Reply to THIS thread
Start a NEW Talkback Thread
Talkback Home

Re: Sunday Night Project - Nigel Newman (20th Feb 2009 - 08:23:59) I seldom post on this site, when I do I like it to be relevant and having read this debate for the last couple of weeks, I now feel there are some relevant issues which appear to have been neglected. Firstly I originally had no problem with Fabulists using the Millennium Hall, however like the majority of people who have approached me with regard to this issue there were some concerns relating to children using the building at the same time. I maybe old fashioned but I still believe in preserving childhood as a time of innocence and while I am sure there are no issues regarding their safety I do have concerns over what is appropriate. I have also been very surprised by the degree of one sided comments and opinions posted on this site relating to this issue. This does not reflect the concerns raised with me by members of the community, it has been reported to me that alternative opinions have been submitted but not posted. Has there been deliberate censorship of this site? One of the common themes of this site has been openness and honesty and I personally fail to understand the backlash against both the Daily Mail and Herald articles. Freedom of the press is one of the great privileges we enjoy in this country and I am confused by some of the hysteria relating to the articles and who wrote them. If there is nothing to hide then what is the problem? I take exception to some of the rude comments posted to the Clerk (later removed) and the requesting of addresses and comments made relating to an ex employee of the Daily Mail. I think Phill Harris would not be best pleased with someone else being credited with his article. The normal means of redress would be through the courts, if the stories are not true then sue, otherwise shut up whining. I trust this will stimulate some healthy debate and I eagerly await the outraged postings that I am sure this will cause. Finally may i say these are my personal views. None of this has as yet been discussed by the council as you may be aware there is an ongoing investigation.

Re: Sunday Night Project - Editor (20th Feb 2009 - 08:37:09) I can confirm that NO posts were rejected from the previous threads Sunday Night Project or Liphook - in the paper for the wrong reasons!. Once the Council confirmed that the Clerk had not made those comments on his own behalf (this took them 2 days!), the earlier posts were edited. Note to Council - be more pro-active, you were well aware that the sh*t was about to hit the fan, but clearly chose the "head in sand" solution to the problem.

Re: Sunday Night Project - Linda Bryant (20th Feb 2009 - 16:32:17) I feel I must respond to Nigel Newman's post above of 20.02.09 - especially as my husband Mark (who this defamatory Mail article was really about) has decided not to post on this site ever again. I would like to make it clear that I am and aways have been 100% female. I am married to Mark Bryant and help run this lovely friendly group of people. I have children (so does he) and I am a grandmother. I do not have a police record and I am not a deviant. I live in Liss. I am a local resident too. I will deal with Mr Newman's (mostly incorrect & mis-informed) comments in the order he wrote them : No relevant issues have been neglected. The name of the group is FABULISS, not Fabulists. "the majority of people who have approached me" - it is highly unlikely that ANYONE has approached Mr Newman. Perhaps he would like to name them - unlike the Daily Mail who just made people up as they couldn't find anyone (oh, except some old Major duffer who I am informed was in Canada at the time. Local Resident ?????). Children DO NOT use the building at the same time. St John's Ambulance are down the hall with John Tough, I believe, and are mostly older teenagers at that. We have sometimes seen scouts going in a back room down the side, that's all. Never via the foyer. Mr Newman says he is surprised by the degree of one-sided comments & opinions relating to this issue. They are not one sided - they are just honest as you see it comments. Plain common sense and rage at the injustice served on my husband in THAT article. I accept that there must be some negative bigotted people out there but they don't seem to have appeared on either this blog or the Daily Mail's. "It has been reported to me that alternative opinions have been submitted but not posted. Deliberate censorship " ? ..... Rubbish. Again I very much doubt that such people exist - only in Mr Newman's mind I expect. The very same invisible people that the Daily Mail came up with. WHO ARE THESE PEOPLE ? As the Editor clearly points out above, there has been no censorship. Perhaps if these disgruntled villagers do exist then they thought better of posting a comment themselves after having really given it some thought. Mr Newman is right about positives and negatives. I do appreciate that in any debate you are going to get both. But there are some instances (freak instances) where everyone is going to agree and there will be no negatives. This subject about Fabuliss is one such example. "I fail to understand the backlash against the Daily Mail or Liphook Herald". What planet are you on Mr Newman ??? You say the freedom of the press is one of the great privileges we enjoy. "Enjoy" ????? Not the word I would use. Nobody enjoys the freedom of the press. Nobody enjoys the press, full stop. The press seriously abuse their privilege and stamp on anybody in their way to get a story. It is they who are "hysterical", not us, the honest public (although a large majority of today's pink shell suit wearing chav public do like hype). Just compare the vile bile articles by Gabrielle Pike in the Liphook Herald with that of Graham Langton of The Petersfield Post (a fantastic well balanced piece). Pike in The Herald is in serious trouble. We are informed both her and Paul Harris of The Daily Mail (yes, Paul Harris - not Phil Harris as you state - Phil Harris was the voice of Balu in The Jungle Book !!) are guilty of transphobic crime. Would they have written their stupid articles about gay people or muslims ? I think not ! Harris is a liar. He duped us into saying he was writing a light hearted piece about the hall and our club etc. He never said he would print a picture of my husband in female mode. All that article did was "out" my lovely husband as a transvestite. No, he shouldn't hide it and he is not ashamed of it. But it is HIS BUSINESS - HIS PRIVATE LIFE. There was NO STORY TO PRINT - IT WAS NOT IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST. I don't think Paul Harris is bothered whether his name was on that article or not. As you probably know, it was handed to him on a plate and he caused the ultimate damage. A good result and everyone's happy don't you think. Plus someone down here got a good pay-out. More nice holidays. no doubt. "I take exception to some of the rude comments posted to the clerk". Probably deserved. In my opinion there is a total lack of security at the hall. What other organisation can let people just wander in to the office and have a nose around ? Just who picked up our Christmas Card ? A card we sent to the staff at The Millenium Hall with a tin of chocolates to show our gratitude. Something here stinks. Just read Barry Hope's comments on the Fabuliss blog. He understands. He was so hurt that my husband was attacked in such a way. He couldn't believe it. But I have to say that the general security/housekeeping at the hall is atrocious. This "non-story" in the Mail would never have got out otherwise. And as for Pike's ramblings in the Herald (which, like the Mail, is the subject of an ongoing case at the Press Complaints Commission) - they are un relenting. Not happy with veering away from the truth in her articles she now finds it quite funny to personally attack my husband and I. She even printed the date of our last meeting to stir up trouble. And it worked - two men arrested outside the hall on the night (Result Gabrielle, Result !). We must have truly upset someone along the way but I cannot think who or why. I really can't. "Redress through Courts - Stop whining" My husband and I do not have the money to take the Daily Mail to court and they know it. Whining ? .... So would you, Mr Newman, so would you. I would like you to spend just 24 hours in my husband's shoes right now (whether loafers or high heels !!). He is destroyed. He is a lovely person and really doesn't deserve this. Your comments made me laugh, if nothing else. I probably won't be the only person having a say though, will I ? Something else for you to discuss down the pub with your drinking buddies. God, you must be laughing at us on a daily basis. We don't deserve it though. On a parting note, it would be good if you came to one of our nights - we have invited a lot of local people and were so pleased to see some turn up and have a good time at the last one. I'm serious Mr Newman - please come to one - you would be made very welcome. As long as you don't turn up wearing the same outfit as me !! Linda Bryant of Fabuliss

