Normanton Lad

That is the most important comment on this thread. 
Everyone should question their beliefs. A good way of doing this is to estimate how probable you think something is true. Then when you find new evidence ask yourself how this has affected your initial probability estimate. If your estimate has gone down then examine the reasons why your belief has changed. If your belief in a claim never varies from 100% then you are probably not thinking hard enough.
Further, to my comments about the Government's intervention in the Brand story via Caroline Dinenage MP I should add that she is married to Major General Mark Lancaster, who is involved with 77th Brigade, the propaganda unit of the British Army. Their job is to support the Government via social media and the legacy media. They were very active in supporting the Covid lockdown.
77 Brigade is countering Covid misinformation
What is the significance of this? It means that the Government has a motive for attacking Brand. He is a Covid sceptic. Does that mean he is not a rapist? No, but the probability that he could be the victim of a conspiracy should increase a few percent.

That is the most important comment on this thread. 
Everyone should question their beliefs. A good way of doing this is to estimate how probable you think something is true. Then when you find new evidence ask yourself how this has affected your initial probability estimate. If your estimate has gone down then examine the reasons why your belief has changed. If your belief in a claim never varies from 100% then you are probably not thinking hard enough.
Further, to my comments about the Government's intervention in the Brand story via Caroline Dinenage MP I should add that she is married to Major General Mark Lancaster, who is involved with 77th Brigade, the propaganda unit of the British Army. Their job is to support the Government via social media and the legacy media. They were very active in supporting the Covid lockdown.
77 Brigade is countering Covid misinformation
What is the significance of this? It means that the Government has a motive for attacking Brand. He is a Covid sceptic. Does that mean he is not a rapist? No, but the probability that he could be the victim of a conspiracy should increase a few percent.

No coordinated attack? Then why did Caroline Dinenage MP, the chair of the Culture, Media and Sport, try to tell Rumble to stop showing Brand videos? Why would the government get involved in this when Brand is at the moment legally guilty of nothing?
Dinenage said Brand was promoting "inappropriate behaviour". That's rich coming from the daughter of a friend of and ghost writer for the Kray brothers. I don't remember anyone complaining about Fred helping the Krays make even more money from a life of crime and murder.

The objective intelligent thing to do is to examine issues from all sides, to follow the evidence wherever it may lead.  A truth does not mind who speaks it, it remains true, no matter who utters it, a nut, or you.

From the same article :
"In January 2019, a judge threw out the inquiry report after it emerged the official investigating the complaints had had prior contact with the complainants."
"Salmond was later awarded £512,250 in legal costs after winning his judicial review against the Scottish government. Evans and senior officials were accused of failing to disclose to the court significant information about the internal inquiry, including the actions of the official conducting the investigation. The court ruled those procedural irregularities mean the inquiry was unlawful and 'tainted by apparent bias'. "
Former ambassador jailed for Alex Salmond case blogposts
"Murray claims he is fulfilling the same role in his blogging about the Salmond case, alleging the former Scottish National party leader and first minister was the victim of a conspiracy involving the Scottish government, the SNP and the lord advocate, James Wolffe QC."
 

I'm too old to waste 90 minutes on "a documentary" which will only show evidence from one side.  It would be like a court case where you only get to hear what the prosecution lawyer has to say.

"Believing victims" is assuming the facts are already decided. It is only after all the facts have been decided that you can call someone a victim. You are putting the cart before the horse.
To find whether someone's claims are true you don't try and "prove them right". You try and prove them wrong. It is only by looking for contradictions in the evidence or alternative explanations for the evidence that you approach the truth.
If there are no contradictions or the alternative evidence is weaker then the claim is probably true. It is the same with science. You don't prove a hypothesis by just collecting evidence that supports the hypothesis. You try find evidence that disproves the hypothesis.
You must look at the alternative explanations for these woman coming forward before you can take their claims as facts. There have been many people put in jail by false claims.

You don't seem to understand that C4 and The Times are just propaganda outlets. They have no more credibility than the bloke next door. 
What are the facts we know for certain?
We know that Brand has had sex with hundreds of women. He's admitted that. He's also had sex unprotected with prostitutes. He's admitted that.
What can we infer from that? Well I would say that there is a very high chance that he has herpes and he has passed this on to many women. 
If you someone has given you herpes you are not going to publicly accuse someone. No woman wants the world to know she has herpes. How else could you get back at someone who has given you this disease? I'm not saying he hasn't raped all these women but you have to look at all possible explanations. You can't take things on blind trust.
 

