Swansea have the 19th Highest Wage Bill In Europe!!?!

Can I provide evidence he said that? Yes.

I didnt say your link suggested that? You are muddling yourself up here.

Provide the evidence then!

What will that gain? You will just invent another blind alley to keep a nonsensical discussion going. Why go through the effort of providing evidence when we can just do the latter anyway, saves me the time.

A shred of credibility for starters.. Enjoy. Nice to have you back though, and see they allow you have a computer again. I'm entertained.

Can I provide evidence he said that? Yes.

I didnt say your link suggested that? You are muddling yourself up here.

Provide the evidence then!

What will that gain? You will just invent another blind alley to keep a nonsensical discussion going. Why go through the effort of providing evidence when we can just do the latter anyway, saves me the time.

you stated quite categorically that you could provide the evidence! Yet, when challenged you withdraw your confident assertion. The characteristics of a charlatan and lair in my experience.

Surely, if you wish to engage in informed and accurate debate honesty and clarity area prerequisite! You criticised Cardiff City Supporters on Thai three for not seeking the truth and honest debate. When questioned about the veracity of your own statements you refuse to provide evidence.

You claim to speak " the truth" but when asked to provide evidence none is forthcoming.

You didn't answer my question, so shall repeat. What will that gain? You will just invent another blind alley to keep a nonsensical discussion going. Why go through the effort of providing evidence when we can just do the latter anyway, saves me the time.

Yes I did categorically state I could provide the evidence (still do). Where have I withdrawn my "confident assertion" (it is not an assertion by the way, it is a fact). Where have I criticised Thai CCFC fans? Your inaccurate posts are getting odder by the minute.

A shred of credibility for starters.. Enjoy. Nice to have you back though, and see they allow you have a computer again. I'm entertained.

We all know my credibility is unrivalled. Hence the reactions.

Can I provide evidence he said that? Yes.

I didnt say your link suggested that? You are muddling yourself up here.

Provide the evidence then!

What will that gain? You will just invent another blind alley to keep a nonsensical discussion going. Why go through the effort of providing evidence when we can just do the latter anyway, saves me the time.

you stated quite categorically that you could provide the evidence! Yet, when challenged you withdraw your confident assertion. The characteristics of a charlatan and lair in my experience.

Surely, if you wish to engage in informed and accurate debate honesty and clarity area prerequisite! You criticised Cardiff City Supporters on Thai three for not seeking the truth and honest debate. When questioned about the veracity of your own statements you refuse to provide evidence.

You claim to speak " the truth" but when asked to provide evidence none is forthcoming.

You didn't answer my question, so shall repeat. What will that gain? You will just invent another blind alley to keep a nonsensical discussion going. Why go through the effort of providing evidence when we can just do the latter anyway, saves me the time.

Yes I did categorically state I could provide the evidence (still do). Where have I withdrawn my "confident assertion" (it is not an assertion by the way, it is a fact). Where have I criticised Thai CCFC fans? Your inaccurate posts are getting odder by the minute.

Prove that the Chairman if the Swansea Supporters' Trust stated that the current majority shareholders of Swansea City FC apprciated the supporters influence over the appointment of Paul Clements was the most influence the trust and exerted over the appointment of a manager in the last fifteen years. Surely, that can't be so difficult if it so well documented!

The point of this pursuit from honesty from you, is to illustrate that the trust has no influence whatsoever ever on the decisions made by the majority American based shareholders. The trust know this and are grateful for any consultation because their influence is minimal. The Americans are happy to keep the trust as minority shareholders because they do not have the financial resources to influence any decision making processes at the Liberty stadium.

They are being fed crumbs of comfort because the current playing and managerial situation at Swansea Town have caused so much resentment amongst supporters.

Last edited by Plynlymonbluebird on Thu Jan 19, 2017 10:58 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Can I provide evidence he said that? Yes.

I didnt say your link suggested that? You are muddling yourself up here.

Provide the evidence then!

What will that gain? You will just invent another blind alley to keep a nonsensical discussion going. Why go through the effort of providing evidence when we can just do the latter anyway, saves me the time.

you stated quite categorically that you could provide the evidence! Yet, when challenged you withdraw your confident assertion. The characteristics of a charlatan and lair in my experience.

