Poll -Truce with the Jeremy Bamber forum.

[Tim Invictus]

Shona you can still expose or challenge anything you like on the Blue Forum or anywhere else!

 

[puglove]

Shona you can still expose or challenge anything you like on the Blue Forum or anywhere else!

 

You reckon??!!  I don't know how this truce thing works, we seem to have lost Jo, we can't name anyone, I'm not sure what we can challenge. We'll end up like Compo and Clegg, rolling down a hill in a bath. I don't want to insult anyone, but I'm not good with bullshit.

[puglove]

Shona you can still expose or challenge anything you like on the Blue Forum or anywhere else!

 

I'm not sure that we can. Most of us on this forum are reprobates banned from the blue. We're just shouting at ourselves. We all know that Sheila was murdered, it's so bloody obvious, but we aren't allowed to say.

[puglove]

Shona you can still expose or challenge anything you like on the Blue Forum or anywhere else!

 

I'm not sure that we can. Most of us on this forum are reprobates banned from the blue. We're just shouting at ourselves. We all know that Sheila was murdered, it's so bloody obvious, but we aren't allowed to say.

Where is the blood spatter on Sheila's nightie, legs and arms, after the close contact shots to the boys and June? How did she carry the bullets, when she needed to reload?

[John]

Constructive criticism of those on the blue forum will continue and to that end I would hope to see guest posting brought back at the earliest opportunity.

Then I'm no longer willing to be part of this on both counts. I've had enough, I think it's no longer practical to be a member of both forums and I'd prefer to be on the blue forum.

Obviously...you want to run with the liars.

I think people want to stop prevaricating, this forum will not be used by them as an escape from the blue forum.  This forum was set up primarily to dispute the rubbish being posted over there and will continue to do so.  Members are either with us or against us, there can be no middle ground.

From now on any member leaving to join the blue forum will be barred permanently.  Actions have consequences!

Do you mean deleting their account on here and posting on blue, they will be banned? Or do you mean anyone who posts on blue will be banned even if they have an account on here? Just want this clearing up.

Just ignore that comment, it was made in haste.  We will see if we can formulate some guidelines which we can all agree with because that to me is the way forward.  We have to know the boundaries.

[goatboy]

I think a lot of the comments against blue forum members were unnecessarily personal in their nature. We can pick holes in their arguments without getting personal and just because we disagree with their opinions on the Bamber murders it doesn't automatically make them idiotic or moronic. Though frankly some of them do tend to be.

[Angelo222]

I think a lot of the comments against blue forum members were unnecessarily personal in their nature. We can pick holes in their arguments without getting personal and just because we disagree with their opinions on the Bamber murders it doesn't automatically make them idiotic or moronic. Though frankly some of them do tend to be.

Many of us have suffered abuse while we were members of the blue forum which was later reflected in our posts when the new forums were created.  When the old forum was lost many of us were shocked and appalled and sought revenge in the only way we knew and that was through our posts.  We have got over that fiasco so we should be big enough to move on and take the lead as we did with the truce agreement.

[Andrea]

The problem, as i see it, and this is only MY OPINION, is this. When anti's posted on the blue forum Jacke Preece often got offended even though the anti's were putting their point across, arguments got heated on both sides. But it came to the point where we had to be careful what we said because jackie kicked up a fuss and anti's got banned, so in the end, IMO jackie could say whatever she liked and [ censored word] got booted. Then pictures of John on toilet seats etc were posted by Jackie, she started this forum war, i have always said that, and i still stick too it.

when the previous forum was set up, for somewhere for [ censored word] to have a voice it then turned into what we had a couple of weeks back, tit for tat bickering, no need for any of it really, but as i said thats just my opinion.
I still say jackie brought the abuse on herself, there was no need for it to become as nasty as it did, but there you go.

[Andrea]

What im saying is [ censored word] needed a place to voice their opinions, we couldnt do that on blue without being attacked, or banned.

people tend to get their own back when given the chance.

BUT, we have stopped the bickering and Preece is rightly banned from both forum's. Things will now hopefully settle down, i would welcome members of blue on here if they want to debate. Im sure many posters here would do too.

[John]

What im saying is [ censored word] needed a place to voice their opinions, we couldnt do that on blue without being attacked, or banned.

people tend to get their own back when given the chance.

BUT, we have stopped the bickering and Preece is rightly banned from both forum's. Things will now hopefully settle down, i would welcome members of blue on here if they want to debate. Im sure many posters here would do too.

