Seil Chat

http://www.heraldscotland.com/politics/ ... .126979265
Pressure building for the last LibDem domino to fall. Can he survive? Or does the SNP claim another scalp? Hmmm.

.
Here's Ali showing us an earlier picture of his pants:

You two seem to take an absolute delight in trawling the press to drum up any chance to vilify anyone who might just be not in accordance with your SNP (independence) views, and displaying the results on this website
Now there is nothing against this practice - after all the proprietor/owner/boss/final arbiter and principal poster is probably known for his views on this subject and, no doubt, thinks that he is doing his bit for the furtherance of the cause.
But I would venture to suggest - and I think I have touched on this subject before, that a diatribe against all and sundry, who do not share your views, tends to alienate you from your readers as a bigot - and on the whole this is counter productive to your cause, because bigots of any persuasion are devoid of anything but a blinkered view on their cause.
I would throw down this challenge to our current SNP supporters - All administrations make mistakes, but can they come up with mistakes that the SNP have made during the Holyrood administration which cannot be discounted by outside influences over which they had no control.
The current situation with this website is that the SNP are above reproach on everything (lily white to coin a word) and all the others are a bunch of crooks who should be behind bars.
Please, oh please, if we are going to have a political debate on this website, could it be fair and representative and not a diatribe against all things anti SNP, as it is currently.

jimcee wrote: I would venture to suggest - and I think I have touched on this subject before, that a diatribe against all and sundry, who do not share your views, tends to alienate you from your readers as a bigot

(stuff snipped)

Please, oh please, if we are going to have a political debate on this website, could it be fair and representative and not a diatribe against all things anti SNP, as it is currently.

Jim, you don't seem to be capable of actually reading a post without jumping to conclusions, which rather impairs your ability to take part in a 'fair and representative' debate.

A few questions:

~ do you actually know anything about the so-called 'Frenchgate' affair of the leaked memo ?

~ are you aware that Carmichael orchestrated this smear against the First Minister to try to influence the election result ?

~ are you also aware that approximately 80% of those polled in a Press and Journal poll said they thought the election result in Orkney and Shetland would have been different if Carmichael had been exposed or had confessed before the vote?

~ are you further aware that Carmichael has only 'come clean' after he was found out by an enquiry that has allegedly cost the taxpayer £1.5 million?

You seem to exist in some strange political fantasy world populated by herds of fanatical and mindless SNP activists, a world where any criticism of politicians of any other hue is no more than propaganda, not worthy of any consideration.

What Carmichael has done is to make a travesty of the democratic process. What is even more despicable is that his party intends to do nothing about it. He is a rotten egg.

You may like living in a 'democracy' where liars and cheats can pervert the course of an election, but some of us don't, and to portray myself and Bill as brainless SNP propagandists when we call for Carmichael to do the decent thing and fall on his sword is unreasonable. If his party removed him swiftly and called a by-election there is every chance the folk of Orkney and Shetland would still return another LibDem, but the longer he squats in a constituency he does not have the moral authority to represent the more chance there is that the LibDem's last Scottish bastion will fall.

As to my previous post - the man's conduct was and is indefensible, so rather than rant apoplectically I thought a little humour might be appropriate. Try a wee grin instead of launching into yet another diatribe against the other posters on this forum.

And while we are here do remember that calling other posters 'bigots' is most definitely against the T&C of the forum and would perhaps be best avoided in future.

.
Craig Murray has an interesting article:

My Friend Alistair Carmichael

jimcee wrote:All administrations make mistakes,

This was NOT a mistake, this was a LIE that was specifically intended to damage the public perception of the SNP.
If the good folk of his constituency had known about this lie before they voted, he would not be an MP now.
He should resign to correct THAT mistake . Simple.

.
Here's an extraordinary interview with Carmichael on Radio Orkney this morning.

Now you can listen to the case for the defence and make up your own mind Jim.

Well that certainly drew the hornets out of their nest.
To N.B. - you raised a lot of questions about my knowledge of the Carmichael affair - answer - I was aware of it at the time but it was all part of the claim and counterclaim going on at the time - propaganda from both sides, and all taken with a pinch of salt. If you are trying to suggest that both sides of the argument played absolutely fairly, then I think you are on a hiding to nothing.
However that is not the point I was trying to get across.
I find it rather reprehensible that yourself and Bill McD (to a lesser extent) seem to take a delight in pinpointing any failures in ANY political personage who does not subscribe to your own preferences. Is this the way that this particular website is going to be conducted hereafter? In the interests of fairness, surely you should be reporting on any adverse publicity achieved by one of your chosen representatives, with possibly an explanation of their fall from grace. With 50+ representatives now in Westminster it is surely only a matter of time before someone blots their copybook. Will you give it air time?. I will be surprised.
So, if that is the way this particular website is going to conduct it's business, - blatantly denigrating any opposition, come what may, then I for one (and I may only be one), will try to provide an alternative view, until such time as I am barred from this site.
I await with interest the next hatchet job worthy of your treatment.