Surely, if you wish to engage in informed and accurate debate honesty and clarity area prerequisite! You criticised Cardiff City Supporters on Thai three for not seeking the truth and honest debate. When questioned about the veracity of your own statements you refuse to provide evidence.

You claim to speak " the truth" but when asked to provide evidence none is forthcoming.

You didn't answer my question, so shall repeat. What will that gain? You will just invent another blind alley to keep a nonsensical discussion going. Why go through the effort of providing evidence when we can just do the latter anyway, saves me the time.

Yes I did categorically state I could provide the evidence (still do). Where have I withdrawn my "confident assertion" (it is not an assertion by the way, it is a fact). Where have I criticised Thai CCFC fans? Your inaccurate posts are getting odder by the minute.

Prove that the Chairman if the Swansea Supporters' Trust stated that the current majority shareholder of Swansea City FC astatement that the supporters influence over the appointment of Paul Clements was the most influence the trust and exerted over the appointment of a manager in the last fifteen years. Surely, that can't be so difficult if it so well documented!

The point of this pursuit from honesty from you, is to illustrate that the trust has no influence whatsoever ever on the decisions made by the majority American based shareholders. The trust know this and are grateful for any consultation because their influence is minimal. The Americans are happy to keep the trust as minority shareholders because they do not have the financial resources to influence any decision making processes at the Liberty stadium.

They are being fed crumbs of comfort because the current paying and managerial situation at Swansea Town have caused so much resentment amongst supporters.

Do you have any proof to provide me to back this statement up out of interest?

Can I provide evidence he said that? Yes.

I didnt say your link suggested that? You are muddling yourself up here.

Provide the evidence then!

What will that gain? You will just invent another blind alley to keep a nonsensical discussion going. Why go through the effort of providing evidence when we can just do the latter anyway, saves me the time.

you stated quite categorically that you could provide the evidence! Yet, when challenged you withdraw your confident assertion. The characteristics of a charlatan and lair in my experience.

Surely, if you wish to engage in informed and accurate debate honesty and clarity area prerequisite! You criticised Cardiff City Supporters on Thai three for not seeking the truth and honest debate. When questioned about the veracity of your own statements you refuse to provide evidence.

You claim to speak " the truth" but when asked to provide evidence none is forthcoming.

You didn't answer my question, so shall repeat. What will that gain? You will just invent another blind alley to keep a nonsensical discussion going. Why go through the effort of providing evidence when we can just do the latter anyway, saves me the time.

Yes I did categorically state I could provide the evidence (still do). Where have I withdrawn my "confident assertion" (it is not an assertion by the way, it is a fact). Where have I criticised Thai CCFC fans? Your inaccurate posts are getting odder by the minute.

Read the trusts' statement from November! The mist of that statement has not been recorded in any statement since!
You want proof from em! I have provided it! Where is yours to support your credibility?


Prove that the Chairman if the Swansea Supporters' Trust stated that the current majority shareholder of Swansea City FC astatement that the supporters influence over the appointment of Paul Clements was the most influence the trust and exerted over the appointment of a manager in the last fifteen years. Surely, that can't be so difficult if it so well documented!

The point of this pursuit from honesty from you, is to illustrate that the trust has no influence whatsoever ever on the decisions made by the majority American based shareholders. The trust know this and are grateful for any consultation because their influence is minimal. The Americans are happy to keep the trust as minority shareholders because they do not have the financial resources to influence any decision making processes at the Liberty stadium.

They are being fed crumbs of comfort because the current paying and managerial situation at Swansea Town have caused so much resentment amongst supporters.

Do you have any proof to provide me to back this statement up out of interest?

I refer you to the trusts' statement from November 2016. No statement since has suggested the trusts' position has changed. You have asked me for proof, where ISPs the proof I asked for? For the sake of your own credibility.

You a charlatan if you cannot back up your assertions with evidence!

I refer you to the trusts' statement from November 2016. No statement since has suggested the trusts' position has changed. You have asked me for proof, where ISPs the proof I asked for? For the sake of your own credibility.

You a charlatan if you cannot back up your assertions with evidence!

So you have no proof then? I read the Trusts release in November and see nothing in it that states what you just said?

