The lies that go unpunished by the Wikipedia cult insiders, to protect the integrity of the cult

In no particular order,

 Telling someone they lied, is a personal attack
 Explaining precisely how someone lied, is not civil
 BLPCRIME says don't put the news of Gerry Adams arrest on the front page
 BLP protects people from defamation by not putting on the front page, what is already in the biography
 The news reporting Adams arrest was tabloid in nature
 Consensus is about who can tell the best lie, and get away with it
 Consensus is about counting up who said yes, who said no, and declaring the winner
 No consensus is what you get when one side lies to counter another sides truths
 The UK polce only arrest you to protect your rights
 In the UK, being arrested is a minor, procedural matter, of no significance
 Gerry Adams might not have been arrested for ordering a murder
 There is no appealing of closures on Wikipedia
 Anything Rambling Man has ever said, is saying now, or will say in the future
 Filing a complaint about any of the above, in any forum, at any time, is "beating a dead horse". Even the first complaint.
 Expecting civility is all about examining what the other guy said, and has nothing at all to do with your behaviour - even if it was patronising, dismissive, sarcastic, arrogant, or just downright rude