Leon Brittan, RIP

Post by **spot** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 9:56 am

Oscar Namechange;1472424 wrote: Come off It Spot. You know full well I had every opportunity to send that bile about you out en masse.
I'm unaware such material ever existed.

As for Clancy's photochops, all I know is that you were still laughing in public, a year after I first complained to you about your profile, that the images were still there. I have no idea whether you've since taken the stuff down. Even if you did finally delete it, you left it there far too long to deserve anything but anger on my part.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:07 am

spot;1472428 wrote: I'm unaware such material ever existed.

As for Clancy's photochops, all I know is that you were still laughing in public, a year after I first complained to you about your profile, that the images were still there. I have no idea whether you've since taken the stuff down. Even if you did finally delete it, you left it there far too long to deserve anything but anger on my part.

Yes you were Spot. Come on. We discussed It In a reported post thread with Koan. The fact remains that I sent Bryn a copy when I could have been far more malicious. Your anger was misdirected. You should have been angry at the person who sent them to me or the person who mocked them up In the first place. Yes, I posted the Burger King one on facebook and left It there too long. Yet, that was nothing compared to copies being sent out all over the shop by others. When I did realise how offended you were, I did delete It. I was under no obligation to do that. I agreed to your request.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:47 am

Bryn Mawr;1472352 wrote: I also have a damn'd good memory and I can assure you that Spot was consistently against Obama getting elected because that would allow the Republicans to shift the blame for the results of their wars onto the subsequent government.

Sorry for the delay In replying here but this took some time.

I very much beg to differ... My wording In quoting Spot may not have been 100 % accurate given It was 6 years ago.... but the content with his comparison to Kennedy was correct.

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... a-win.html

Post by **Betty Boop** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:02 pm

Oscar Namechange;1472451 wrote: Sorry for the delay In replying here but this took some time.

I very much beg to differ... My wording In quoting Spot may not have been 100 % accurate given It was 6 years ago.... but the content with his comparison to Kennedy was correct.

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... a-win.html

I'm totally lost, what post number exactly are we meant to be looking at?

Post by **Peter Lake** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:11 pm

Betty Boop;1472467 wrote: I'm totally lost, what post number exactly are we meant to be looking at? 2

Right under the opening post.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:49 pm

Oscar Namechange;1472451 wrote: Sorry for the delay In replying here but this took some time.

I very much beg to differ... My wording In quoting Spot may not have been 100 % accurate given It was 6 years ago.... but the content with his comparison to Kennedy was correct.

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... a-win.html

Two things :-

Firstly and most importantly, what about the rest of the post that you've oh so conveniently ignored in both your reply and your subsequent posting.

Secondly, as a point of correctness, are you blind to the difference between thinking Obama personally is a good guy and thinking that he should be elected because "he's the best thing for the US since Kennedy"? He was consistent in saying that Obama should *not* be elected because it would be the worst thing for the US.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:51 pm

Peter Lake;1472469 wrote: 2

Right under the opening post.

What on Earth has that post got to do with Oscar's post (#53) that BB quotes and is is querying.

Maybe we should be looking at posts #8 and #10 instead!

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 12:56 pm

Bryn Mawr;1472471 wrote: Two things :-

Firstly and most importantly, what about the rest of the post that you've oh so conveniently ignored in both your reply and your subsequent posting.

Secondly, as a point of correctness, are you blind to the difference between thinking Obama personally is a good guy and thinking that he should be elected because "he's the best thing for the US since Kennedy"? He was consistent in saying that Obama should *not* be elected because it would be the worst thing for the US.

True. Yet this Is focusing on what I posted which was :

I remember one post In particular where you said along the lines that Obama was the best hope for the US since Kennedy.

It was not exact granted but the crux was right. This Is the exact post I recalled.

Spot posted

What you've got there is Jack Kennedy reborn with some extra plus points. Take good care of him, you're only averaging one every fifty years.

How does anyone not Interpret that as favourable to Obama ? I merely went by what I recalled... I have produced the post I recalled. Exactly the same as a post was produced when my opinion changed on Jade Goody. Spot produced the post he recalled, exactly as I have here.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 1:00 pm

Oscar Namechange;1472474 wrote: True. Yet this Is focusing on what I posted which was :

I remember one post In particular where you said along the lines that Obama was the best hope for the US since Kennedy.