I am still waiting for a decent offer. Will you put "I am constantly wrong and I apologise whole heartedly" in your footnote on this forum for the next 30 days if I decide to be kind and provide the proof? That would amuse me enough to bow to your demands.

I'm off to bed. This will never end because Roathie has given an opinion which he is stating as fact, but has nothing to back these facts up. Rest assured, if he did, he would have provided us with a link quicker than you can say Roathie talks complete rubbish. I notice that everyone involved here has a different opinion to Roathie, but I am sure we are all wrong and he is right as always. He will never provide the proof that has been asked for, simply because he has made it up. By the end of the night, he will have posted almost as much in 4 days as the average person does in a month. No surprise here as we are used to this from his other posts under his numerous other names.

I refer you to the trusts' statement from November 2016. No statement since has suggested the trusts' position has changed. You have asked me for proof, where ISPs the proof I asked for? For the sake of your own credibility.

You a charlatan if you cannot back up your assertions with evidence!

So you have no proof then? I read the Trusts release in November and see nothing in it that states what you just said?

I am still waiting for a decent offer. Will you put "I am constantly wrong and I apologise whole heartedly" in your footnote on this forum for the next 30 days if I decide to be kind and provide the proof? That would amuse me enough to bow to your demands.

Answer a simple question.

Why did the trust ask Jason Levien to buy a part if not all of their share allocation if they still had any significant influence over the way pay that Swansea City FC was being run? So much influence that they had more influence over the appointment of Paul Clements that's they have over managerial appointments in the last fifteen years?

You are getting desperate in your compensation for some evidence. Your are realising you are losing the argument. After all open, honest, evidence debate is what we all wish for on a messageboard.

I'm off to bed. This will never end because Roathie has given an opinion which he is stating as fact, but has nothing to back these facts up. Rest assured, if he did, he would have provided us with a link quicker than you can say Roathie talks complete rubbish. I notice that everyone involved here has a different opinion to Roathie, but I am sure we are all wrong and he is right as always. He will never provide the proof that has been asked for, simply because he has made it up. By the end of the night, he will have posted almost as much in 4 days as the average person does in a month. No surprise here as we are used to this from his other posts under his numerous other names.

I very rarely deal in opinion this is 100% fact. If I get so,ething in return then will happily provide it. Everybody is wrong if they think payments aren't staggered. Anyone can tell them that doesnt need to be me. I provide links on my terms not anyone elses.

I refer you to the trusts' statement from November 2016. No statement since has suggested the trusts' position has changed. You have asked me for proof, where ISPs the proof I asked for? For the sake of your own credibility.

You a charlatan if you cannot back up your assertions with evidence!

So you have no proof then? I read the Trusts release in November and see nothing in it that states what you just said?

I am still waiting for a decent offer. Will you put "I am constantly wrong and I apologise whole heartedly" in your footnote on this forum for the next 30 days if I decide to be kind and provide the proof? That would amuse me enough to bow to your demands.

Answer a simple question.

Why did the trust ask Jason Levien to buy a part if not all of their share allocation if they still had any significant influence over the way pay that Swansea City FC was being run? So much influence that they had more influence over the appointment of Paul Clements that's they have over managerial appointments in the last fifteen years?

You are getting desperate in your compensation for some evidence. Your are realising you are losing the argument. After all open, honest, evidence debate is what we all wish for on a messageboard.

I will answer that of course and give you the benefit of the doubt that you are genuinely interested in the answer. The Trust offered the Americans a chance to buy their shares prior to the events leading up to the Trust becoming an influencial member of the boardroom. I still think they would sell if offered as £20m+ in the bank is one hell of a warchest and would almost guarantee 100% fan ownership at some point in the future. Not to mention the threat of a future dilution which would lead to a long and messy court battle.

So you refuse my offer? Your decision I guess. Shame. Although I guess you would agree if you genuinelly thought I couldnt supply evidence, meaning you have refused because you believe I can. Which has solved our problem really hasn't it

A shred of credibility for starters.. Enjoy. Nice to have you back though, and see they allow you have a computer again. I'm entertained.

We all know my credibility is unrivalled. Hence the reactions.

comedy gold James. and heading for a new record

I refer you to the trusts' statement from November 2016. No statement since has suggested the trusts' position has changed. You have asked me for proof, where ISPs the proof I asked for? For the sake of your own credibility.

