Broadcasterman

Mr Victim is basically a shit minor league politician that didn’t even get any votes to get into office on a meaningless and hated local authority. But he controls a local “anonymous” forum where a load of chimps get to throw shit at a wall against everyone else in Manx politics. So he thinks he has some power. Which is why all attempts to bring his own authority to account on this forum end in suspensions and bans as the truth can’t come out. Sometimes you end up actually rising to your own level of mediocrity. Controlling a closed forum which blows smoke up your ass where you can’t even allow any new members to join as they might well say something that you don’t like.

As opposed to the many thousands of posts that you yourself have removed from your own profile covering many many years of insane rambling on this forum (btw it looks like 17 years worth of posts you have physically erased from your profile) you embittered delusional psychotic witch.

License revoked to the IOM Gov double or triple dipper club.

If …. If he hadn’t of got on the boat we’d all have been better off.

You’re probably right. But it has vague echos of the IOMs Covid lockdown strategy to it though. The pictures it took weren’t apparently near the TT course according to his advocate but he got arrested, a night in the cells, a three grand fine (or three months in prison if he didn’t pay instantly) and for good measure they ignored his pleas and smashed the whole thing up and cut up the memory card. They might as well also have made him walk the plank off the pier and swim back to Liverpool with a breeze block on his head. Welcome to the IOM do come back next year and tell all your friends how great it is!

It wasn’t confiscated it was totally destroyed https://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/courts/man-who-flew-drone-near-the-tt-course-spent-a-night-in-the-cells-619479 “Mr Swain pointed out that the regulations regarding drones are published on the Isle of Man Government’s website” “The advocate said that not many people who went on holiday would look at the laws of the land to which they were visiting” “Mr Taylor went on to ask for credit to be given for his client’s guilty plea and co-operation with the police, and asked that, if the drone was going to be forfeited, if Shrimpton could have the memory card and battery returned to him, as the card contained pictures of other places he had visited” “However, magistrates made the order for forfeiture and destruction of the drone, memory card and battery”

What you think it’s bizarre that someone making a public statement on Facebook might be making a factually true statement especially when it might be picked up by the media? On that basis I dread to think what sort of strange world you must live in. The guy is hardly David Icke. He’s a bloke who had an argument with a grotty local authority over some bins. He is not claiming to have been abducted by aliens.

All of them including the Uber moocher Bill Henderson who spouts a load on nonsense in that story.

Thanks Bill.

Best job in the IOM https://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/legislative-council-sits-just-21-times-since-general-election-618662

I didn’t say that it does. But I said that someone would be unlikely to make it up as they likely know that people from the newspapers are looking at it so will likely be challenged on it at some stage.

I think you need to read what I said above. I was simply providing a link to the story as someone had asked for it. I agree with you the headline is totally mis leading which is why I said from outset that this had nothing to do with weekly bin collections and provided the Facebook posts.

How does speculation work in your world? This was an actual post by an actual person on Facebook categorically stating that something had happened. It you don’t believe him that is absolutely fine. He made the post and it’s reproduced below as I am certainly not speculating he made the claims on Facebook and they are as below. That is not speculation at all.

You seem to be oddly truculent on this point. The man has said it himself on Facebook via his own Facebook account. Why would anyone have any reason to disbelieve his public statement especially knowing that the press are already involved and so you would assume that he’s being careful about anything he posts as it will be read by the press.

The man posted so on Facebook under his own name. I have no reason to doubt him but added allegedly as this forum seems to get a bit jittery about reproducing claims made elsewhere. The newspapers seem to have a direct line into the guy so if he’s made that statement publicly on Facebook knowing that the papers will probably read it then I’d be inclined to believe him.

You appear to be like those people who ask questions on Facebook rather than just spend 2 seconds Googling stuff “Does anyone know the phone number for B&Q” popped up in my feed from one of those sites yesterday. And “is the post office in Onchan still open?” was another. There isn’t really any need to ask those sort of questions on social media. So the default thing that people tend to assume when people read your sort of post is that the poster is just out to cause trouble for other people by alerting the public to some sort of transgression.

He seems to have done his research otherwise they would not have allegedly back dated bye laws at a secret meeting to make the siting of the bins that shouldn’t have been there now legal. Why try and reach a sensible resolution with a ratepayer when you can just fuck them over if your lack of action gets confrontational.

His argument seems to be that the bins were illegally placed on public land and had no right to be there so his environment was being ruined by having to pass stinking overflowing bins every day that shouldn’t legally have been there. Hence his later claim that when he returned the bin all they then did was then set up an emergency private meeting of the relevant DBC committee to ratify and back date the ratification that the bins were legally allowed to be sited on that piece public land after all. It seems to have been ongoing for a long time and rather than actually move the bins onto the private property of H&B they’ve now just changed the bye laws to say that the bins that shouldn’t of been on their public land can now be left there.

The new build cost with labour & materials at current levels must be at least £150K a unit plus all the groundwork needed to clear etc. It’s very hard to believe that if they’re structurally sound they can’t refurb them for less than £150K each.

It’s here I believe there might be a follow up story by the weekend https://www.iomtoday.co.im/news/resident-dumps-bin-at-town-hall-in-protest-against-fortnightly-collections-618496

I don’t think it needs to be tested it’s a matter of law since last year I think. So trying to sneakily shop someone on Twitter seems a bit low to be honest. You could have just googled it in half the time it took to take a picture and then post a tweet to advertise the situation.

Likely they are following it all now yes. So it will be interesting to see where it goes next as the person who posted that, and it was Douglas’ own Osama Bin Loader, likely knows that whatever he might say will be reported so presumably he can back it up.

Oh they’re correct alright. Reporting a man to the police for ‘stealing’ a bin that was standing in their reception. No wonder the DBC aren’t commenting on this publicly. They look like a bunch of absolute morons.

This is interesting. I’m just passing it on in good faith as it was sent to me. So the council apparently reported their bin missing to the police, despite the fact that it was stood in their own reception. Presumably to create issues for the depositor. Then had a secret meeting to ratify that the illegally placed bin was actually placed legally that the man who delivered the bin to reception was banned from. You couldn’t make it up. These seem to be the sort of people that the residents of Douglas are dealing with.

I would have thought it was obvious. That someone in your department or in IOM Gov IT could see a record of the link to the contact for, even if you ultimately connect to a confidential line.