[brockwell-spireite]

[quote name='Stockholm Spireite' timestamp='1460848819' post='1202868']
Let me repeat - I asked you to confirm you knew the newspaper had doctored the photo; you presented a response as only a theory. Hardly concrete, is it? With all your legal background, that's not exactly a staunch defence of your acquaintance, is it?

I look forward to you proving the image was altered by the newspaper for their own means - you are the one who has made that claim. Or are you going to hide behind the "I don't need to do anything for you" reasoning again? If that's the case, then I will refer you to your own doctrine of "I don't have to prove anything to you" and then stalemate is reached - I get the feeling that you would be happier with that than me. The burden of proof is still with you, sir.

As for the "unethical practices" I refer you to your own comment about people (or newspapers) pursuing their own agenda. That's the comment you made, not me. You made a comment that your friend DB had not altered the image. I'm not promoting or condoning unethical practices. Indeed, I would refer you to the quote on the RPI website that states:


We are dedicated to proper business practices and ethics in commodities at all times
source: Here you go


Perhaps you could also educate the savages and decipher what your friend means when he talks about "RPI's wherewithal and massive capacity" - or is that something you will add the rule of 'Omerta' to?

EDIT: Sorry for the typos folks, just back from watching games in Mamlmö and Norrkörping. It's been a long day

You can project all you like, I don't comment on who I know and who I don't and who I do business with and who I don't. Should I take the "omertà"
Comment as a racial Slur? Are you suggesting I'm involved in organised crime? .. Likewise you can call people savages on here if you like but I won't and haven't used that phrase that's all you building a straw man...

I've expressed my OPINION and I've given you my reasoning why, the chronology of the articles etc etc etc I've never claimed it was concrete only that it was logical in my opinion... If you disagree that's fine... Of course I can't categorically prove the theory ... The same way you've been unable to show me the doctored image anywhere else online... Neither of us are in a court of law were debating on a msg board.

I've been to Norkopping...friendly student population!

This post has been edited by brockwell-spireite: 17 April 2016 - 12:36 AM

[moondog]

brockwell-spireite, on 16 April 2016 - 11:51 PM, said:

As I said in one post... I was on a train... Friends wedding in Bury st Edmunds... Very nice it was too... Much better than watching Di Maio get bullied

Well it wasn't a posting on here, was there no evening reception then ?

[moondog]

[quote name='brockwell-spireite' timestamp='1460851700'

You can project all you like, I don't comment on who I know and who I don't and who I do business with and who I don't. Should I take the "omertà"
Comment as a racial Slur? Are you suggesting I'm involved in organised crime? .. Likewise you can call people savages on here if you like but I won't and haven't used that phrase that's all you building a straw man...

I've expressed my OPINION and I've given you my reasoning why, the chronology of the articles etc etc etc I've never claimed it was concrete only that it was logical in my opinion... If you disagree that's fine... Of course I can't categorically prove the theory ... The same way you've been unable to show me the doctored image anywhere else online... Neither of us are in a court of law were debating on a msg board.

I've been to Norkopping...friendly student population!
[/quote]

Surely logic dictates that the person who created a fake company website would be the one altering the photograph?

[dim view]

brockwell-spireite, on 17 April 2016 - 12:08 AM, said:

You can project all you like, I don't comment on who I know and who I don't and who I do business with and who I don't.

Ha ha. Shame CT doesn't have the same professional standards. You must be fuming. As I said, a strongly worded letter is required.

[Stockholm Spireite]

brockwell-spireite, on 17 April 2016 - 12:08 AM, said:

You can project all you like, I don't comment on who I know and who I don't and who I do business with and who I don't. Should I take the "omertà"
Comment as a racial Slur? Are you suggesting I'm involved in organised crime? .. Likewise you can call people savages on here if you like but I won't and haven't used that phrase that's all you building a straw man...

I've expressed my OPINION and I've given you my reasoning why, the chronology of the articles etc etc etc I've never claimed it was concrete only that it was logical in my opinion... If you disagree that's fine... Of course I can't categorically prove the theory ... The same way you've been unable to show me the doctored image anywhere else online... Neither of us are in a court of law were debating on a msg board.

I've been to Norkopping...friendly student population!

Omerta - defined as "A code of honour that places importance on silence". How do you make the leap that I am suggesting you are involved in organised crime? Would you care to retract that statement? This is you projecting another falsehood onto somebody else whilst you fail to respond adequately to a perfectly reasonable question.

There's nothing racist about using a single word from another language, unless that word is racist. Racism is defined as "differences in human character or ability and the belief that one group are superior to another". Or "Discrimination or prejudice based on race".

Are you projecting your own belief or definition of omerta and trying to taint me with it?

As for "educate the savages" - it's a well used phrase in many industries, texts and through generations as a means for someone better, more informed, to shine light and share wisdom with those not as well educated.

