Ammonite, another fact denier, understandably so and perfectly in line with the title of the discussion.

The topic title, of itself, is not insulting, because the matters mentioned have all been substantiated ones of public knowledge occurring within or near to government, at times when all governments happened to have been Labor governments. This general topic has been given a new lease of life due to the one CURRENT matter mentioned in the opening sentence of the opening post, that of the formally unidentified SA MP that has just resigned who is by inference linked by the opening post and/or topic title to child porn.

I consider it most regrettable that no link was posted in the opening post to any online news item relating to this current matter of the resignation of the SA MP, nor any explanation as to why it is reasonable to infer a connection of that resignation with child porn allegations. Heaven knows, there is no shortage of such items. The connection is made by the words attributed to the SA Premier, that "The reasons for [Bernard Finnegan's] resignation cannot be published for legal reasons", words contained within the second link posted in my previous post. One doesn't have to be Einstein to work it out, but one does have to READ THE LINKS.

http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/ipad/voters-desert-ranns-labor/story-fn6bqphm-1226041831973

Belly asks (on Friday, 22 April 2011 at 1:27:56 PM) "why such a law [one banning publication of the accused's name] only in SA?". OUG gives a clue in saying "party loyalists is the name of the game [...] we got the dirt on you..we have your vote". In these days of the ubiquitous computer and the internet, it is not only possible to 'get the dirt' on someone, but to PUT the 'dirt' upon them via their computer, 'dirt' in which they may not knowingly or willingly have played. With name suppressed, such accused could perhaps be coerced into a certain course of action before the matter comes to be dealt with in court. That being achieved, the allegations are then made to 'go away', the formerly accused continues in public life, people forget. pwned! - in SA. Where it all began?

Really FG? Shadow Minister gave no links to read just biased opinion.

I guess the title "Child porn, paedophilia, gay bars, corruption, and Blacks" is inoffensive?

or

maybe:

"Child porn, paedophilia, gay bars, corruption, and the male gender"?

Of course: "Child porn, paedophilia, gay bars, corruption, and the Liberal Party" is perfectly acceptable.

Not personal enough?

Try: "Child porn, paedophilia, gay bars, corruption, and Tony Abbott".

Would the last two titles been approved by the moderator? Inquiring minds want to know.

Flaming still going on - called a "fact denier" by Individual merely for questioning the title of this rather spurious topic.

Ammonite I believe you are new here.
I refuse to be sorry for defending my party.
A good and balanced poster Forrest seems to say I am wrong too.
Do this for me,click the little man under shadow ministers post, look then at his posts/thread titles.
Forget individual and two others, one has not yet posted here, they are not capable of debate.
Users, myself included left, ,in my case twice because of Shadow Ministers confrontational and flaming history, he is protected from affects of his slanted bigoted statements.
I am what I Hope I appear to be a realist who understands my party's faults.
But consider this,media is unwilling to highlight conservatives actions.
In the last 12 years premature retirements have never been investigated.
Now uncharitable Forrest, can you confirm this law is a labor invention?
And I an active member am on record remember saying the current leader is rubbish in that state and the party.like QLD is better served by its impending defeat next election.
My party is not to be blamed for its criminals and filth, those within the party who cover up for them are as bad as them, but is it an ALP or human nature problem.
Take a look at SM post history.

Belly

I have been watching long enough to know that SM constantly disses the Labor Party - whether they need it or not.

If people just ignored his topics (yeah, I know I'm posting here - but my issue was the title) he'd soon run out of puff.

Can't quite get my mind around FG - clearly intelligent, has a tendency to 'blind by science' rather than state clearly what he truly means and I have to wonder why he is defending the indefensible - we all know how poorly both major political parties have performed over the past 14 years or more.

Very little ball playing here - this thread being a perfect example.

As for all the flame wars all that results in is furthering deeply entrenched views.

Nothing to see here folks, move along.

As for all the flame wars all that results in is furthering deeply entrenched views.
Ammonite,
Sensible suggestion, cheers.