Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old January 20th, 2009 #21
WIGANMIKE
Senior Member
 
WIGANMIKE's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 1,013
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Rolf Of Harris View Post
Without question Hadley is one of several.



In that case, fucking scum, Tony is a great nationalist. And a mate.
__________________
Net war 4 kids, action 4 men

http://britishfreedomfighters.freeforums.org/
 
Old January 24th, 2009 #22
Sir Rolf Of Harris
Senior Member
 
Sir Rolf Of Harris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sheffield England
Posts: 2,487
Default

Is Sean still protecting his Paedophile family members? Hes gone very quiet
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #23
Sir Rolf Of Harris
Senior Member
 
Sir Rolf Of Harris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sheffield England
Posts: 2,487
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Rolf Of Harris View Post
Is Sean still protecting his Paedophile family members? Hes gone very quiet
Nows a good time to readdress the issue methinks?
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #24
Chris E
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 180
Default

Sean Hadley does not have to answer for the actions of his relatives. If one of your relatives ends up in jail, it does not mean you personally are to blame. Stupid fucks.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #25
Leeds SC
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 100
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris E View Post
Sean Hadley does not have to answer for the actions of his relatives. If one of your relatives ends up in jail, it does not mean you personally are to blame. Stupid fucks.
These sicko's use child abuse to score points...
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #26
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris E View Post
Sean Hadley does not have to answer for the actions of his relatives. If one of your relatives ends up in jail, it does not mean you personally are to blame. Stupid fucks.
No, it doesn't. However, if I had a relative who was a nonce - convicted nonce - I not only would not defend him, I'd be at the front of the queue giving him grief.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Leeds SC View Post
These sicko's use child abuse to score points...
And you sickos out a nationalists child on the nwn blog.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #27
Chris E
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by odinslag88
No, it doesn't. However, if I had a relative who was a nonce - convicted nonce - I not only would not defend him, I'd be at the front of the queue giving him grief.
Well it all depends what you thought of the relatives beforehand/how close your family is, as well as a whole other list of personal factors. Attacking Hadley for this is really scraping the bottom of the barrel, even for a Gri££inite.

If we want to discuss child abuse, then let's talk about Mark Collett, who you still defend despite conclusive proof he's a pedo.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #28
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris E View Post

If we want to discuss child abuse, then let's talk about Mark Collett, who you still defend despite conclusive proof he's a pedo.
Yes, let's. You still haven't explained how him being in a hotel room, fully clothed, with three other people, and then leaving the room, still fully-clothed, proves conclusively that he had sex with a girl he knew to be underage.

Neither have you explained why none of you have ever discussed this with him face to face.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #29
Chris E
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by odinslag88
Yes, let's. You still haven't explained how him being in a hotel room, fully clothed, with three other people, and then leaving the room, still fully-clothed, proves conclusively that he had sex with a girl he knew to be underage.

Neither have you explained why none of you have ever discussed this with him face to face.
Context. Why else would the girl be in his hotel room unless he had sex with her?

As for why I haven't discussed this with him, I only do online activism, not street activism.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #30
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris E View Post
Context. Why else would the girl be in his hotel room unless he had sex with her?

As for why I haven't discussed this with him, I only do online activism, not street activism.
As I said, I've been alone in a chalet with a 14 y/o boy in just his trunks. He was not my son, stepson or any sort of relative.

So according to your logic, I must have had sex with him? Fucking retard.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #31
Chris E
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by odinslag88
As I said, I've been alone in a chalet with a 14 y/o boy in just his trunks. He was not my son, stepson or any sort of relative.

So according to your logic, I must have had sex with him? Fucking retard.
Well it would certainly explain a few things.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #32
Sir Rolf Of Harris
Senior Member
 
Sir Rolf Of Harris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sheffield England
Posts: 2,487
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris E View Post
Sean Hadley does not have to answer for the actions of his relatives. If one of your relatives ends up in jail, it does not mean you personally are to blame. Stupid fucks.
So turn a blind eye then? What about the 14 words? A paedo is a paedo and you are just as guilty as any of them for knowing about it and not acting on it.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #33
Chris E
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 180
Default

Where's the proof he knew about it and didn't act?

Furthermore, I'm sure all of us know someone who's done something illegal and not "dont anything about it", even if it's just a case of downloading some music off the internet. The difference between that and this incident (which there's no proof Sean even knew about) is merely a matter of degrees. Where does one draw the line? Obviously if you know a pedo you should kick their faces in, but what about burgulary? Theft? Someone dropping litter?

