git-intae-thum Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Seems to me the wings article was wrong only in respect of the woman being any relation to Pat Lally. This has subsequently been retracted. Otherwise it was spot on. Salmond is right and she is entitled to her opinion and should in no way be personally abused, however her involvement in the campaign and in particular how she has been portrayed does need scrutiny. This person, we were informed was an ordinary carer with no implied previous political leaning. To not mention her close ties to the labour establishment when being portrayed in the capacity she was portrayed was clearly a deception. That is fact and cannot be spun. They have been found out and hence the desperate seethe over the cybernats and attempts to deflect the ball back over the net. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 I'm not. I'm just saying I'm glad I'm not a grumpy racist. How would you feel if you were deprived of the ability to continually ask questions? I'd find it quote sad the free exchange of debate had been stifled. How would you have felt if a UK Government civil servant had emailed a paper alleging things about a Yes activist which weren't true? indeed, how would you feel about a UK civil servant emailing a newspaper about a yes activist full stop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Seems to me the wings article was wrong only in respect of the woman being any relation to Pat Lally. This has subsequently been retracted. No one cares about the Wings article, it's the fact the First Minister's spokesperson sent an unsolicited email containing false information to a newspaper about someone inovled in a politcal campaign, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 You seem to be big chums with them, only assuming you're a supporter. No need to get angry now. Why did you go into hiding to begin with? I voted for them at the European election too. As I was always going to. No need to vote for them at any other time though as far as I'm concerned. The utter rage from the separatists at them taking that last seat was excellent all the same. Not posting in here doesn't mean hiding. It means, not posting in here. The next few months will be good fun though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 I'd find it quote sad the free exchange of debate had been stifled. How would you have felt if a UK Government civil servant had emailed a paper alleging things about a Yes activist which weren't true? indeed, how would you feel about a UK civil servant emailing a newspaper about a yes activist full stop? So you're just going to keep repeating yourself? Like I said, after your monumental f**k up the other day, it's quite clear that you're not interested in debate. The only thing you're interested in is hammering home your point and point blank refusing to listen to clear logic when your argument is clearly flawed. You've been spending too much time apeing H_B's frankly pathetic displays on here, so you'll forgive me if I simply can't be arsed with you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 I'm not. I'm just saying I'm glad I'm not a grumpy racist. How would you feel if you were deprived of the ability to continually ask questions? I'm sure my world would simply cave in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 I'm sure my world would simply cave in. That was aimed at Banterman, brainiac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 So you're just going to keep repeating yourself? Well, I haven't had an answer yet.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Isn't there a difference between an activists and a member of the shadow cabinet for Labour? I missed this earlier sorry. I'm not clear on her shadow cabinet role - she's clearly not in the running to replace John Swinney or anything in 2016. None of this changes the fact that the First Minister's spokesperson sent an unsolicted email about her, containing false information., relating to a campaign he is not employed to work on... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamaldo Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 I missed this earlier sorry. I'm not clear on her shadow cabinet role - she's clearly not in the running to replace John Swinney or anything in 2016. None of this changes the fact that the First Minister's spokesperson sent an unsolicted email about her, containing false information., relating to a campaign he is not employed to work on... This is horrific whataboutery. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 This is horrific whataboutery. No it's not. Whataboutery is actually the hypothetical example i presented to confidemus, where a UK Civil servant had sent an unsolcited email containing false information about a Yes campaigner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 It not like bt are attempting to deflect anything today is it? Blood and soil is a clue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
banterman86 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 FAO Jamaldo It not like bt are attempting to deflect anything today is it? Blood and soil is a clue ^^^^^ whataboutery Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Indeed its great to see hb trolling again after the usual buckets of fail then disappearing (ecto appears) and also the fox will still be denying that obama is president and banterman is just a money in a red rosette type,happy days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 It not like bt are attempting to deflect anything today is it? Blood and soil is a clue What would that be then? the biggest number of jobs created in a quarter in the UK ever? A continuation of a rise in living standards? A continuation of a fall in unemployment? Continued strong economic growth, indeed one of the fastest growing developed nations on the planet. Can't think which one of those terrible news stories of broken Britain they are trying to cover up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reynard Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Indeed its great to see hb trolling again after the usual buckets of fail then disappearing (ecto appears) and also the fox will still be denying that obama is president and banterman is just a money in a red rosette type,happy days Obama is president. I know this because he also thinks that breaking up a political union that has lasted for over 300 years is a stupid and unnecessary thing to do. I saw him pointing and laughing at our too wee too poor too stupid nationalists last week. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doulikefish Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Obama is president. I know this Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thumper Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 Obama is president. I know this because he also thinks that breaking up a political union that has lasted for over 300 years is a stupid and unnecessary thing to do. I saw him pointing and laughing at our too wee too poor too stupid nationalists last week. He's also foreign and a funny colour, so why are you defending his right to politically influence this great nation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adam4267 Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 I was at a public Independence meeting the other night and someone said: "Why does Alex Salmond want to take off the shackles of Westminster and put on the shackles of Brussels?" Another said: "Why does Salmond want independence from Westminster and not from Brussels. Could it be to do with racialism?" Sums up your #BetterTogether types for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burma Posted June 11, 2014 Share Posted June 11, 2014 An integrity move by the First Minister. I applaud the apology ordering. Not often I have praise for politicians, but credit to Alex Salmond. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.