Seil Chat

.
No Jim, you are absolutely right - the only reason this site is kept running is so it can act as an SNP propaganda vehicle. On behalf of our glorious leader I would like to thank you for your assistance in keeping it going with your contributions.

Well now - an admission from NB that he (and to a lesser extent Bill McD fortunately who is not quite so blinkered) that this websites main purpose is to glorify the SNP and deride anyone who thinks otherwise.
And talking of glorify - who is the "Glorious leader referred to in his posting? - this rather smacks of Communist propoganda in promoting the "Glorious leader" who must be revered at all costs, and without whom our country would be in dire straits.
However, kidding and swanking aside, the inference seems to be that my presence on this site does the "cause" some good by providing an antidote to the incessant propoganda, which NB and henchman B mcD can then deride and assert that they are right and that I am completely out of touch with reality.
Now I don't know what the readership of these pages is, or what their personal political persuasions are, but I would hazard a guess that this continual denigration of all SNP opposition, and adulation of "our glorious leader" might just be counter productive to the cause, and that the perptrators might just be a bit too obsessive with the cause to have a balanced view on the world we live in.
And this in turn would make the readers rather discount the outpourings from our two (currently) zealots.
Without an answer to these musings - i throw this into the melting pot - to see what transpires. All these silent outsiders have an answer to whether this website does more harm than good to the espoused cause of our two political activists.

.
I see an FOI request for more information on the infamous memo has been refused by the Scotland Office because it might harm Anglo-French relations.

You couldn't make this stuff up.

NickB wrote:.
I see an FOI request for more information on the infamous memo has been refused by the Scotland Office because it might harm Anglo-French relations.

You couldn't make this stuff up.

Yes you could. That's how this all started, remember?

Well the chuckle brothers are still at it.
If I had to search for an analogy to this long drawn out diatribe, the best I can come up with it is that it is like a dog worrying a bone

jimcee wrote:Well the chuckle brothers are still at it.
If I had to search for an analogy to this long drawn out diatribe, the best I can come up with it is that it is like a dog worrying a bone

It's not a diatribe, it is an expression of moral outrage and disgust at the perversion of our political process.

Your own moral code is your affair, Jim. You may think it is fine for politicians to seek to influence election results with bare-faced lies, for them to then deny those lies and subsequently carry on in post with no repercussions. I'm afraid I can't agree with you there.

If Carmichael is the bone then I sincerely hope he is worried. However, the ultimate aim is to bury the bone (metaphorically of course).

OK Nick, you continue your vendetta, if it gives you any satisfaction.
But don't forget that sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander.
During the referendum campaign your "glorious leader" (the previous one) made some unsubstantiated claims , (notice that I have not used the word lies) which presumably you thought were justified, and will defend "tooth and nail" all in the interests of the cause.
Please let us have a bit of balance in these deliberations.
I do not condone any chicanery by any politician ( it is almost par for the course) but a one sided attack on anything anti SNP, to me, shows a complete lack of critical ability in the belief that the SNP can do no wrong, and every other party (without exception) are absolute blackguards and should be drummed out of office forthwith.
Although you may wish it - life is not like that.

jimcee wrote:OK Nick, you continue your vendetta, if it gives you any satisfaction.
But don't forget that sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander.
During the referendum campaign your "glorious leader" (the previous one) made some unsubstantiated claims , (notice that I have not used the word lies) which presumably you thought were justified, and will defend "tooth and nail" all in the interests of the cause.
Please let us have a bit of balance in these deliberations.

Jim, if you want to slag off Salmond and point out things he said which you consider to be untrue, deceptive or misleading then please do. I may defend him if I feel your criticisms are unfair, but I promise will not accuse you of bias or operating a vendetta.

You really need to calm down and engage in the discussion; demanding balance and then refusing to provide any is frankly absurd.

jimcee wrote:a one sided attack on anything anti SNP, to me, shows a complete lack of critical ability in the belief that the SNP can do no wrong

What utter guff. This thread is about one LibDem politician, and in particular it is about his actions over 'Frenchgate'. In what way can it possibly be construed as an attack on 'anything anti-SNP' ??

You really need to try to be a little more on-topic with your posts. I think we are all a trifle bored with every post you make doing nothing but slagging other posters off while making no factual, informative or indeed relevant comments yourself.