More Blue forum BS about the moderator

[david1819]

On blue David loves to attack me since I am not there to defend myself.  He posts garbage like this:

http://jeremybamberforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,7282.225.html

I believe I posted plenty of GIFs in replies to you long before you were banned. Besides I was simply saying I get the impression your angry annoyed whenever I read your posts

It seems to apply to him though because after it is prove he has posted rubbish- like the rubbish claim that evidence proves police moved her body before taking the initial photos he runs and hides on blue because he has lost the debate here.

Who said anyone lost? I see this as casual chat not a competitive debate

Everytime he posts a video or cartoon mocking me or anyone else it is simply him projecting his flaws onto us they always apply to him.

What is wrong with replying with a gif image? http://replygif.net/ nothing to stop you using them.

Sure I have flaws but that is not the reason I mock you, I mock you because I don't like the way you talk to me.

As for projecting you might want to read this
http://www.theessentialyoublog.com/projecting-your-flaws/

The argument that because they moved her hand and took photos this means they moved her before taking the first set of photos is the most illogical argument I ever heard.  Worse he claims MacDonnell was unaware of that movements even though he makes clear he saw both sets of photos.

The argument that Adams saying to query the others about whether the body was moved doesn't prove it was moved, he admitted his memory was foggy.  None of those that Adams suggester COLP query told COLP the photos did not reflect how they saw Sheila.  David adopts Mike's absurd claims then when proven wrong runs to blue and posts childish attacks like a big baby.

If you chose to believe the police notes mean nothing and I chose to believe otherwise then there is not much point discussing the subject if our views differ combined with the fact I don't like talking to you hence no reply from me does not mean 'I lost' or 'you won'

Also I don't adopt Mikes theory that police shot Sheila.


Hope this clears everything up :)

[Holly Goodhead]

David/Scipio

Can you please draw a line under the above.  I should not have approved the thread as the title and post #1 is too aggressive as I pointed out in post #2 and it just snowballs as I said it would.  Friendly banter is fine but verbal aggression/hostility/goading is not. 

Personally none it bothers me including Scipio's rudeness to myself but as a forum we need to consider all members, potential members, guests and the forums image.  We have invited the CT to join the forum but if they read the above I can understand their reluctance. 

You both make excellent posts and without opposing views we would have nothing to debate!

TY.

[Angelo222]

David/Scipio

Can you please draw a line under the above.  I should not have approved the thread as the title and post #1 is too aggressive as I pointed out in post #2 and it just snowballs as I said it would.  Friendly banter is fine but verbal aggression/hostility/goading is not. 

Personally none it bothers me including Scipio's rudeness to myself but as a forum we need to consider all members, potential members, guests and the forums image.  We have invited the CT to join the forum but if they read the above I can understand their reluctance. 

You both make excellent posts and without opposing views we would have nothing to debate!

TY.

This thread appears to have been edited Holls with the naughty bits taken out so no worries.   

[scipio_usmc]

I believe I posted plenty of GIFs in replies to you long before you were banned. Besides I was simply saying I get the impression your angry annoyed whenever I read your posts
Who said anyone lost? I see this as casual chat not a competitive debate


What is wrong with replying with a gif image? http://replygif.net/ nothing to stop you using them.

Sure I have flaws but that is not the reason I mock you, I mock you because I don't like the way you talk to me.

As for projecting you might want to read this
http://www.theessentialyoublog.com/projecting-your-flaws/

If you chose to believe the police notes mean nothing and I chose to believe otherwise then there is not much point discussing the subject if our views differ combined with the fact I don't like talking to you hence no reply from me does not mean 'I lost' or 'you won'

Also I don't adopt Mikes theory that police shot Sheila.


Hope this clears everything up :)

You posted notes taken when Adams was questioned by COLP.  Those notes say to query other officers about Sheila's body to see if they think the photos were accurate or not.   Those officers said the photos reflect how she was.  The crime scene officer and photographer say they took photos BEFORE moving her body. 

That means you have evidence of nothing except in your mind.  You project and project and project and distort.  At the end of the day you know much less than you think and your arguments hold no merit at all except in your mind.

[david1819]

 

That means you have evidence of nothing except in your mind.  You project and project and project and distort.  At the end of the day you know much less than you think and your arguments hold no merit at all except in your mind.

At the end of the day your opinion is your opinion. Besides if it was all in my mind I would not have people giving me some credit for what I post.

[scipio_usmc]

At the end of the day your opinion is your opinion. Besides if it was all in my mind I would not have people giving me some credit for what I post.