I agree with your analysis of what went on Andrea and there is no doubt that Jackie Preece was out to smear anyone who dared speak out against Jeremy.  And the when he turned on her she couldn't wait to post his letters.  She tried the same old trick on Twitter but was effectively barricaded into protecting her account.  She wouldn't have been able to post those abusive pictures if there had been proper moderation on the blue forum but Tesko et all loved it and turned a blind eye.  They did the same when she threaten ProBoards that she would nobble their advertisers if they didn't shut the forum down and she boasted all this on the blue forum while Tesko and the then mods lapped it up.  They didn't think that we would come back and twice as strong and that took them by surprise.   Then when Hall started her rein of abuse a few weeks ago the blue forum were clearly very content to sit back again and do nothing.  In the end I approached Roch to do something because some of the material Hall was posting breached a Court Order.  The material was removed immediately and as an acknowledgement of this cooperation the Roch threads on here were archived.  I think it was Joanne who took up the issue after that and between her and Patti a truce of sorts was achieved even though Hall tried to scupper it in her usual adorable way.  So that is where we are now and it seems to work but will need a bit of tweaking here and there.

[Myster]

What im saying is [ censored word] needed a place to voice their opinions, we couldnt do that on blue without being attacked, or banned.

people tend to get their own back when given the chance.

BUT, we have stopped the bickering and Preece is rightly banned from both forum's. Things will now hopefully settle down, i would welcome members of blue on here if they want to debate. Im sure many posters here would do too.

Welcome them by all means..., but I don't think you'll have many takers Andrea. People over there are too set in their views to change, and when they do make the jump like Patti they run back scared, because nearly all regular posters here know that the case is dead in the water and won't take any bull.
It would be pointless say, for [ censored word] like vidvic to come over because he knows the score, tells it like it is and is doing a great job there by constantly prodding at agent 006⅞, even though it goes in one ear and straight out the other.

I've never been a member over there, have no desire to be, and I came late to this forum, although I grew up with the case and have taken a passing interest over the years, through newspaper articles etc. My interest was rekindled when I found this and the previous sabotaged forum where all the many case documents, photos, etc., were thankfully provided by John/Admin and which are not accessible otherwise, unless your a blue forum member.

There are a lot of members here, but few regular posters. Whenever I've glanced at the "what people are viewing" page most of the guests are looking at the Kevin Craigie threads. Bamber is old news. And really, people (at present anyway) haven't got the time, inclination or interest to discuss other cases in depth here.

Jo was right in one sense, in that whatever she posted was just acknowledged and glossed over, simply because there was too much info to take in, and a lot of us have lives elsewhere on the internet or in the real world to be getting on with.

[John]

Good points guys.  The other factor worth mentioning was that many who came across to post here whilst maintaining their membership on the blue forum were intimidated to such an extent that they left.  This even happened to Roch who is now a Global Moderator on the blue forum.  I have heard many others complain of how they were given a hard time for simply registering here. I can tell you that it reached the point where anyone coming across had to do so anonymously and keep quiet about it.

Graham Belton was the worst offender if I remember correctly but he got his just desserts in the end and cannot even post in his own name any more. A tad annoying that Grahame...eh?

[Mr Justice K]

Good points guys.  The other factor worth mentioning was that many who came across to post here whilst maintaining their membership on the blue forum were intimidated to such an extent that they left.  This even happened to Roch who is now a Global Moderator on the blue forum.  I have heard many others complain of how they were given a hard time for simply registering here. I can tell you that it reached the point where anyone coming across had to do so anonymously and keep quiet about it.

Graham Belton was the worst offender if I remember correctly but he got his just desserts in the end and cannot even post in his own name any more. A tad annoying that Grahame...eh?

Good evening.   I observe the truce is holding albeit with a few teething problems.  I do hope it prevails in the long term.  There should be guidelines but kept as simple as possible.

Keep up the good work.

[Tim Invictus]

Andy has hit the nail on the head ... without the Spinsters (Hall and Preece) the conditions we now call a truce are actually just normal debating! I have just read Tesko's latest 'informant with helicopters" utter tosh and laughed my head off!!! Mike is lying through his teeth and everyone knows it including Bamber ... the 'official' Bamber site goes out of it's way to stress they are NOT accusing the police of shooting Sheila the second time. That must be a reaction to Tesko's fantasy theories!

See I have accused Tesko of lying because I am sure he is ... no need for home addresses or any other personal abuse! Without Preece followed by Hall ..... stalking just isn't a problem!

So let's just carry on exposing the Bamberettes without digging into their personal lives ... some of them are even good people just misguided and dare I say just plain wrong! Patti for example is well liked on both sides of the divide! Roch isn't a bad lad even though his attempts to challenge Mike fall into the very weak category!

The only guildlines we need is NO PERSONAL STALKING with a caveat perhaps we should be less hostile than previously! Rather than call Mertol mental for example, we should just say he is 'challenged'!

What we actually need is a damn good bonifide Miscarriage Of Justice case to support! Simon Hall was a possibility but his mental wife scuppered that!

[Admin]

A reminder to anyone who hasn't yet voted in the two polls that they finish tomorrow.  You can also change your vote at any time. 

Poll - Guest posting

Poll - Should we continue the truce?