You a charlatan if you cannot back up your assertions with evidence!

So you have no proof then? I read the Trusts release in November and see nothing in it that states what you just said?

I am still waiting for a decent offer. Will you put "I am constantly wrong and I apologise whole heartedly" in your footnote on this forum for the next 30 days if I decide to be kind and provide the proof? That would amuse me enough to bow to your demands.

Answer a simple question.

Why did the trust ask Jason Levien to buy a part if not all of their share allocation if they still had any significant influence over the way pay that Swansea City FC was being run? So much influence that they had more influence over the appointment of Paul Clements that's they have over managerial appointments in the last fifteen years?

You are getting desperate in your compensation for some evidence. Your are realising you are losing the argument. After all open, honest, evidence debate is what we all wish for on a messageboard.

I will answer that of course and give you the benefit of the doubt that you are genuinely interested in the answer. The Trust offered the Americans a chance to buy their shares prior to the events leading up to the Trust becoming an influencial member of the boardroom. I still think they would sell if offered as £20m+ in the bank is one hell of a warchest and would almost guarantee 100% fan ownership at some point in the future. Not to mention the threat of a future dilution which would lead to a long and messy court battle.

So you refuse my offer? Your decision I guess. Shame. Although I guess you would agree if you genuinelly thought I couldnt supply evidence, meaning you have refused because you believe I can. Which has solved our problem really hasn't it

Just prove your point about the authenticity of the quote from the Supporters' Trust Chairman. If it such a documented fact why are prevaricating?

Why should I make a deal? When all I am asking is for evidence to support your assertions in an honest, factual based debate. Of course you might be reluctant to engage in factual discourse if you cannot support your facts.

I refer you to the trusts' statement from November 2016. No statement since has suggested the trusts' position has changed. You have asked me for proof, where ISPs the proof I asked for? For the sake of your own credibility.

You a charlatan if you cannot back up your assertions with evidence!

So you have no proof then? I read the Trusts release in November and see nothing in it that states what you just said?

I am still waiting for a decent offer. Will you put "I am constantly wrong and I apologise whole heartedly" in your footnote on this forum for the next 30 days if I decide to be kind and provide the proof? That would amuse me enough to bow to your demands.

Answer a simple question.

Why did the trust ask Jason Levien to buy a part if not all of their share allocation if they still had any significant influence over the way pay that Swansea City FC was being run? So much influence that they had more influence over the appointment of Paul Clements that's they have over managerial appointments in the last fifteen years?

You are getting desperate in your compensation for some evidence. Your are realising you are losing the argument. After all open, honest, evidence debate is what we all wish for on a messageboard.

I will answer that of course and give you the benefit of the doubt that you are genuinely interested in the answer. The Trust offered the Americans a chance to buy their shares prior to the events leading up to the Trust becoming an influencial member of the boardroom. I still think they would sell if offered as £20m+ in the bank is one hell of a warchest and would almost guarantee 100% fan ownership at some point in the future. Not to mention the threat of a future dilution which would lead to a long and messy court battle.

So you refuse my offer? Your decision I guess. Shame. Although I guess you would agree if you genuinelly thought I couldnt supply evidence, meaning you have refused because you believe I can. Which has solved our problem really hasn't it

Just prove your point about the authenticity of the quote from the Supporters' Trust Chairman. If it such a documented fact why are prevaricating?

Why should I make a deal? When all I am asking is for evidence to support your assertions in an honest, factual based debate. Of course you might be reluctant to engage in factual discourse if you cannot support your facts.

Because I have no interest in whether you choose to believe a fact or not. Why would that affect me in any way?

If I want a loaf of bread I pay for it, if I need a newspaper I pay for it, if you want proof of a fact for your own ends then I have offered to help and have given my price which is just a small sentence in your profile. If you don't agree then you can't be all too confident in what you say.

Last edited by Capitano on Fri Jan 20, 2017 12:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

I refer you to the trusts' statement from November 2016. No statement since has suggested the trusts' position has changed. You have asked me for proof, where ISPs the proof I asked for? For the sake of your own credibility.

You a charlatan if you cannot back up your assertions with evidence!

So you have no proof then? I read the Trusts release in November and see nothing in it that states what you just said?

