rumpelstiltskin wrote: let's start with my opinion on page 15, "That there was more to his (about this tragic woman) and it would all come out in the wash." Which prompted …the rather bizarre observation of I'm sure you do, but what, if you're implying you have a good idea? I have already seen nutty conspiracy theories that the nurse was assassinated and it's all a cover-up, but then nowadays it is de rigueur for the lunatics to come out of the asylum for a while whenever there's a good conspiracy to be theorised.
Liar, It was your WHOLE original post “which prompted” my comment on what you had posted. You are trying to squirm out by suggesting I was referring to that sentence in isolation, when you bloody well know it wasn’t. That last bit was on the end of:
Quote: “Their apparent failure to follow long established protocols regarding access and Media intrusion to members of the Royal Family, could now be conveniently forgotten in the witch hunt fanned by a post Leveson Press, all eager to display their "lessons have been learned credentials"
My second one; what reasonably normal person kills themselves over a work incident,
Now stop being disingenuous and selectively quoting your own drivel. Those were and are YOUR WORDS, in the same post. It was your post, READ AS A WHOLE, that prompted my observation.
In the whole post you said:
You wrote:My first thoughts on hearing about this incident was "what a stroke of luck for the Hospital Authorities!"
As well as being a bizarre first thought, it’s obvious what you’re implying. You are using a basic literary device which screams to the reader, “NO, THIS WAS NO STROKE OF LUCK FOR THE HOSPITAL, HOW NAÏVE YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE TO BELIEVE THAT”
You wrote: My second one; what reasonably normal person kills themselves over a work incident"
Clearly meaning you don’t believe, however she died, that she killed herself over a work incident. Taken together, you think it was a very convenient death for the hospital (because, you said, their failures “could now be conveniently forgotten in the witch hunt ..”).
Coupled with your first thought, it is crystal clear what you are suggesting, and it is in that context that your closing remark is explained. The above is what you actually SAID..
rumpelstiltskin wrote: FA then returns to his task of Straw Man building with In the face of the bleedin' obvious, I find completely speculative suggestions that she may have been killed to be the worst sort of baseless conspiracy speculation of which so many seem to be so fond'
Whilst conveniently ignoring the fact that it is only him and Cronius, who are banging on ad naueum about any kind of conspiracy! 'Kin unbelievable!
Well, let’s pause for a moment, so you can tell me what you actually MEANT, if not the above.
My breath is bated.