Not a "weak strawman argument" at all. Denying justice to the many so that the few are not convicted wrongly is part of our legal system. Read about Blackstone's ratio. 
Blackstone's ratio
 
 

"Believing victims" is assuming the facts are already decided. It is only after all the facts have been decided that you can call someone a victim. You are putting the cart before the horse.
To find whether someone's claims are true you don't try and "prove them right". You try and prove them wrong. It is only by looking for contradictions in the evidence or alternative explanations for the evidence that you approach the truth.
If there are no contradictions or the alternative evidence is weaker then the claim is probably true. It is the same with science. You don't prove a hypothesis by just collecting evidence that supports the hypothesis. You try find evidence that disproves the hypothesis.
You must look at the alternative explanations for these woman coming forward before you can take their claims as facts. There have been many people put in jail by false claims.

You don't seem to understand that C4 and The Times are just propaganda outlets. They have no more credibility than the bloke next door. 
What are the facts we know for certain?
We know that Brand has had sex with hundreds of women. He's admitted that. He's also had sex unprotected with prostitutes. He's admitted that.
What can we infer from that? Well I would say that there is a very high chance that he has herpes and he has passed this on to many women. 
If you someone has given you herpes you are not going to publicly accuse someone. No woman wants the world to know she has herpes. How else could you get back at someone who has given you this disease? I'm not saying he hasn't raped all these women but you have to look at all possible explanations. You can't take things on blind trust.
 

Thanks for that, but the story I think I remember was mainly about the son having to travel back and forth between his house in Littleover or Mickleover and the old folks home. However, I am quite prepared to accept that it was some kind of dream I am mistaking for reality.
I've told a few people over the years about the odd situation of a 90 something year old in Derby looking after his mother. After you tell the story a few times it becomes reality. I think George Best came to believe the "Where did it all go wrong" story was real.

"The Man from earth" is a fascinating film about a man who lives a very long life. Stupid people hate this film. They say nothing happens in it. That's true. It all takes place in one room. But if you have a brain it will make you think.
I would not like to live forever because I don't want to outlive my children. There is something about this in the above film. 
I've known many childhood friends who have died and it is weird to remember them as children and then to realise some of them died long ago as old people. Rather than thinking it is your turn next you begin to think you might be immortal.
I'm as physically fit as most people 30 years younger than me. I have no pains or aches at all. My grandfather lived to be 96 and his brother missed a 100 by a couple of days so it could be that I've been lucky with my genes.
Despite feeling physically good I don't feel happy about all the changes I have seen in my life. Some old people have told me that they want to die because they are bored or because they've just had enough of life even though their bodies could carry on a few more years. I'm not as bad as that, but the thought of endless change for the worse does make me wonder if it is all worthwhile.

"The Man from earth" is a fascinating film about a man who lives a very long life. Stupid people hate this film. They say nothing happens in it. That's true. It all takes place in one room. But if you have a brain it will make you think.
I would not like to live forever because I don't want to outlive my children. There is something about this in the above film. 
I've known many childhood friends who have died and it is weird to remember them as children and then to realise some of them died long ago as old people. Rather than thinking it is your turn next you begin to think you might be immortal.
I'm as physically fit as most people 30 years younger than me. I have no pains or aches at all. My grandfather lived to be 96 and his brother missed a 100 by a couple of days so it could be that I've been lucky with my genes.
Despite feeling physically good I don't feel happy about all the changes I have seen in my life. Some old people have told me that they want to die because they are bored or because they've just had enough of life even though their bodies could carry on a few more years. I'm not as bad as that, but the thought of endless change for the worse does make me wonder if it is all worthwhile.

David, your post about anxiety was very interesting. You are like Bradbury's Illustrated Man.
At 41 you are still a young man. You might be surprised by how things can change in a few years. One of my friends was living at home with his mother at your age but at 50 he was married with about half a dozen kids.
I don't know if this will be a comfort to you but social anxiety, in my experience, doesn't affect many people my age. When I was younger I would never talk to strangers in queues, but now I will initiate conversations with anyone in any circumstance. I don't care what they think of me. Most people my age have said the same thing happened to them. 
My views on most topics are very unconventional and when I express them I don't worry that others think I am stupid or mad. Young people worry too much about what others think of them. 
The only person I know who had anxiety problems was a man who got shell shock in the Malaya War. He couldn't leave his house unless he had a hat or an umbrella. He's got dementia now and his anxiety has gone away. He is always trying to leave the house and he doesn't bother with the hat or the umbrella.