I am still waiting for a decent offer. Will you put "I am constantly wrong and I apologise whole heartedly" in your footnote on this forum for the next 30 days if I decide to be kind and provide the proof? That would amuse me enough to bow to your demands.

Answer a simple question.

Why did the trust ask Jason Levien to buy a part if not all of their share allocation if they still had any significant influence over the way pay that Swansea City FC was being run? So much influence that they had more influence over the appointment of Paul Clements that's they have over managerial appointments in the last fifteen years?

You are getting desperate in your compensation for some evidence. Your are realising you are losing the argument. After all open, honest, evidence debate is what we all wish for on a messageboard.

I will answer that of course and give you the benefit of the doubt that you are genuinely interested in the answer. The Trust offered the Americans a chance to buy their shares prior to the events leading up to the Trust becoming an influencial member of the boardroom. I still think they would sell if offered as £20m+ in the bank is one hell of a warchest and would almost guarantee 100% fan ownership at some point in the future. Not to mention the threat of a future dilution which would lead to a long and messy court battle.

So you refuse my offer? Your decision I guess. Shame. Although I guess you would agree if you genuinelly thought I couldnt supply evidence, meaning you have refused because you believe I can. Which has solved our problem really hasn't it

What evidence do you have that a minority shareholder with no financial clout and little support from the fans is a significant influence on boardroom decisions. Even the Swansea Supporters trust would it claim that!
I believe they are pressing their disappointment at the lack of consultation!

A person who refuse to provide evidence for self-righteous opinion is a coward.

What evidence do you have that a minority shareholder with no financial clout and little support from the fans is a significant influence on boardroom decisions. Even the Swansea Supporters trust would it claim that!
I believe they are pressing their disappointment at the lack of consultation!

A person who refuse to provide evidence for self-righteous opinion is a coward.

So you refuse my offer yes? You can vent as much as you like, it changes nothing. I do something for you, you do something for me.

I refer you to the trusts' statement from November 2016. No statement since has suggested the trusts' position has changed. You have asked me for proof, where ISPs the proof I asked for? For the sake of your own credibility.

You a charlatan if you cannot back up your assertions with evidence!

So you have no proof then? I read the Trusts release in November and see nothing in it that states what you just said?

I am still waiting for a decent offer. Will you put "I am constantly wrong and I apologise whole heartedly" in your footnote on this forum for the next 30 days if I decide to be kind and provide the proof? That would amuse me enough to bow to your demands.

Answer a simple question.

Why did the trust ask Jason Levien to buy a part if not all of their share allocation if they still had any significant influence over the way pay that Swansea City FC was being run? So much influence that they had more influence over the appointment of Paul Clements that's they have over managerial appointments in the last fifteen years?

You are getting desperate in your compensation for some evidence. Your are realising you are losing the argument. After all open, honest, evidence debate is what we all wish for on a messageboard.[/quote

I will answer that of course and give you the benefit of the doubt that you are genuinely interested in the answer. The Trust offered the Americans a chance to buy their shares prior to the events leading up to the Trust becoming an influencial member of the boardroom. I still think they would sell if offered as £20m+ in the bank is one hell of a warchest and would almost guarantee 100% fan ownership at some point in the future. Not to mention the threat of a future dilution which would lead to a long and messy court battle.

So you refuse my offer? Your decision I guess. Shame. Although I guess you would agree if you genuinelly thought I couldnt supply evidence, meaning you have refused because you believe I can. Which has solved our problem really hasn't it

Just prove your point about the authenticity of the quote from the Supporters' Trust Chairman. If it such a documented fact why are prevaricating?

Why should I make a deal? When all I am asking is for evidence to support your assertions in an honest, factual based debate. Of course you might be reluctant to engage in factual discourse if you cannot support your facts.

Because I have no interest in whether you choose to believe a fact or not. Why would that affect me in any way?

If I want a loaf of bread I pay for it, if I need a newspaper I pay for it, if you want proof of a fact for your own ends then I have offered to help and have given my price which is just a small sentence in your profile. If you don't agree then you can't be all too confident in what you say.

I thought you were interested in open fair minde debate based on factual evidence. Yet here you are donning the mask of the coward and trying to goad me into an auction.

