Another Freudian Slip?

[Stephanie]

This forum is for debate---------right ? You stick to your views and I to mine.

You're all busy condemning Jeremy ( who's already where you want him to be ) yet when I read ALL the posts you describe him as being,your own behaviour is questionable !!

But according to you we are't allowed our own views, unless they agree with yours? It is JB's behaviour that is questionable, hence the different points raised for discussion.

[lookout]

But according to you we are't allowed our own views, unless they agree with yours? It is JB's behaviour that is questionable, hence the different points raised for discussion.

Of course you're allowed your own views. It's how you put them over. It seems as though none of you can wait until your opponent posts before you pounce,not just one of you,but ALL,particularly Mat who breezes in from nowhere as soon as he sees a post which I've written. That's NOT debating-------it's nit-picking at its worst.

[guest154]

Of course you're allowed your own views. It's how you put them over. It seems as though none of you can wait until your opponent posts before you pounce,not just one of you,but ALL,particularly Mat who breezes in from nowhere as soon as he sees a post which I've written. That's NOT debating-------it's nit-picking at its worst.

Oh, whatever, Lookout. You're not pleasant to guilters and are just as guilty of nit picking.
 I don't "breeze" in, but if I comment on your posts more than I do most other members it's because yours are the most outlandish and often people have to ask where you got your information from before they can debate it.

[Stephanie]

Of course you're allowed your own views. It's how you put them over. It seems as though none of you can wait until your opponent posts before you pounce,not just one of you,but ALL,particularly Mat who breezes in from nowhere as soon as he sees a post which I've written. That's NOT debating-------it's nit-picking at its worst.

That's a bit rich coming from you Lookout. Do you not see how you tend to get personal when you don't agree with something?

You speak as though this is a game or something? Opponent? An opponent is someone who competes or opposes in a game or contest! I'm not competing with anyone and I'm most certainly not playing games!

I can't help but get a sense you are projecting your own feelings?

[susan]

Mat I am a guilter and lookout is very pleasant with me and discusses the case in a nice manner and is never abusive or unpleasant

[guest154]

Mat I am a guilter and lookout is very pleasant with me and discusses the case in a nice manner and is never abusive or unpleasant

Pretty sure that's not what you were saying a few months ago, Susan.

[Jane]

Of course you're allowed your own views. It's how you put them over. It seems as though none of you can wait until your opponent posts before you pounce,not just one of you,but ALL,particularly Mat who breezes in from nowhere as soon as he sees a post which I've written. That's NOT debating-------it's nit-picking at its worst.

This isn't one sided, Lookout. You have aimed some really STINGING side swipes at me, that's without going down the adoption route........................however, I have no desire to be vindictive so I'm going to say that you, on occasions, leave yourself wide open to being got at. You sometimes come out with, what sound like OUTLANDISH comments, which, whilst possibly being true, are accompanied ONLY by that you've read it "somewhere." We've ALL read stuff "somewhere" but most of us question what we read BEFORE we put it on forum for public scrutiny where we would expect it to be questioned if it didn't sound believable.

[susan]

Pretty sure that's not what you were saying a few months ago, Susan.

Mat lookout and I had words a few months ago over Mason Doyle I held my hands up to ngb and apologised to lookout as I was entirely at fault.  I was out of order and quite dreadful and lookout did accept my apology and we are OK now she would have been justified in telling me to "do one"

[lookout]

Oh, whatever, Lookout. You're not pleasant to guilters and are just as guilty of nit picking.
 I don't "breeze" in, but if I comment on your posts more than I do most other members it's because yours are the most outlandish and often people have to ask where you got your information from before they can debate it.

I wouldn't exactly say that the guilters were overly pleasant with me either,and because of it,they'll get the same attitude back,except that I haven't got it down to as finer art as they as I find being nasty doesn't come as easy to me !!
What could be more " outlandish " than a bicycle and a wetsuit ? I didn't mention those,your team did,trying to scrape what was left in the barrel.

Speaking of information,your contribution has consisted mainly of snipes towards me,and nothing pleases you more than to see your gang descend upon me.Am I bovvered ? NO.! Because I've passed the juvenile stage of " safety in numbers ".

[guest154]

I wouldn't exactly say that the guilters were overly pleasant with me either,and because of it,they'll get the same attitude back,except that I haven't got it down to as finer art as they as I find being nasty doesn't come as easy to me !!
What could be more " outlandish " than a bicycle and a wetsuit ? I didn't mention those,your team did,trying to scrape what was left in the barrel.

Speaking of information,your contribution has consisted mainly of snipes towards me,and nothing pleases you more than to see your gang descend upon me.Am I bovvered ? NO.! Because I've passed the juvenile stage of " safety in numbers ".

Perhaps you should name my "gang" so they can speak for themselves as I don't want to speak for anyone else but I don't feel I am part of ANY gang. Perhaps there are just a good number of people who take offence to YOUR posts - doesn't make us a gang.
I have taken offense to some of your posts and I do believe you can be nasty, I can't recall who you were having a go at the other day, I think it may have been April where you said she had shown her true colours, that's being nasty.

What could be more " outlandish " than a bicycle and a wetsuit ? I didn't mention those,your team did,trying to scrape what was left in the barrel.

That didn't start on this forum, Lookout.

[Jane]

I wouldn't exactly say that the guilters were overly pleasant with me either,and because of it,they'll get the same attitude back,except that I haven't got it down to as finer art as they as I find being nasty doesn't come as easy to me !!
What could be more " outlandish " than a bicycle and a wetsuit ? I didn't mention those,your team did,trying to scrape what was left in the barrel.

Speaking of information,your contribution has consisted mainly of snipes towards me,and nothing pleases you more than to see your gang descend upon me.Am I bovvered ? NO.! Because I've passed the juvenile stage of " safety in numbers ".

Except, I imagine that you're FULLY aware that those of the Guilty Party who are here now have NEVER subscribed to the sheer stupidity of wet suits on bicycles, OTHER than to ridicule those who did, yet you're content to tar everyone with the same brush.

[lookout]

That's a bit rich coming from you Lookout. Do you not see how you tend to get personal when you don't agree with something?

You speak as though this is a game or something? Opponent? An opponent is someone who competes or opposes in a game or contest! I'm not competing with anyone and I'm most certainly not playing games!

I can't help but get a sense you are projecting your own feelings?

I'm neither playing games,nor am I as obsessed with the case as you are. I couldn't care less either way !

[guest154]

I'm neither playing games,nor am I as obsessed with the case as you are. I couldn't care less either way !

You care enough to take offence when anyone is negative about Bamber, to spend a lot of time on here AND to write to him.

[Patti]

This topic has been locked and if this argument continues on another thread that will be locked too.  Please try to keep on track and discuss the case rather than make personal attacks.

The thread will be cut back to the point of discussion when I have the time to do so, which will not be tonight.

[Reader]

He did mention it taking him around 10 mins to look up the number and I will find the reference.

Jeremy was asked "Approximately how long would it have taken you to find the number and get through?" He replied "Ten minutes at the outside." That's not the same thing as saying it took him around ten minutes.