It was not exact granted but the crux was right. This Is the exact post I recalled.

Spot posted

What you've got there is Jack Kennedy reborn with some extra plus points. Take good care of him, you're only averaging one every fifty years.

How does anyone not Interpret that as favourable to Obama ? I merely went by what I recalled... I have produced the post I recalled. Exactly the same as a post was produced when my opinion changed on Jade Goody. Spot produced the post he recalled, exactly as I have here.

Firstly and most importantly, what about the rest of the post that you've oh so conveniently ignored in both your reply and your subsequent posting.

Ignoring it will only make me take action against you to see it that will get your attention.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 1:08 pm

Bryn Mawr;1472476 wrote: Firstly and most importantly, what about the rest of the post that you've oh so conveniently ignored in both your reply and your subsequent posting.

Ignoring it will only make me take action against you to see it that will get your attention.
OK.. what thread do you mean ? This thread or the 7 year old thread ? I'm more than happy to address anything.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 1:12 pm

Oscar Namechange;1472477 wrote: OK.. what thread do you mean ? This thread or the 7 year old thread ? I'm more than happy to address anything.

Are you incapable of reading what I've read or are you being deliberately obtuse?

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 1:15 pm

Bryn Mawr;1472479 wrote: Are you incapable of reading what I've read or are you being deliberately obtuse?

Maybe we should be looking at posts #8 and #10 instead!

No Bryn. Right I'm assuming you mean this thread so I'll go look

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 1:24 pm

Right, so If It's this thread, how many times have I been lambasted on this forum for typo's and error's ?

How many times do I have to watch posts Informing members I am a criminal ? Or Peter has been banned.

Yet, I see no action.

I have spent a great deal of time today to show Spot I am not a malicious person. I have tried to reason with him quite civilly that he doesn't need to chase banned members around new forums.. I have even sincerely offered words of praise. In fact, In the end, It was probably the most civil conversation weve had In may a year.

I have repeatedly offered him a cease fire since posts 8 and 10. I have made an genuine offer to deregister from the forum he Is on If It makes him happier.

Since posts 8 and 10, you tell me. What else could I say to be more generous and compromise?

You are threatening action against me when In fact we had got way beyond that. There seems to be absolutely no word on the personal attack Spot made on me as the criminal In Peter's thread. He could have reported the post. Remember, Peter was Infracted for writing personal Info on a member by posting the town she lived In. By the same token, why has a post giving personal Info that I am a criminal not been acted upon ?

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 2:07 pm

Oscar Namechange;1472482 wrote: Right, so If It's this thread, how many times have I been lambasted on this forum for typo's and error's ?

How many times do I have to watch posts Informing members I am a criminal ? Or Peter has been banned.

Yet, I see no action.

I have spent a great deal of time today to show Spot I am not a malicious person. I have tried to reason with him quite civilly that he doesn't need to chase banned members around new forums.. I have even sincerely offered words of praise. In fact, In the end, It was probably the most civil conversation weve had In may a year.

I have repeatedly offered him a cease fire since posts 8 and 10. I have made an genuine offer to deregister from the forum he Is on If It makes him happier.

Since posts 8 and 10, you tell me. What else could I say to be more generous and compromise?

You are threatening action against me when In fact we had got way beyond that. There seems to be absolutely no word on the personal attack Spot made on me as the criminal In Peter's thread. He could have reported the post. Remember, Peter was Infracted for writing personal Info on a member by posting the town she lived In. By the same token, why has a post giving personal Info that I am a criminal not been acted upon ?

So firstly you go in all guns blazing over an irrelevant triviality, completely disrupting a memorial thread, and then you want a mitigating factor that you've ground it into the dust since then?

The first few posts are the problem, not the subsequent idiocy.

And for the record, you have been the one to bring up your court case most frequently to the extent you appear to glory in it.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 2:17 pm

She really ain't much in the criminal department, is she now? Hardly worthy of the name, IMO.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 2:38 pm

Bryn Mawr;1472496 wrote: So firstly you go in all guns blazing over an irrelevant triviality, completely disrupting a memorial thread, and then you want a mitigating factor that you've ground it into the dust since then?

