Mike has issued me a permanent ban on the blue forum

[scipio_usmc]

For disrespecting him by saying most people don't trust him by writing "unlike most here you actually trust Mike so why don't you ask him about it."

 

[Myster]

Oh Dear!... better join IA then and see if you can work your wily magic on Charlie W. et al.  Loads of other cases to delve into there as well.

But go easy on your keyboard though! 

[puglove]

For disrespecting him by saying most people don't trust him by writing "unlike most here you actually trust Mike so why don't you ask him about it."

There won't be much of a blue forum without you.     

I read the other night that Mike was "possessed by the devil and his minions." It seemed to involve Mike just saying "f*ck off" a lot. I'm sure you'll miss the sparkling repartee.

[scipio_usmc]

There won't be much of a blue forum without you.     

I read the other night that Mike was "possessed by the devil and his minions." It seemed to involve Mike just saying "f*ck off" a lot. I'm sure you'll miss the sparkling repartee.

lol that thread didn't last more than 8 hours before being pulled- probably by the moderators as opposed to him waking up and saying uh oh this doesn't make me look very good.

[Holly Goodhead]

For disrespecting him by saying most people don't trust him by writing "unlike most here you actually trust Mike so why don't you ask him about it."

Scipio you haven't posted on here for months and now you've been banned from Blue you descend on us/me and expect us/me to come out and play?  No pleasantries eg how you guys doing blah, blah instead you launch into telling me my posts are BS, biased and ridiculous; my reading comprehension skills are quite lacking; I live in la la land etc, etc.  Please can you explain why all this is necessary?  You obviously disagree with my posts, fair enough, but why the need to get personal?  Why can't you just stick to the case? 

We are both atheists?  Agreed?  Would you go around telling Christians, Hindus, Jews, Muslims their beliefs are BS, ridiculous, they live in la la land etc, etc?  You might think it.  I might think it but I wouldnt be so rude as to disrespect other peoples' views.  Especially when I can't prove that their God doesn't exist.  I accept JB has been found guilty in a court of law but we all know the system does get it wrong and miscarriages of justice do happen.   You're unable to provide concrete evidence of JB's guilt.  And I'm unable to provide concrete evidence of JB's innocence. 

If you want me to debate with you on the main board I'm happy to do so but firstly I require an apology for the personal comments outlined above.  Secondly I want your assurance that the personal comments will be kept out of posts.   

A copy of this post has been copied to all mods incl John.

[APRIL]

For disrespecting him by saying most people don't trust him by writing "unlike most here you actually trust Mike so why don't you ask him about it."

Awww. I'm sorry about that. Despite that there were a few occasions when you were as pain in the xrsx, I think you'll be missed.

[scipio_usmc]

Scipio you haven't posted on here for months and now you've been banned from Blue you descend on us/me and expect us/me to come out and play?  No pleasantries eg how you guys doing blah, blah instead you launch into telling me my posts are BS, biased and ridiculous; my reading comprehension skills are quite lacking; I live in la la land etc, etc.  Please can you explain why all this is necessary?  You obviously disagree with my posts, fair enough, but why the need to get personal?  Why can't you just stick to the case? 

We are both atheists?  Agreed?  Would you go around telling Christians, Hindus, Jews, Muslims their beliefs are BS, ridiculous, they live in la la land etc, etc?  You might think it.  I might think it but I wouldnt be so rude as to disrespect other peoples' views.  Especially when I can't prove that their God doesn't exist.  I accept JB has been found guilty in a court of law but we all know the system does get it wrong and miscarriages of justice do happen.   You're unable to provide concrete evidence of JB's guilt.  And I'm unable to provide concrete evidence of JB's innocence. 

If you want me to debate with you on the main board I'm happy to do so but firstly I require an apology for the personal comments outlined above.  Secondly I want your assurance that the personal comments will be kept out of posts.   

A copy of this post has been copied to all mods incl John.

I'm Catholic not an atheist. Arguing about religion and this case are quite different things. While it is true that you have faith in Jeremy akin to the way someone believes in God that doesn't mean one should treat such beliefs in the same manner.

I do stick to the case.  You said you believe the COA is going to quash his conviction.  I challenged you to post on what basis he could even get the CCRC to refer the matter to the COA let alone the COA to actually rule in his favor on such issue.

I didn't see any answer though.

He expended all his best arguments already and they were totally insufficient.  One has to be living in lala land to believe a new one of epic proportions is just going to magically appear.

[Holly Goodhead]

I'm Catholic not an atheist. Arguing about religion and this case are quite different things. While it is true that you have faith in Jeremy akin to the way someone believes in God that doesn't mean one should treat such beliefs in the same manner.

I do stick to the case.  You said you believe the COA is going to quash his conviction.  I challenged you to post on what basis he could even get the CCRC to refer the matter to the COA let alone the COA to actually rule in his favor on such issue.

I didn't see any answer though.

He expended all his best arguments already and they were totally insufficient.  One has to be living in lala land to believe a new one of epic proportions is just going to magically appear.