I thought you saw yourself as an educator of the misinformed. Yet when you are asked for facts you prevaricate and posture. If you wish to adorn yourself with the robes of a professor then surely you appreciate that credibility is based on the authority of truth, knowledge and authenticity.

I refer you to the trusts' statement from November 2016. No statement since has suggested the trusts' position has changed. You have asked me for proof, where ISPs the proof I asked for? For the sake of your own credibility.

You a charlatan if you cannot back up your assertions with evidence!

So you have no proof then? I read the Trusts release in November and see nothing in it that states what you just said?

I am still waiting for a decent offer. Will you put "I am constantly wrong and I apologise whole heartedly" in your footnote on this forum for the next 30 days if I decide to be kind and provide the proof? That would amuse me enough to bow to your demands.

Answer a simple question.

Why did the trust ask Jason Levien to buy a part if not all of their share allocation if they still had any significant influence over the way pay that Swansea City FC was being run? So much influence that they had more influence over the appointment of Paul Clements that's they have over managerial appointments in the last fifteen years?

You are getting desperate in your compensation for some evidence. Your are realising you are losing the argument. After all open, honest, evidence debate is what we all wish for on a messageboard.[/quote

I will answer that of course and give you the benefit of the doubt that you are genuinely interested in the answer. The Trust offered the Americans a chance to buy their shares prior to the events leading up to the Trust becoming an influencial member of the boardroom. I still think they would sell if offered as £20m+ in the bank is one hell of a warchest and would almost guarantee 100% fan ownership at some point in the future. Not to mention the threat of a future dilution which would lead to a long and messy court battle.

So you refuse my offer? Your decision I guess. Shame. Although I guess you would agree if you genuinelly thought I couldnt supply evidence, meaning you have refused because you believe I can. Which has solved our problem really hasn't it

Just prove your point about the authenticity of the quote from the Supporters' Trust Chairman. If it such a documented fact why are prevaricating?

Why should I make a deal? When all I am asking is for evidence to support your assertions in an honest, factual based debate. Of course you might be reluctant to engage in factual discourse if you cannot support your facts.

Because I have no interest in whether you choose to believe a fact or not. Why would that affect me in any way?

If I want a loaf of bread I pay for it, if I need a newspaper I pay for it, if you want proof of a fact for your own ends then I have offered to help and have given my price which is just a small sentence in your profile. If you don't agree then you can't be all too confident in what you say.

I thought you were interested in open fair minde debate based on factual evidence. Yet here you are donning the mask of the coward and trying to goad me into an auction.

I thought you saw yourself as an educator of the misinformed. Yet when you are asked for facts you prevaricate and posture. If you wish to adorn yourself with the robes of a professor then surely you appreciate that credibility is based on the authority of truth, knowledge and authenticity.

So that is a refusal yes?

I refer you to the trusts' statement from November 2016. No statement since has suggested the trusts' position has changed. You have asked me for proof, where ISPs the proof I asked for? For the sake of your own credibility.

You a charlatan if you cannot back up your assertions with evidence!

So you have no proof then? I read the Trusts release in November and see nothing in it that states what you just said?

I am still waiting for a decent offer. Will you put "I am constantly wrong and I apologise whole heartedly" in your footnote on this forum for the next 30 days if I decide to be kind and provide the proof? That would amuse me enough to bow to your demands.

Answer a simple question.

Why did the trust ask Jason Levien to buy a part if not all of their share allocation if they still had any significant influence over the way pay that Swansea City FC was being run? So much influence that they had more influence over the appointment of Paul Clements that's they have over managerial appointments in the last fifteen years?

You are getting desperate in your compensation for some evidence. Your are realising you are losing the argument. After all open, honest, evidence debate is what we all wish for on a messageboard.[/quote

I will answer that of course and give you the benefit of the doubt that you are genuinely interested in the answer. The Trust offered the Americans a chance to buy their shares prior to the events leading up to the Trust becoming an influencial member of the boardroom. I still think they would sell if offered as £20m+ in the bank is one hell of a warchest and would almost guarantee 100% fan ownership at some point in the future. Not to mention the threat of a future dilution which would lead to a long and messy court battle.

So you refuse my offer? Your decision I guess. Shame. Although I guess you would agree if you genuinelly thought I couldnt supply evidence, meaning you have refused because you believe I can. Which has solved our problem really hasn't it

Just prove your point about the authenticity of the quote from the Supporters' Trust Chairman. If it such a documented fact why are prevaricating?