Suddenly, you're trying to become the defender of the bob's board savages, due to my "faux pas". You say I'm building a straw man, but it's not quite the same as the castle you're building on sand...

[brockwell-spireite]

Stockholm Spireite, on 17 April 2016 - 08:13 AM, said:

Omerta - defined as "A code of honour that places importance on silence". How do you make the leap that I am suggesting you are involved in organised crime? Would you care to retract that statement? This is you projecting another falsehood onto somebody else whilst you fail to respond adequately to a perfectly reasonable question.

There's nothing racist about using a single word from another language, unless that word is racist. Racism is defined as "differences in human character or ability and the belief that one group are superior to another". Or "Discrimination or prejudice based on race".

Are you projecting your own belief or definition of omerta and trying to taint me with it?

As for "educate the savages" - it's a well used phrase in many industries, texts and through generations as a means for someone better, more informed, to shine light and share wisdom with those not as well educated.

Suddenly, you're trying to become the defender of the bob's board savages, due to my "faux pas". You say I'm building a straw man, but it's not quite the same as the castle you're building on sand...

I asked if that was your inference because despite your pretence the definition of Omertà.... Indeed the only times in my life when I've heard the phrase Omertà has been in relation to the Mafia and organised crime and silence to the authorities.... Indeed the very first Google definition search of the term agrees with me.... Given my heritage and what you are suggesting about DB then that was how your post came across to me... Perhaps as you say it was the result of posting after a long day...but despite your protestations now I am sure I'm not the only one who associates Omertà with the Godfather movies! Italians have long suffered prejudices about Mafia stereotypes and use of that word in the context of this thread is in bad taste in my opinion.

I'm not defending anyone on Bobs board either, just wanted to point out your very provocative choice of language and make it clear that wasn't my opinion!

[Stockholm Spireite]

brockwell-spireite, on 17 April 2016 - 10:50 AM, said:

I asked if that was your inference because despite your pretence the definition of Omertà.... Indeed the only times in my life when I've heard the phrase Omertà has been in relation to the Mafia and organised crime and silence to the authorities.... Indeed the very first Google definition search of the term agrees with me.... Given my heritage and what you are suggesting about DB then that was how your post came across to me... Perhaps as you say it was the result of posting after a long day...but despite your protestations now I am sure I'm not the only one who associates Omertà with the Godfather movies! Italians have long suffered prejudices about Mafia stereotypes and use of that word in the context of this thread is in bad taste in my opinion.

I'm not defending anyone on Bobs board either, just wanted to point out your very provocative choice of language and make it clear that wasn't my opinion!

Let me make it clear for you...Omerta = silence. You are 'keyboard' silent when it comes to answering questions that are directed towards you. It is fair to say you are employing omerta, or even a diluted version of it. To verify this, look at your own posts when you refuse to answer questions raised by a number of different posters, directly to you.

I'm happy you've found a google search that agrees with you, and therefore you can jump on it to suit your agenda.

I have no clue of you heritage. I don't know your name and don't believe we've ever met. When you say "given your heritage...that was how your post came across to me" you are applying your own skewed context to the phrase and twisting my words to suit your own agenda. You could have just asked me to confirm instead of suggesting I believe you to be involved in organised crime. You can see that, right?

Please feel free to expand on what you believe I am suggesting about your friend, Dennis. Currently, I have not made any suggestions, but I wait for you to either fill in the blanks or get creative with another theory of your own where you state that "obviously, that's how it is" as your justification.

The result of my long day were a number of typos - as I stated in the post.

This post has been edited by Stockholm Spireite: 17 April 2016 - 11:07 AM

[brockwell-spireite]

Stockholm Spireite, on 17 April 2016 - 11:07 AM, said:

Let me make it clear for you...Omerta = silence. You are 'keyboard' silent when it comes to answering questions that are directed towards you. It is fair to say you are employing omerta, or even a diluted version of it. To verify this, look at your own posts when you refuse to answer questions raised by a number of different posters, directly to you.

I'm happy you've found a google search that agrees with you, and therefore you can jump on it to suit your agenda.

I have no clue of you heritage. I don't know your name and don't believe we've ever met. When you say "given your heritage...that was how your post came across to me" you are applying your own skewed context to the phrase and twisting my words to suit your own agenda. You could have just asked me to confirm instead of suggesting I believe you to be involved in organised crime. You can see that, right?

Please feel free to expand on what you believe I am suggesting about your friend, Dennis. Currently, I have not made any suggestions, but I wait for you to either fill in the blanks or get creative with another theory of your own where you state that "obviously, that's how it is" as your justification.

The result of my long day were a number of typos - as I stated in the post.

