Coronavirus (COVID-19)

[Bairnardo]

43 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

 

You're right.

Aiming for anything approaching balance causes certain posters on P&B real difficulty.  Any inserted qualifications attached to observations are routinely ignored by those seemingly capable of dealing only with the absolute.

I've literally seen posting on here that sides explicitly with the despicable right wing Tories many of us recognise as such.  I'm not claiming that's universal but it exists and Granny was right to identify the link.

That you and others struggle with the existence of this dimension is not my difficulty.

Granny wasnt right to "identify the link" at all because there was absolutely no "balance" or "qualification" in the shite he posted, and has posted across multiple threads. 

 

He quite simply and clearly stated that being against these restrictions, or being in agreement with what Tories have landed on re restrictions, makes you a tory. You somewhat at least, backed him up and this is why you have been dragged along. Sure, you did it in a way that you thought was clever and nuanced, but you effectively entered a debate where people are being told their views make them something, and its clearly a pile of shite. Its not actually up for debate, and as Dons1988 put better than me, you're not thick enough to believe it, so maybe come back later with a straighter bat.

[Granny Danger]

7 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Granny wasnt right to "identify the link" at all because there was absolutely no "balance" or "qualification" in the shite he posted, and has posted across multiple threads. 

 

He quite simply and clearly stated that being against these restrictions, or being in agreement with what Tories have landed on re restrictions, makes you a tory. You somewhat at least, backed him up and this is why you have been dragged along. Sure, you did it in a way that you thought was clever and nuanced, but you effectively entered a debate where people are being told their views make them something, and its clearly a pile of shite. Its not actually up for debate, and as Dons1988 put better than me, you're not thick enough to believe it, so maybe come back later with a straighter bat.

You appear obsessed with me.  That’s not healthy.

[pozbaird]

29 minutes ago, MONKMAN said:

Was it not that senile old c**t danger who had a complete meltdown when questioned on why he had to go and do with shopping with his wife, going against the guidelines at the time?

 

Never had a meltdown, but just got heartily sick of explaining that it was one of the rules / guidelines / requests that we looked at, discussed, and chose to disobey / ignore / whatever. 
 

Many, many times, we did go solo into the shops, for example, if we had forgotten something and just needed to nip in somewhere for milk or whatever. However, we chose to try and minimise our trips into shops buy going as little as possible, but when there, buy lots of stuff. Which meant we weren’t frequenting the shops very often at all. So, rather than lots of solo trips, we made less trips full stop. With two of us, did it quicker, was easier, and made it easier to carry and pack. Get in, get it done, get out.

I make zero apology for it. None.

You want to know how many couples we saw doing similar? Fcuking hundreds of them. Lost count, the amount of times we saw folk walk in solo, act like they were alone, then simply join up inside. No-one gave a fcuk. No-one came up to them and said ‘oooh, are you a couple?’. Get out.

Fcuking joke. Like a lot of the last two years - which is clearly being brought back into sharp focus with the Scottish Government right here, right now, and the shite they are asking football fans, music fans, business owners, and hospitality businesses to obey - while your Silverburns and Braeheads are rammed to the rafters.

So yeah, we thought about the solo shopping suggestion, and absolutely said ‘get to fcuk’. Wasn’t the only one. Facemasks being another. So strike me down to hell in a handcart.

Edited December 26, 2021 by pozbaird

[Monkey Tennis]

3 minutes ago, Bairnardo said:

Granny wasnt right to "identify the link" at all because there was absolutely no "balance" or "qualification" in the shite he posted, and has posted across multiple threads. 

 

He quite simply and clearly stated that being against these restrictions, or being in agreement with what Tories have landed on re restrictions, makes you a tory. You somewhat at least, backed him up and this is why you have been dragged along. Sure, you did it in a way that you thought was clever and nuanced, but you effectively entered a debate where people are being told their views make them something, and its clearly a pile of shite. Its not actually up for debate, and as Dons1988 put better than me, you're not thick enough to believe it, so maybe come back later with a straighter bat.

Nah, my bat was, and remains, straight.

I'm not going to defend the odd singling out of football here, but neither am I throwing my lot in absolutely with those who see any Omicron related measures as fundamentally and utterly wrong. 

Sorry, but some of the objections on here to the government placing restrictions on us at all, do chime with those emanating from self styled libertarians.

That's not to say, as Frankie established at length, that people wanting an easing must identify wholly with Steve Baker, but it is to recognise that strands of such thought can have dodgy champions.

I'm actually the one doing nuance here, but I'm being shoved into a particular pen and berated by those who claim this shouldn't be viewed tribally.  If you look closely, you'll find an irony in there somewhere.

[djchapsticks]

Amazing that folk are openly defending themselves against being a Tory and the person levelling the accusations is the most prominent poster on here who voted for Brexit.

Don't let his simpering 'I voted it then but regret it now' act fool you, Danger is in no position to take the moral high ground on anyone being on board with right wing philosophies. He's a self loathing old man who loves projecting his own personal deep rooted political tendencies onto others.

[Jacksgranda]

23 minutes ago, carpetmonster said:

No, that was pozbaird. 

It might have been him, too, but it was also Granny

[Jacksgranda]

9 minutes ago, pozbaird said:

Never had a meltdown, but just got heartily sick of explaining that it was one of the rules / guidelines / requests that we looked at, discussed, and chose to disobey / ignore / whatever. 
 