The first few posts are the problem, not the subsequent idiocy.

And for the record, you have been the one to bring up your court case most frequently to the extent you appear to glory in it. Over the past few months, the fact I am a criminal has been brought up by other members. You may have missed them. The reason I don't have a problem with them Is because I am In no doubt there was no real malicious Intent and they were thrown In such as the time FourPart questioned If I could stand for Parliament with a criminal record. If It's mentioned In posts, why should I not discuss It and set the facts straight.? Glory In It > You're having a laugh. It made me seriously Ill and put me In hospital for two weeks after the trial with stress exhaustion. I was diagnosed as clinically depressed and dangerously underweight from exhaustion. You go through two arrests, a four day trial having to wait a year until It came to court. You watch your husband trying to deal with advanced cancer with that crap going on.You watch the effect on your children then go through another Investigation with the IPCC for 4 months. You spend weeks fighting to have libel removed. If anything I may vent here but you go through that Bryn and then come back and tell me you never need mention It again.

Sorry Bryn, that does annoy me. We all make mistakes In life but my god I paid during that year.

theia · Post by **theia** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 2:44 pm

Oscar Namechange;1472510 wrote: Over the past few months, the fact I am a criminal has been brought up by other members. You may have missed them. The reason I don't have a problem with them Is because I am In no doubt there was no real malicious Intent and they were thrown In such as the time FourPart questioned If I could stand for Parliament with a criminal record. If It's mentioned In posts, why should I not discuss It and set the facts straight.? Glory In It > You're having a laugh. It made me seriously Ill and put me In hospital for two weeks after the trial with stress exhaustion. I was diagnosed as clinically depressed and dangerously underweight from exhaustion. You go through two arrests, a four day trial having to wait a year until It came to court. You watch your husband trying to deal with advanced cancer with that crap going on.You watch the effect on your children then go through another Investigation with the IPCC for 4 months. You spend weeks fighting to have libel removed. If anything I may vent here but you go through that Bryn and then come back and tell me you never need mention It again.

Sorry Bryn, that does annoy me. We all make mistakes In life but my god I paid during that year.

I take your point there, Oscar, it must have been hellish to go through that.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 2:55 pm

theia;1472514 wrote: I take your point there, Oscar, it must have been hellish to go through that.

Thank you friend. It was bad timing on my part. Peter had just had his radical open surgery to remove the cancer and replumb him.

There Is a local police officer here who I am very fond of. Hard as nails type. One night during an arrest where It was just him and the guy, the guy made a formal complaint that he'd been assaulted during the arrest. The officer was charged with assault and just like me It was a year he had to wait before the trial was held. He actually came Into the Take away when I was working one night to tell me he'd just been found not guilty. We'd been so worried for him. He got really choked up and then told us he was now off for a fortnights holiday to get over the stress. He said to me ' J I should have offered you more support. Only now do I know what you went through and I never believed this would actually make me Ill and have this effect on my children. That was one hard copper. Things did get better and doors did open for me. The lawyer knew I was ill through It and stuck by fantastically. So did the MP. They used to phone Peter just to ask, has she eaten today, did she sleep last night ? That's what I mean... don't think I glory In It. If a hardened copper had problems being on trial then don't assume an ordinary member of the public finds It a breeze.

Thanks Theia I do appreciate that...That's the last I shall say on the subject.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 3:04 pm

Oscar Namechange;1472519 wrote: That's the last I shall say on the subject.

There is no answer to that.........................is there ?

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 3:44 pm

Oscar Namechange;1472510 wrote: Over the past few months, the fact I am a criminal has been brought up by other members. You may have missed them. The reason I don't have a problem with them Is because I am In no doubt there was no real malicious Intent and they were thrown In such as the time FourPart questioned If I could stand for Parliament with a criminal record. If It's mentioned In posts, why should I not discuss It and set the facts straight.? Glory In It > You're having a laugh. It made me seriously Ill and put me In hospital for two weeks after the trial with stress exhaustion. I was diagnosed as clinically depressed and dangerously underweight from exhaustion. You go through two arrests, a four day trial having to wait a year until It came to court. You watch your husband trying to deal with advanced cancer with that crap going on.You watch the effect on your children then go through another Investigation with the IPCC for 4 months. You spend weeks fighting to have libel removed. If anything I may vent here but you go through that Bryn and then come back and tell me you never need mention It again.