You know in my post when I typed a question mark after my words asking if I should take it as a slur and then when I asked what you were suggesting.... That is generally done when asking a question not making a statement, I think you're a smart guy... And by your own admission so do you... And you know what using the word omertà in a thread about criminal activity ... That references the Mafia in numerous Monza news articles within the same thread could look like to someone.... I didn't find a Google search to suit my definition... The majority of definitions of omertà relate to silence to the authorities about criminal activity, specifically Mafia related... The majority on this board even though they probably wouldn't admit it will have only ever heard that phrase in Mafia films... And you have to search much harder for an online definition of omertà that doesn't reference the Mafia than one that does!

The people of bobs board aren't an authority, they're football fans, me not discussing my own business is not "omerta" it's just not discussing private details with people with too much time on their hands that I've never met!

[Stockholm Spireite]

brockwell-spireite, on 17 April 2016 - 10:50 AM, said:

Indeed the very first Google definition search of the term agrees with me

brockwell-spireite, on 17 April 2016 - 11:20 AM, said:

I didn't find a Google search to suit my definition

Which statement from you should I believe?

Goodnight, sweet prince...

[brockwell-spireite]

Stockholm Spireite, on 17 April 2016 - 11:24 AM, said:

Which statement from you should I believe?

Goodnight, sweet prince...

Haha you've gone from waxing lyrical to that????? I didn't find a Google search that specifically suited my point... THE Google search agreed with me!! Sweet dreams clever boy x

This post has been edited by brockwell-spireite: 17 April 2016 - 11:41 AM

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Perhaps someone should tell 'BS' that his desperate attempts to defend dodgy Dennis (or whatever he's calling himself this week) have merely kept the thread ticking along and focus upon what's been exposed.

[brockwell-spireite]

MDCCCLXVI, on 17 April 2016 - 02:33 PM, said:

Perhaps someone should tell 'BS' that his desperate attempts to defend dodgy Dennis (or whatever he's calling himself this week) have merely kept the thread ticking along and focus upon what's been exposed.

Again... Pointing out "due diligence" that in my opinion doesn't make sense is what it is...

The whole thing will tick along for some people until CT is gone I reckon, some people appear to have a void in their life that these "investigations" are filling!

The continual moaning about the lack of a DT article is example of that...

I wonder why nobody doesn't just go to DA... Present their evidence and have done with it......

[moondog]

brockwell-spireite, on 17 April 2016 - 05:09 PM, said:

Again... Pointing out "due diligence" that in my opinion doesn't make sense is what it is...

The whole thing will tick along for some people until CT is gone I reckon, some people appear to have a void in their life that these "investigations" are filling!

The continual moaning about the lack of a DT article is example of that...

I wonder why nobody doesn't just go to DA... Present their evidence and have done with it......

Or in other words please tell me if DA has been provided with anything more than I've read on here so I can tell CT

[brockwell-spireite]

moondog, on 17 April 2016 - 06:01 PM, said:

Or in other words please tell me if DA has been provided with anything more than I've read on here so I can tell CT

That makes absolutely zero sense to me... one thing most of us could agree on is that DA and CT work closely together... I think you missed the sarcasm in my comment...

[Westbars Spireite]

How is Dirty Den anyway BS? Bearing up under the strain I hope.

[Forever a Spireite]

MDCCCLXVI, on 17 April 2016 - 02:33 PM, said:

Perhaps someone should tell 'BS' that his desperate attempts to defend dodgy Dennis (or whatever he's calling himself this week) have merely kept the thread ticking along and focus upon what's been exposed.

Chris is it time to finally put this to bed with the evidence collected?? You have said there's stuff that cant be printed on here. I'm sick of Brockwell **** talkin rubbish. Time to sort this and the turnipe once and for all.

[moondog]

brockwell-spireite, on 17 April 2016 - 06:14 PM, said:

That makes absolutely zero sense to me... one thing most of us could agree on is that DA and CT work closely together... I think you missed the sarcasm in my comment...

I think you'll find most disagree and you're right I missed and still can't see the sarcasm

[Sammy Spireite]

*Bump*

Now its back visible

[The Earl of Chesterfield]

Good, 'cos I've a couple of questions.

Firstly, is it true that Turner and Sutcliffe's enterprise is still admitting overseas arrivals?

Perhaps a messageboard member can confirm one way or the other

Then if so, who's supplying those arrivals?

Y'see unless they discover otherwise the suspicious on here might wonder if DB's accusation laden exit tantrum was merely a ruse and he's still involved somewhere in the background...

[brockwell-spireite]

MDCCCLXVI, on 28 April 2016 - 02:37 PM, said:

Good, 'cos I've a couple of questions.

Firstly, is it true that Turner and Sutcliffe's enterprise is still admitting overseas arrivals?

Perhaps a messageboard member can confirm one way or the other

Then if so, who's supplying those arrivals?

Y'see unless they discover otherwise the suspicious on here might wonder if DB's accusation laden exit tantrum was merely a ruse and he's still involved somewhere in the background...

The suspicious on here are free to do what they want... Why would you believe that CT or LS couldn't find players through their own contacts and advertising?