My opinion is based on facts while you make up fake facts.  You said that there is proof that police moved her body before taking the photos- your proof turned out to be simply Adams telling COLP to query others as to whether it was moved.  You also ERROENOUSLY claimed MacDonnell was unaware police moved her hand to take photos though he clearly explained in his report police did so.  That means you didn't even read his report. But your argument that moving her hand to take the photo proves they moved her before taking the initial photos holds no merit anyway.  Your claims are always illogical.  You constantly demonstrate you don't know the basic facts of the case.  You didn't even know that there were 30 bullets on the counter next to the phone.  You were unaware the tray had a bullet in it and that they were taken as a separate exhibit though we discussed such a million times.  You are little more than a legend in your own mind and assert absurd opinions formed around erroneous claims including multiple rifles being used though there was a single rifle at WHF.  And let's not forget your insistence that Davidson told COLP he personally witnessed a rifle that had red paint on the barrel though he said no such thing he simply assumed there was paint on the barrel of some other rifle because he heard paint was on a weapon and assumed that meant a rifle he was unaware it was the moderator.   He didn't see or collect any other rifles because there were none.  But hey I'm weird I like actual facts and correctly view the evidenc einstea dof distorting it to pretend it says anything I fell like as you and Mike do...

[david1819]

My opinion is based on facts while you make up fake facts.  You said that there is proof that police moved her body before taking the photos- your proof turned out to be simply Adams telling COLP to query others as to whether it was moved.  You also ERROENOUSLY claimed MacDonnell was unaware police moved her hand to take photos though he clearly explained in his report police did so.  That means you didn't even read his report. But your argument that moving her hand to take the photo proves they moved her before taking the initial photos holds no merit anyway.  Your claims are always illogical.  You constantly demonstrate you don't know the basic facts of the case.  You didn't even know that there were 30 bullets on the counter next to the phone.  You were unaware the tray had a bullet in it and that they were taken as a separate exhibit though we discussed such a million times.  You are little more than a legend in your own mind and assert absurd opinions formed around erroneous claims including multiple rifles being used though there was a single rifle at WHF.  And let's not forget your insistence that Davidson told COLP he personally witnessed a rifle that had red paint on the barrel though he said no such thing he simply assumed there was paint on the barrel of some other rifle because he heard paint was on a weapon and assumed that meant a rifle he was unaware it was the moderator.   He didn't see or collect any other rifles because there were none.  But hey I'm weird I like actual facts and correctly view the evidenc einstea dof distorting it to pretend it says anything I fell like as you and Mike do...

Just to remind you. You are in a rat race and you are the only participant. 

[scipio_usmc]

Just to remind you. You are in a rat race and you are the only participant. 

You can't refute what I posted because it is true so instead you try to pretend you just don't want to respond.  No one is being fooled though your ignorance and inability to admit when you are wrong is on full display for all to see.

[david1819]

You can't refute what I posted because it is true so instead you try to pretend you just don't want to respond.  No one is being fooled though your ignorance and inability to admit when you are wrong is on full display for all to see.

Yeah I've had that said to me by 9/11 truthers, creationists, Scientology people and other such people I have engaged with. I stop responding because I don't see the point anymore. But if it makes you feel better to believe otherwise that's fine by me.

[scipio_usmc]

Yeah I've had that said to me by 9/11 truthers, creationists, Scientology people and other such people I have engaged with. I stop responding because I don't see the point anymore. But if it makes you feel better to believe otherwise that's fine by me.

I posted facts and evidence you posted nonsense that you couldn't back up.  Anytime people prove you wrong you act like a child then project and claim they are the ones doing so.  You are little more than a legend in your own mind.  Did MacDonnell know that police took photos after moving Sheila's hand?  Yes your claim he didn't was ludicrous.  Does that prove the initial photo was taken after she was moved?  No it proves that photos were taken before and after the police moved her hand.  Did Collins et al tell COLP Sheila's body was in a different position when they saw her?  No Collins and the Crime scene officers said the photos reflect how her body was.  Adams told COLP to query these people because his recollection was poor and these people said it wasn't moved.  Your claim Adams notes prove her body was moved by police is sheer nonsense.  Just like the 911 conspiracy theorists you ignore evidence proving you wrong and distort to try to pretend things are as you wish them to be instead of how they are.

[puglove]

FAO Mike - it's "OH! What a tangled web we weave. When FIRST we practise to deceive." Marmion, Sir Walter Scott. As you "hate liars" so much (hollow laugh) I presume that you equally despise plagiarism.

Happy to help!     

[puglove]

Bamber, Huntley, Bridger, Philpott, all eating "sprouts a la Wakefield" and waiting for Sutcliffe to make up a hand of bridge. Thank goodness that Troods wll save the day with her flabby sponge!

[ActualMat]

Bamber, Huntley, Bridger, Philpott, all eating "sprouts a la Wakefield" and waiting for Sutcliffe to make up a hand of bridge. Thank goodness that Troods wll save the day with her flabby sponge!

Dare I ask what a flabby sponge is.

[scipio_usmc]

Dare I ask what a flabby sponge is.

I assumed spongecake but was afraid to ask

[APRIL]

Dare I ask what a flabby sponge is.

Half baked, perhaps?