Why should I make a deal? When all I am asking is for evidence to support your assertions in an honest, factual based debate. Of course you might be reluctant to engage in factual discourse if you cannot support your facts.

Because I have no interest in whether you choose to believe a fact or not. Why would that affect me in any way?

If I want a loaf of bread I pay for it, if I need a newspaper I pay for it, if you want proof of a fact for your own ends then I have offered to help and have given my price which is just a small sentence in your profile. If you don't agree then you can't be all too confident in what you say.

I thought you were interested in open fair minde debate based on factual evidence. Yet here you are donning the mask of the coward and trying to goad me into an auction.

I thought you saw yourself as an educator of the misinformed. Yet when you are asked for facts you prevaricate and posture. If you wish to adorn yourself with the robes of a professor then surely you appreciate that credibility is based on the authority of truth, knowledge and authenticity.

So that is a refusal yes?

So you are a lying bullshitter then! Back up your bullshit or except that it deserves to be acknowledged for what it is unsubstantiated nonsense.

Provide the evidence for your statements or wear the mantle of someone who has little to no credibility.

Stop trying to make me make assurancesthat I ahve no need to make! All my opinion about the situation at Swansea Town have been based on statements issued by the trust. I have provided links to conform what has been said. You state that you ahve made factual statements that are easily proved. Yet, you provide no proof!

You my dear deluded friend are a coward! Back up your bullshit! Or accept you are a bullshitter!

Been through this a few times now haven't we. I am making a statement that I know space to be real. I am providing no proof however as I don't feel I need to - this doesn't mean that what I say isn't true. They aren't mutually exclusive.

I have said, and will say again... I have the evidence and will happily post it for you, but in return I would like what I have asked of you. If you refuse then you basically prove my point for me anyway. Up to you. No skin off my nose.

Been through this a few times now haven't we. I am making a statement that I know space to be real. I am providing no proof however as I don't feel I need to - this doesn't mean that what I say isn't true. They aren't mutually exclusive.

I have said, and will say again... I have the evidence and will happily post it for you, but in return I would like what I have asked of you. If you refuse then you basically prove my point for me anyway. Up to you. No skin off my nose.

Why would I accept your ludicrous terms for the disclosure of evidence

I thought you believed in the truth. You claim to speak the truth but when challenged to provide evidence of your so called "truth" you can not or will not provide it. Yet you claim it is a matter of history!

I smell a liar!

Why would I agree to something that is unnecessary, have the dignity that should be expected from any poster with any claim to authenticity?

For the same reason as why I don't need to agree to something that is not necessary. I don't need the proof, I have it. I have no care whether you see it or not, it is your opinion that will suffer not mine. You can call me names and shout and stamp your feet to your hearts content, it changes nothing. You want the evidence, you give me what I want too.

Ball in your court.

For the same reason as why I don't need to agree to something that is not necessary. I don't need the proof, I have it. I have no care whether you see it or not, it is your opinion that will suffer not mine. You can call me named and shout and stamp your feet to your hearts content, it changes nothing. You want the evidence, you give me what I want too.

Ball in your court.

Prove you are not a liar! I am accusing you! Stand up for your dignity!

You made a categoric statement about the chairman of the Swansea Supporter's trust opinion of his influence with the current majority shareholders.

Back it up with evidence you claim to have! Or be labelled a coward and a liar!

not that old chestnut. I am afraid we are now boiled down to one thing. I post the evidence - you post the sentence. If not then the discussion ends here, I am more than happy to complete our transaction.

:laughing6: not that old chestnut. I am afraid we are now boiled down to one thing. I post the evidence - you post the sentence. If not then the discussion ends here, I am more than happy to complete our transaction.

So i am correct then! How gratifying! You are an unmitigated liar and bullshitter! Unable or unwilling to provide the evidence to back up your so called protestation of "truth".

There is no transaction my sad deluded friend! Simple be a man and back up your statements with evidence!

It is so simple! Can you do it? Or can you not?

Be a man and make up your mind!
If the Evidence is there believe me I will acknowledge the voracity of your statement! I will do no more than accept the truth!

Last edited by Plynlymonbluebird on Fri Jan 20, 2017 12:44 am, edited 1 time in total.