I think Glover's character was based on Glover himself. He was a teacher at the same school as Barry Hines. But then again, you might be right about Greenwood. Barry Hines was a local teacher. He had a spell teaching at Dale School.
Glover was quite a good player. He played for Barnsley boys around 1948. He mentions online that he played against Len Allchurch when he played against Swansea Boys, but I think Cliff Jones might also have been in the Swansea team. He complains in one Youtube video that he missed the chance to play against Derby Boys at Barnsley because he was dropped. The Parry brothers and a few other very good players were in the Derby team.

David, your post about anxiety was very interesting. You are like Bradbury's Illustrated Man.
At 41 you are still a young man. You might be surprised by how things can change in a few years. One of my friends was living at home with his mother at your age but at 50 he was married with about half a dozen kids.
I don't know if this will be a comfort to you but social anxiety, in my experience, doesn't affect many people my age. When I was younger I would never talk to strangers in queues, but now I will initiate conversations with anyone in any circumstance. I don't care what they think of me. Most people my age have said the same thing happened to them. 
My views on most topics are very unconventional and when I express them I don't worry that others think I am stupid or mad. Young people worry too much about what others think of them. 
The only person I know who had anxiety problems was a man who got shell shock in the Malaya War. He couldn't leave his house unless he had a hat or an umbrella. He's got dementia now and his anxiety has gone away. He is always trying to leave the house and he doesn't bother with the hat or the umbrella.

I read that as Raich and thought how old is this bloke to have seen his debut.

I will second that. I was standing behind the Normanton End goal and in my mind's eye I can still see him racing with the ball towards the goal at the speed of light. I'm talking relatively. No pun intended.  Relative to players like Durban and Buxton. They were both quite skilful but to call them a bit slow is an understatement. Most defenders could give them a 20 yard start and still catch them. Hector was a totally new type of player. I'd never seen a Derby player run so fast with the ball under his control.
For me that Huddersfield game was the big bang in Derby's great success over the next decade.

I will second that. I was standing behind the Normanton End goal and in my mind's eye I can still see him racing with the ball towards the goal at the speed of light. I'm talking relatively. No pun intended.  Relative to players like Durban and Buxton. They were both quite skilful but to call them a bit slow is an understatement. Most defenders could give them a 20 yard start and still catch them. Hector was a totally new type of player. I'd never seen a Derby player run so fast with the ball under his control.
For me that Huddersfield game was the big bang in Derby's great success over the next decade.

I will second that. I was standing behind the Normanton End goal and in my mind's eye I can still see him racing with the ball towards the goal at the speed of light. I'm talking relatively. No pun intended.  Relative to players like Durban and Buxton. They were both quite skilful but to call them a bit slow is an understatement. Most defenders could give them a 20 yard start and still catch them. Hector was a totally new type of player. I'd never seen a Derby player run so fast with the ball under his control.
For me that Huddersfield game was the big bang in Derby's great success over the next decade.

I read that as Raich and thought how old is this bloke to have seen his debut.

I will second that. I was standing behind the Normanton End goal and in my mind's eye I can still see him racing with the ball towards the goal at the speed of light. I'm talking relatively. No pun intended.  Relative to players like Durban and Buxton. They were both quite skilful but to call them a bit slow is an understatement. Most defenders could give them a 20 yard start and still catch them. Hector was a totally new type of player. I'd never seen a Derby player run so fast with the ball under his control.
For me that Huddersfield game was the big bang in Derby's great success over the next decade.

Kevin Hector's home debut vs Huddersfield. He was fantastic and although Alan Durban got a hattrick and Derby won 4-3, all the talk was about 'Zac', the King.
I can honestly say, "I was there".

Thank you for those great memories, but I think your memory is playing tricks with your reference to Italian tanks at Monte Cassino. You are thinking of El Alamein. Monte Cassino is a mountain and I doubt if tanks – Italian or otherwise – were of much use in the battle. Anyway, the Italians had changed sides by then. After the battle many Italian women, children and animals were raped and killed by Allied troops.
I haven’t bought a paper for years but I think Brian Glanville is still writing. He was very knowledgeable about a lot of topics, but I don’t think football was one of them. I can remember reading one of his articles around 1974 when he said Leighton James was the best attacker in Europe! I liked Leighton but he was never that good even when he was on form.