Sorry Bryn, that does annoy me. We all make mistakes In life but my god I paid during that year.

And once again it's a deflection into a side stream so as to avoid the main subject

Are we really to go back to the days when every time I went away you'd stir up trouble? I put you on permanent probation then and I'm very close to pulling the plug now!

Post by **spot** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 3:53 pm

Oscar Namechange;1472474 wrote: Spot posted

What you've got there is Jack Kennedy reborn with some extra plus points. Take good care of him, you're only averaging one every fifty years.

How does anyone not Interpret that as favourable to Obama ?

I shall reply simply to correct your mistake. The first sentence warns America that Senator Obama has charisma in buckets - he's Jack Kennedy reborn with some extra plus points. The second sentence notes that the Americans assassinate around one president every fifty years, and that on balance they're due for another. That being why I said "Take good care of him", which means nothing at all with any alternative interpretation. The only way it can mean anything is in the context of Kennedy's assassination. I know this to be the meaning of the post because I recall working out the number of years per assassination, which involved dividing the length of the Federal Republic by the number of murdered presidents.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 3:56 pm

Bryn Mawr;1472553 wrote: And once again it's a deflection into a side stream so as to avoid the main subject

Are we really to go back to the days when every time I went away you'd stir up trouble? I put you on permanent probation then and I'm very close to pulling the plug now!

Bryn. I am tired of the fights. Do what you feel you have to or what I deserve. I have tried my hardest all day to get through this with Spot and all I see Is public threats now from you almost as though It's fun to see Oscar go through round two after I have been most generous In compromise. I see no action on a post that was clearly designed to bait. It's clear here what's happening. Do you what you feel Is right, It's your forum. I have called for a cease fire with Spot long ago. We could have moved on from here. Peter has apologised also to Spot and admitted he was In the wrong. For Spot to return, Oscar must go.

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 4:01 pm

spot;1472557 wrote: I shall reply simply to correct your mistake. The first sentence warns America that Senator Obama has charisma in buckets - he's Jack Kennedy reborn with some extra plus points. The second sentence notes that the Americans assassinate around one president every fifty years, and that on balance they're due for another. That being why I said "Take good care of him", which means nothing at all with any alternative interpretation. The only way it can mean anything is in the context of Kennedy's assassination. I know this to be the meaning of the post because I recall working out the number of years per assassination, which involved dividing the length of the Federal Republic by the number of murdered presidents.

Yes, I know you did Spot. That's not the Issue now Is It ? For my own curiosity, I went looking for the post on your post on Kennedy and Obama just to assure myself I did see It. If I'd have got It wrong, I'd have said so. To be honest, after 7 years, I was surprised I even found It. You have now made It clearer as that explanation was not there 7 years ago. Maybe I Interpreted It wrong? That In essence Is the problems associated with only having the written word.

Post by **spot** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 4:07 pm

Oscar Namechange;1472559 wrote: Yes, I know you did Spot. That's not the Issue now Is It ? For my own curiosity, I went looking for the post on your post on Kennedy and Obama just to assure myself I did see It. If I'd have got It wrong, I'd have said so. To be honest, after 7 years, I was surprised I even found It. You have now made It clearer as that explanation was not there 7 years ago. Maybe I Interpreted It wrong? That In essence Is the problems associated with only having the written word.
You would perhaps have found it more quickly if you'd searched for the other post in the thread which you remembered: "How we will laugh at the doubters, oh faithful one's, when Ali Bingo is trouced by McCain.".

Post by **Oscar Namechange** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 4:14 pm

spot;1472560 wrote: You would perhaps have found it more quickly if you'd searched for the other post in the thread which you remembered: "How we will laugh at the doubters, oh faithful one's, when Ali Bingo is trouced by McCain.".