Re: Sunday Night Project - Phil McNamara (20th Feb 2009 - 17:14:03) Dear Editor I have to say I was very pleased when you stepped in on the previous discussions around this matter (and an associated thread about school-wear), and closed them down. I suspect there are now 3 discussions going on this, and frankly it is getting quite boring, repetitive and not very constructive. Could I therefore plead that you cease all these threads, leaving only the more usual, constructive topics, please? Thank you. [editor - Hi Phil, I thought it important to allow Nigel to have his say and for any immediate responses (wouldn't want to be accused of censorship!), this thread will also be closed soon, if it doesn't self extinguish]

Re: Sunday Night Project - Phil McNamara (20th Feb 2009 - 20:08:24) Okay, many thanks for the quick reply! Kiind regards.

Re: Sunday Night Project - kazzy (20th Feb 2009 - 23:02:17) I think enough has been said about this subject now and as Phil says it is all getting rather boring, but I would just like to say that you are very definitely wrong Linda about children not using the Millennium Hall on your meeting nights. I know for a fact, because I was there, that a LAMPS rehearsal was taking place during one of your meetings. The hall was crawling with a large number of 7-15 year olds and as a mother of one of those children, I have to say that I was concerned. Having read all of your postings (and Mark's), may I suggest that if you want privacy and you are, as you say, concerned about the attention, then you should consider moving your meeting to another location, after all, the world and his wife now know when and where you meet. Not so much 'Fabuliss' but more of a let's go and have a 'Fabulook' and I can only assume that is not what you want. Now where are the details for that naked pilates course, because that sounds like fun....plank anyone???

Re: Sunday Night Project - christi (21st Feb 2009 - 07:40:39) Couldnt agree more, I know people have been hurt and upset by the press recently but in the greater scheme of things can it not be left alone now. It's turning into personal clashes which is not what this site is for.

Re: Sunday Night Project - P Weyland (21st Feb 2009 - 17:50:26) I hope LAMPS don't put on seasonal pantomine productions; all those men dressed up as ladies - very sinister!

Re: Sunday Night Project - Kazzy (22nd Feb 2009 - 08:39:18) Final comment on this subject. Quite obviously dressing up as a 'woman' to be in a show is different, so let's not go down that route again.....certainly none of the men I know from LAMPS have their own set of La Perla or Janet Reager underwear or are able to apply make up with any degree of accuracy. The End. This is soooo old news now. [editor - I agree - this thread is also closed now]

Reply to THIS thread
Talkback Home