participate in the investigation. Did Clinton or Prince Andrew do anything. I can’t answer that because I don’t know, all I know is the testimonies of the victims which need to be investigated. If they are innocent, then I will defend their honour. If they are not, they deserve to be dealt with according to the law.