I read the entire thread and yep, I got that one wrong eh? :wah: However, one thing I seem to have been correct on was my prediction he was going to be a failure.

Post by **Peter Lake** » Fri Jan 23, 2015 4:37 pm

Bryn Mawr;1472553 wrote: And once again it's a deflection into a side stream so as to avoid the main subject

Are we really to go back to the days when every time I went away you'd stir up trouble? I put you on permanent probation then and I'm very close to pulling the plug now!

You have demanded she explain posts 8 and 10 with public threats. So how about you do likewise Bryn, just out of fairness ? You read right through this thread and show me where before post 40 anything that warranted the bait set for me. It was by most reading viewed as a fairly healthy discussion without any real upset until post 40. Have a look and also take note, that i had already posted in the thread which i am sure was seen given the contribution. The fact i'd already posted in the debate shows that the uncalled for dig at my second post was deliberate. Why no reaction to my first post there? How can you keep pulling her back over this again and again yet ignore the cheap dig which was posted long before the posts in this thread? You are hounding her here Bryn with public threats yet you've not addressed why a post could be made to bait in another thread.

Please show me where before post 40, that post was warranted given it was posted long before this.?

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... uts-4.html

She has indeed been most compromising all day but now it's clear that round two with Oscar is far more entertaining than the desire to move on. I'll be honest here Bryn, I had you down as fairer than this. Also, silence from other members here does not dictate endorsement of your actions.

This is the forum who boasts light moderation yet can not lay off to allow two members to sort things out politely as they have here. Why that's not been allowed i can only guess.

I'm not calling you out so don't come back with that. I really would like to know how anything before post 40 incited a personal attack.

Post by **Bryn Mawr** » Sat Jan 24, 2015 4:16 am

Peter Lake;1472563 wrote: You have demanded she explain posts 8 and 10 with public threats. So how about you do likewise Bryn, just out of fairness ? You read right through this thread and show me where before post 40 anything that warranted the bait set for me. It was by most reading viewed as a fairly healthy discussion without any real upset until post 40. Have a look and also take note, that i had already posted in the thread which i am sure was seen given the contribution. The fact i'd already posted in the debate shows that the uncalled for dig at my second post was deliberate. Why no reaction to my first post there? How can you keep pulling her back over this again and again yet ignore the cheap dig which was posted long before the posts in this thread? You are hounding her here Bryn with public threats yet you've not addressed why a post could be made to bait in another thread.

Please show me where before post 40, that post was warranted given it was posted long before this.?

http://www.forumgarden.com/forums/gener ... uts-4.html

She has indeed been most compromising all day but now it's clear that round two with Oscar is far more entertaining than the desire to move on. I'll be honest here Bryn, I had you down as fairer than this. Also, silence from other members here does not dictate endorsement of your actions.

This is the forum who boasts light moderation yet can not lay off to allow two members to sort things out politely as they have here. Why that's not been allowed i can only guess.

I'm not calling you out so don't come back with that. I really would like to know how anything before post 40 incited a personal attack.

Show me anything before post #8 that warranted the heavy handed thump around the ears - by post #40 the thread was already irretrievably trashed.

I have tried, many times, to have a quiet word with Oscar by PM and it has not worked. As I say, she has been on probation since I ran out of patience with having to sort out the trouble she had caused every time I come back from holiday.

Two members do not sort things out politely by trampling over the Garden - read the thread, it's a memorial thread or was until post #8.

To be honest, although this thread has been the trigger, the main problem I have is the way Oscar (and you) have reacted to my post telling her that enough is enough - anything to divert the subject rather than to address it. That does not suggest that anything is likely to change anytime soon and I've no intention to allow this to go on.

FourPart · Post by **FourPart** » Sat Jan 24, 2015 5:12 am

Firstly, as I interpreted Spot initial post regarding Kennedy, I read it as being a sarcastic comment to Nomad's posting - although that is just my interpretation - I could be wrong in my understanding of what was said.

Secondly, as to my first having mentioned about about Oscar's criminal record regarding standing for election - if she hadn't advertised it so much I wouldn't have known the record had existed.

Post by **spot** » Sat Jan 24, 2015 5:39 am

A great man, Nomad. Nobody could push a thread off course faster.