Bit economical with the truth...

http://miscarriageofjustice.co/index.php?topic=6704.msg285977#msg285977

[Holly Goodhead]

I'm Catholic not an atheist. Arguing about religion and this case are quite different things. While it is true that you have faith in Jeremy akin to the way someone believes in God that doesn't mean one should treat such beliefs in the same manner.

I do stick to the case.  You said you believe the COA is going to quash his conviction.  I challenged you to post on what basis he could even get the CCRC to refer the matter to the COA let alone the COA to actually rule in his favor on such issue.

I didn't see any answer though.

He expended all his best arguments already and they were totally insufficient.  One has to be living in lala land to believe a new one of epic proportions is just going to magically appear.

I very rarely argue with anyone by referring to their comments/views/beliefs etc BS, la la land, irrational, struggle comprehending etc, etc.  Discussing/debating JB's case is no different to discussing/debating any other topic: religion, politics, sports teams, child rearing, music, fashion etc, etc.  I've no need to force my beliefs etc on others.  Others are entitled to think and believe what they want.  I couldn't give a flying fig.

I dont know JB personally to know whether or not I should have faith in him.  I have a lack of faith in the process that found him guilty in a court of law based on the info available to me and my own research.

You dont believe JB's conviction will ever be quashed fine.  You think he's guilty as charged.  He's currently a Cat A prisoner on a whole life tarrif.  Why bother yourself with what I believe?  I said I believe his conviction will be quashed and I'm not prepared to comment further.  If you think I'm BSing, living in la la land, irrational, not telling the truth etc, etc that's fine by me but please just keep your personal comments to yourself.   

[scipio_usmc]

I very rarely argue with anyone by referring to their comments/views/beliefs etc BS, la la land, irrational, struggle comprehending etc, etc.  Discussing/debating JB's case is no different to discussing/debating any other topic: religion, politics, sports teams, child rearing, music, fashion etc, etc.  I've no need to force my beliefs etc on others.  Others are entitled to think and believe what they want.  I couldn't give a flying fig.

I dont know JB personally to know whether or not I should have faith in him.  I have a lack of faith in the process that found him guilty in a court of law based on the info available to me and my own research.

You dont believe JB's conviction will ever be quashed fine.  You think he's guilty as charged.  He's currently a Cat A prisoner on a whole life tarrif.  Why bother yourself with what I believe?  I said I believe his conviction will be quashed and I'm not prepared to comment further.  If you think I'm BSing, living in la la land, irrational, not telling the truth etc, etc that's fine by me but please just keep your personal comments to yourself.   

I don't care what you believe anymore than what Mike believes.

But like him you spread countless falsehoods about the facts of the case and rather than allow them to go unchallenged where someone unaware of all the evidence and facts might be misinformed I correct the record.

[Holly Goodhead]

I don't care what you believe anymore than what Mike believes.

But like him you spread countless falsehoods about the facts of the case and rather than allow them to go unchallenged where someone unaware of all the evidence and facts might be misinformed I correct the record.

I havent met anyone on any forum I've ever posted on that isnt at least of average intelligence.  No one needs to be spoon fed info by anyone.  Forum members and guests are more than capable of forming their own opinions.

[david1819]

For disrespecting him by saying most people don't trust him by writing "unlike most here you actually trust Mike so why don't you ask him about it."

I'm sure you will be allowed back. Haven't you been permanently banned before only to be allowed back on?

[scipio_usmc]

I'm sure you will be allowed back. Haven't you been permanently banned before only to be allowed back on?

That was when Harters and I were both banned and the site criticized mike for doing so for such a stupid reason so he changed his mind to stop the outcry against him.  This time he only banned me and is spouting all the lies I always challenge him on so will not let me back.  He wants to just post away with his lies unchallenged evne if no one else bothers to read them.

 

[Holly Goodhead]

That was when Harters and I were both banned and the site criticized mike for doing so for such a stupid reason so he changed his mind to stop the outcry against him.  This time he only banned me and is spouting all the lies I always challenge him on so will not let me back.  He wants to just post away with his lies unchallenged evne if no one else bothers to read them.

Why do you want to waste your time/energy responding to MT's posts if no one else bothers to read them?  If no one reads MT's posts do you think they are likely to read your responses?

[Holly Goodhead]

I'm sure you will be allowed back. Haven't you been permanently banned before only to be allowed back on?

Why are you sure Scipio will be allowed back?  I find him a most unpleasant poster.  He's intolerant of anyone that doesn't share his views often resorting to verbal aggression and/or attempts to intimidate.  He doesn't debate just gets all shouty.  When losing the debate, which he often does, he lies, cheats and refuses to provide any documentary evidence to support his assertions.  Instead he resorts to 'find it yourself' or 'the burden of proof is with you' or 'I dont have to prove a negative'. 

I wouldn't mind betting there are a few paid internet shills on these forums and Scipio might well be one of  them.