:laughing6: not that old chestnut. I am afraid we are now boiled down to one thing. I post the evidence - you post the sentence. If not then the discussion ends here, I am more than happy to complete our transaction.

So i am correct then! How gratifying! You are an unmitigated liar and bullshitter! Unable or unwilling to provide the vide nice to back up your so called protestation of "truth".

There is no transaction my sad deluded friend! Simple be a man and back up your statements with evidence!

It is so simple! Can you do it? Or can you not?

Be a man and make up your mind!
If the Evidence is there believe me I will acknowledge the voracity of your satement! I will do no more than accept the truth!

more than happy to post it. You post the sentence in return. There is no negotiating here, these are my terms. Meet them or stop moaning.

:laughing6: not that old chestnut. I am afraid we are now boiled down to one thing. I post the evidence - you post the sentence. If not then the discussion ends here, I am more than happy to complete our transaction.

So i am correct then! How gratifying! You are an unmitigated liar and bullshitter! Unable or unwilling to provide the vide nice to back up your so called protestation of "truth".

There is no transaction my sad deluded friend! Simple be a man and back up your statements with evidence!

It is so simple! Can you do it? Or can you not?

Be a man and make up your mind!
If the Evidence is there believe me I will acknowledge the voracity of your satement! I will do no more than accept the truth!

more than happy to post it. You post the sentence in return. There is no negotiating here, these are my terms. Meet them or stop moaning.

Why would I accept your terms? Post or be damned as a liar! You have accused others of lacking any basis of truth in their postings, but you can not do it out of decency and fairness.

Bullshitter!

:laughing6: not that old chestnut. I am afraid we are now boiled down to one thing. I post the evidence - you post the sentence. If not then the discussion ends here, I am more than happy to complete our transaction.

So i am correct then! How gratifying! You are an unmitigated liar and bullshitter! Unable or unwilling to provide the vide nice to back up your so called protestation of "truth".

There is no transaction my sad deluded friend! Simple be a man and back up your statements with evidence!

It is so simple! Can you do it? Or can you not?

Be a man and make up your mind!
If the Evidence is there believe me I will acknowledge the voracity of your satement! I will do no more than accept the truth!

more than happy to post it. You post the sentence in return. There is no negotiating here, these are my terms. Meet them or stop moaning.

Why would I accept your terms? Post or be damned as a liar! You have accused others of lacking any basis of truth in their postings, but you can not do it out of decency and fairness.

Bullshitter!

Because it is you that wants to see it. I am happy to post it as said on several occasions, I will go out of my way to do that for you. Im good like that. I just ask a small favour in return.

:laughing6: not that old chestnut. I am afraid we are now boiled down to one thing. I post the evidence - you post the sentence. If not then the discussion ends here, I am more than happy to complete our transaction.

So i am correct then! How gratifying! You are an unmitigated liar and bullshitter! Unable or unwilling to provide the vide nice to back up your so called protestation of "truth".

There is no transaction my sad deluded friend! Simple be a man and back up your statements with evidence!

It is so simple! Can you do it? Or can you not?

Be a man and make up your mind!
If the Evidence is there believe me I will acknowledge the voracity of your satement! I will do no more than accept the truth!

more than happy to post it. You post the sentence in return. There is no negotiating here, these are my terms. Meet them or stop moaning.

Why would I accept your terms? Post or be damned as a liar! You have accused others of lacking any basis of truth in their postings, but you can not do it out of decency and fairness.

Bullshitter!

Because it is you that wants to see it. I am happy to post it as said on several occasions, I will go out of my way to do that for you. Im good like that. I just ask a small favour in return.

COWARD!!!

I don't debate with people who do not have the courage of their convictions. Debate without facts supported by substantiated evidenced is not debate.

You spout the language of the educated and informed but pursue the charade of the misinformed and despots. Well done! You have exposed your hypocrisy and deceit and totally diminished any credibility you tried to claim.
!
The fantasist exposed!

I hope the Swansea Supporters Trust are represented by more honourable men than yourself for their club's sake.

As I said, kick and scream as much as you like. You are denying yourself the proof, I have said many times I am more than happy to post it. You just don't have the courage to agree a mutual deal. Your choice, I am happy either way.