Many, many times, we did go solo into the shops, for example, if we had forgotten something and just needed to nip in somewhere for milk or whatever. However, we chose to try and minimise our trips into shops buy going as little as possible, but when there, buy lots of stuff. Which meant we weren’t frequenting the shops very often at all. So, rather than lots of solo trips, we made less trips full stop. With two of us, did it quicker, was easier, and made it easier to carry and pack. Get in, get it done, get out.

I make zero apology for it. None.

You want to know how many couples we saw doing similar? Fcuking hundreds of them. Lost count, the amount of times we saw folk walk in solo, act like they were alone, then simply join up inside. No-one gave a fcuk. No-one came up to them and said ‘oooh, are you a couple?’. Get out.

Fcuking joke. Like a lot od the last two years - which is clearly being brought back into sharp focus with the Scottish Government right here, right now.

So yeah, we thought about the solo shopping suggestion, and absolutely said ‘get to fcuk’. Wasn’t the only one. Facemasks being another. So strike me down to hell in a handcart.

Murderer!

[Granny Danger]

2 hours ago, Elixir said:

Old Man Danger makes me wish omicron had ebola-like mortality rather than simply being a glorified cold.

I’d hoped that Santa Claus would have brought you something useful.  Like a life.

Maybe next year…

[Monkey Tennis]

2 hours ago, Frankie S said:

In jumping to Granny Danger’s defence, you applied a very broad brush in stating ‘much of the anti-restriction sentiment expressed on here (not particularly that relating to football) reflects an individualist, essentially right-wing standpoint.’ I disagree. That’s a very reductive way of portraying things. False dichotomies have been perpetuated by the media, and on public discussion fora / social networks, since the start of pandemic, feeding into an artificially adversarial and polarised discussion which trivialises and coarsens the debate, and dissuades people from sticking their heads above the parapet to criticise the government for fear of being characterised as right-wing Tory apologists, anti-vaxxers, conspiracy theorists or uncaring monsters who don’t care about old sick people dying.

There is disquiet from people across the political spectrum at the recent batch of restrictions, and not just emanating from the right-wing (or anti-vaxxers, conspiracy theorists etc.) I don’t think it’s accurate, helpful or instructive to characterise those who are increasingly expressing concern about restrictions as (largely) Tory apologists. 

Sorry, but I don't accept that I'm doing the polarising here.

On this particular thread, the courage required to pop one's head above the parapet, does not involve attacking the likes of Granny.

[Inanimate Carbon Rod]

3 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

I’d hoped that Santa Claus would have brought you something useful.  Like a life.

Maybe next year…

I see Santa brought you the snarky teenagers guide to patter book. 

[Monkey Tennis]

1 minute ago, oaksoft said:

You blundered in with your right wing windup and now you're claiming to be the voice of reason and balance?

"Wind up"?

This isn't the Falkirk thread.

[Left Back]

5 minutes ago, Monkey Tennis said:

"Wind up"?

This isn't the Falkirk thread.

Agreed.  You’re digging that hole for yourself so fast you’re dropping faster than Falkirk.

[carpetmonster]

8 minutes ago, Inanimate Carbon Rod said:

I see Santa brought you the snarky teenagers guide to patter book. 

If that’s what you took from that exchange then that’s pretty poor mate. 

[Elixir]

1 hour ago, Michael W said:

Been a while since this particular fake sage bore was heard from. Deepti still in the huff?

 

56 minutes ago, PedroMoutinho said:

Yep- she’s fuming at the moment that she’s not getting to broadcast her doom mongering unchallenged 

Deepti is too busy trying to trash the vaccines - straight out the Devi school of weaselry.

 

12 minutes ago, Granny Danger said:

I’d hoped that Santa Claus would have brought you something useful.  Like a life.

Maybe next year…

See, even Old Man Danger can take a clear joke instead of pissing the bed. Fair play.

[Todd_is_God]

 

Omicron causes more severe disease, apparantly. That's just an outright lie.

[Elixir]

6 minutes ago, Todd_is_God said:

 

Omicron causes more severe disease, apparantly. That's just an outright lie.

It's takes like these that should see her instantly laughed at as any sort of go to source for Covid information.

Mentally ill.

[Theroadlesstravelled]

 

Covid turns you gay.

[WhiteRoseKillie]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

That would have sounded slightly more convincing had it not come from someone who voted for Brexit alongside those right wing racists Granny.

The lack of self-awareness is genuinely hilarious.
 

Have a reddie, Oaky. There's plenty of left-wing anti-racists voted for Brexit. Revisionism of this sort helps no-one. 

[Lyle Lanley]

Hopefully this 500 crowd rule after today's games is gone by the end of the winter break and we're back with full capacity. 

[WhiteRoseKillie]

1 hour ago, oaksoft said:

Hypocrisy at it's worst.

When a person voites with the Tories it means they believe in EVERYTHING the Tories stand for.

 But when you or someone on your side votes alongside the Tories, what matters is their intent?

Away and gie us peace ya daft auld bugger.

And another reddy. This is not playground pick-a-side or some other binary choice. You (probably) realise this, but your wee play-the-man game continues. 

Edited December 26, 2021 by WhiteRoseKillie