Difference between revisions of "Talk:Richard Scott"

From Wikispooks
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(The publicly available source substantiating the accusations is the Lobster magazine article "Maggie's guilty secret")
m (reply)
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 
:That surge of traffic [[User:Peter|Peter P]] was the result of my dozen or so ''Facebook'' postings of "Maggie's guilty secret" including three on different [[Jeremy Corbyn]] pages which were [https://www.facebook.com/groups/1493139050999337/ shared a phenomenal 76 times], [https://www.facebook.com/groups/JeremyCorbyn/1518420258463934/ shared 63 times] and [https://www.facebook.com/groups/865846546868809/921929974593799/ shared 59 times]. The publicly available source substantiating the accusations is the ''[[Lobster]]'' magazine article (http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/free/lobster66/lob66-maggies-secret.pdf "Maggie’s guilty secret") by John Hughes-Wilson. This [https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Richard_Scott#Maggie.27s_guilty_secret WS link to the ''Facebook'' postings] no longer works, however.--[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick Haseldine]] ([[User talk:Patrick Haseldine|talk]]) 16:34, 7 March 2016 (GMT)
 
:That surge of traffic [[User:Peter|Peter P]] was the result of my dozen or so ''Facebook'' postings of "Maggie's guilty secret" including three on different [[Jeremy Corbyn]] pages which were [https://www.facebook.com/groups/1493139050999337/ shared a phenomenal 76 times], [https://www.facebook.com/groups/JeremyCorbyn/1518420258463934/ shared 63 times] and [https://www.facebook.com/groups/865846546868809/921929974593799/ shared 59 times]. The publicly available source substantiating the accusations is the ''[[Lobster]]'' magazine article (http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/free/lobster66/lob66-maggies-secret.pdf "Maggie’s guilty secret") by John Hughes-Wilson. This [https://wikispooks.com/wiki/Richard_Scott#Maggie.27s_guilty_secret WS link to the ''Facebook'' postings] no longer works, however.--[[User:Patrick Haseldine|Patrick Haseldine]] ([[User talk:Patrick Haseldine|talk]]) 16:34, 7 March 2016 (GMT)
 +
 +
::Yes I figured it was Facebook referals from the Piwik stats. I keep my FB account permanently deactivated and only reactivate on odd occasions when I need to see something available nowhere else. I hate the damn system with a vengeance. No problem with using anything in Lobster as a reference either. It was just a general caution because, as we both know, this whole area of 'Maggie's guilty secrets' does remains ultra-sensitive to your former colleagues and those who pull their strings. That makes me ultra-sensitive too. --[[User:Peter|Peter P]] ([[User talk:Peter|talk]]) 17:35, 7 March 2016 (GMT)

Revision as of 17:35, 7 March 2016

Sensitivity

The Arms-to-Iraq affair and Scott's report on it remain an ultra-sensitive issue to the British Deep state. This and related pages have seen a surge of traffic over the past few days, indicating likely monitoring by powerful interests. Please make sure that any accusations against living, named people and others who held positions of authority during the Thatcher years, can be substantiated from publicly available sources. Some speculative deduction from such evidence is also OK so long as it is reasonable and clearly reads as such. --Peter P (talk) 08:03, 5 March 2016 (GMT)

That surge of traffic Peter P was the result of my dozen or so Facebook postings of "Maggie's guilty secret" including three on different Jeremy Corbyn pages which were shared a phenomenal 76 times, shared 63 times and shared 59 times. The publicly available source substantiating the accusations is the Lobster magazine article (http://www.lobster-magazine.co.uk/free/lobster66/lob66-maggies-secret.pdf "Maggie’s guilty secret") by John Hughes-Wilson. This WS link to the Facebook postings no longer works, however.--Patrick Haseldine (talk) 16:34, 7 March 2016 (GMT)
Yes I figured it was Facebook referals from the Piwik stats. I keep my FB account permanently deactivated and only reactivate on odd occasions when I need to see something available nowhere else. I hate the damn system with a vengeance. No problem with using anything in Lobster as a reference either. It was just a general caution because, as we both know, this whole area of 'Maggie's guilty secrets' does remains ultra-sensitive to your former colleagues and those who pull their strings. That makes me ultra-sensitive too. --Peter P (talk) 17:35, 7 March 2016 (GMT)