Be careful before calling the kwaps, for they are not on our side.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #34
Sir Rolf Of Harris
Senior Member
 
Sir Rolf Of Harris's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Sheffield England
Posts: 2,487
Default

So you think that your brother being a paedophile (convicted) is equal to downloading a Jive Bunny MP3? I bet you also think women who wear short skirts deserve to be raped..........hang on a mo........come to think of it........you were the one who laid drunk on his back smelling of piss at a BNP event and was seen by everyone looking up Emma Colgates skirt while making lewd suggestions. It figures you really are a sick individual arn't you Sean?
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #35
SidW UK
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,956
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Rolf Of Harris View Post
So you think that your brother being a paedophile (convicted) is equal to downloading a Jive Bunny MP3? I bet you also think women who wear short skirts deserve to be raped..........hang on a mo........come to think of it........you were the one who laid drunk on his back smelling of piss at a BNP event and was seen by everyone looking up Emma Colgates skirt while making lewd suggestions. It figures you really are a sick individual arn't you Sean?
Jive Bunny or Scunny Bunny?
Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	scunny bunny.jpg
Views:	9
Size:	128.1 KB
ID:	5797  
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #36
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris E View Post
Where's the proof he knew about it and didn't act?

Furthermore, I'm sure all of us know someone who's done something illegal and not "dont anything about it", even if it's just a case of downloading some music off the internet. The difference between that and this incident (which there's no proof Sean even knew about) is merely a matter of degrees. Where does one draw the line? Obviously if you know a pedo you should kick their faces in, but what about burgulary? Theft? Someone dropping litter?

Be careful before calling the kwaps, for they are not on our side.
But it's not about litter dropping or burglary, it's about paedophilia. Remember, you claim Mark did it and it was OMFGHANG HIM but when a Hadley does it, it's no worse than throwing a Coke can on the street?

I'm sure we all have our own moral standards of what we'd turn a blind eye to. Littering, dodging customs with 100 extra fags, tax disc a day or two out of date, going over the limit by a few miles - who cares but I'd hope each and every one of us would never, ever condone or protect a nonce.

Sean should have publicly disowned him. Twatted him. Alerted his neighbours after the first conviction. Whatever. Not carry on as though nothing happened.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #37
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
Default

OK, can we STOP right there with the Jive Bunny piss-taking? Some subjects you lot can go too far on, you know.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #38
Chris E
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir Rolf Of Harris
So you think that your brother being a paedophile (convicted) is equal to downloading a Jive Bunny MP3? I bet you also think women who wear short skirts deserve to be raped..........hang on a mo........come to think of it........you were the one who laid drunk on his back smelling of piss at a BNP event and was seen by everyone looking up Emma Colgates skirt while making lewd suggestions. It figures you really are a sick individual arn't you Sean?
I'm not Sean you kike-enabler. I never said pedophilia was equal to downloading an MP3, what I am saying is that once you accept that it's OK to break the law (which most of us do here "inciting racial hatred"), the level of crime that you draw the line on is merely your opinion.

As for women who wear short skirts and come out of nightclubs utterly drunk, while I don't think they "deserve" to be raped, one can hardly say they are entirely blameless either. Act with some self-respect for fuck sake.

Quote:
Originally Posted by odinslag88
But it's not about litter dropping or burglary, it's about paedophilia. Remember, you claim Mark did it and it was OMFGHANG HIM but when a Hadley does it, it's no worse than throwing a Coke can on the street?

I'm sure we all have our own moral standards of what we'd turn a blind eye to. Littering, dodging customs with 100 extra fags, tax disc a day or two out of date, going over the limit by a few miles - who cares but I'd hope each and every one of us would never, ever condone or protect a nonce.

Sean should have publicly disowned him. Twatted him. Alerted his neighbours after the first conviction. Whatever. Not carry on as though nothing happened.
Why should Sean have done anything? Sean didn't commit any crime, therefore it's not his problem. Publicly disowning him would only give the sick story more publicity and let's face it you'd all still be sat here insulting Hadley cos his brother is a pedo anyway.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #39
Bev
drinking tea
 
Bev's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: England
Posts: 38,898
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris E View Post
Why should Sean have done anything? Sean didn't commit any crime, therefore it's not his problem. Publicly disowning him would only give the sick story more publicity and let's face it you'd all still be sat here insulting Hadley cos his brother is a pedo anyway.
No. I can honestly say that if he had come forward and disowned him I for one would not have mentioned it.

It's not like we don't have anything else to beat him with; we could easily afford to let that one go.
__________________
Above post is my opinion unless it's a quote.
 
Old April 30th, 2009 #40
Chris E
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 180
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by odinsgal88
No. I can honestly say that if he had come forward and disowned him I for one would not have mentioned it.

It's not like we don't have anything else to beat him with; we could easily afford to let that one go.
But why should he? He didn't commit the crime!

It's all a matter of degrees anyway. An 18 year old getting his 15 year old girlfriend has technically also done the same crime, but I wouldn't be all that bothered in that case, expecially as some girls with makeup/hair etc can look a lot older than they actually are. Obviously in this case it's pretty damned sick but given that Hadley hasn't done anything he shouldn't be required to do anything with regards this mans conviction either.
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:05 AM.
Page generated in 0.70478 seconds.