Jim. it's part of the cut and thrust of political debate to have fun with politicians when they are caught engaging in dishonest acts or other embarrassing situations.
It just happens this bloke is a LibDem, his lot defend the man, everybody else reach for their daggers.
You'll have noticed that the SNP have been in power in Scotland for a long time now and there has been very little or no scandal, so there is no reason to suppose SNP MPs' will behave any differently. (as long as you ignore the Telegraph !).

OK Bill, your idea of fun and mine are different.
I do not enjoy searching around for someone to denigrate, because they have offended my personal code of conduct.
I will grant you that you have an axe to grind, and anything you can dredge up to vilify your opponents is fair game (and as you say in your reply - a bit of fun), but I think we will have to disagree on that point.
You may consider that by trashing the opposition you will automatically assume that others will agree with you and endorse your views, but this is a two edged sword, and it might just be that the recipients of your views think that you are a trifle biased, and therefore write your efforts off as those of a blinkered individual who cannot see any good in the opposition and cannot see any bad in those who have your favour.
Whether this will have any influence on those that read these pages - I know not, but I do think that this continual harping on by yourself and N.B. about anyone who offends the strict political correctness - and continually looking for ways to lambast them is probably not going to do any favours to you personally, or your cause.
I may be wrong in all this, but my common decency will not accept the vilification that goes on within these postings.

Jim

Remember this post from Bill McD over the next few months ............ !!!! - lol I certainly think I will be revisiting his thoughts sooner than later

An old school mate of mine is a Reuters political correspondent reporting on Westminster issues

He is already suggesting a completely different scenario to that of Bill McD !!!

Perhaps this observation supports the view that Nicola S is already very anxious about their behaviour down south not to mention how she manages her predecessor in Westminster - both factors could cause an untimely split - as somebody said in a previous post (perhaps NB ) the SNP need to behave like 'statesmen' at the moment

G

You know Jim, your previous post is a totally overblown and an inexplicably biased view of the behaviour the contributors on this forum.
The idea that you hold some sort of moral high ground is interesting.

jimcee wrote: . . . anything you can dredge up to vilify your opponents

Such as facts, concrete examples of blatant dishonesty, letters to the Shetland Times showing a total hypocrisy, proof like radio and TV interviews ? It's pretty easy dredging.

So Jim Cunningham - instead of blustering and waffling and attacking myself and Bill, please tell us what precisely you have got to say in Alistair Carmichael's defence and why you think his behaviour is justified.

I have no desire to defend any of the people that are trashed on this site - probably many of them are guilty of misdemeanours.
One of the people whom I most admire, is a lady who used to work for me, and who never had a bad word to say about anybody, and she certainly had good cause to do so. This is possibly the high moral ground, Bill, to which I aspire, although at times it can be difficult at times to live up to this.
It is probably a human failing to be critical of others, but to be judgemental - that should maybe be left to Judges, but even they are not infallible - there is a biblical (I think) saying - "He who is above reproach be the first to cast a stone".
I may not be putting this case very well, and I have no doubt that it will have no effect on the conduct of this site,

jimcee wrote: . . . I have no doubt that it will have no effect on the conduct of this site,

Probably right there Jim

.

Here's Sir Malcolm Bruce former Liberal Democrat MP (and also the party’s former Scottish leader, and until just a few weeks ago its UK deputy leader) on Radio 4 this morning justifying Carmichael's continuing existence as an MP on the grounds that the HoC is full of brazen liars (51 second audio clip):



Bruce: “If you’re telling me that every MP who hasn’t quite told the truth, or even told a brazen lie [should go], including cabinet ministers, including prime ministers, we’d clear out the House of Commons very fast.”

BBC: “You’re saying that lying in public life is widespread?”

Bruce: “No. Well, yes. I think the answer is lots of people have told lies and you know that to be perfectly true.”

Well that makes it okay then…

You couldn't make it up!

So, the name of the game within politics is to be economic with the truth, in the cutthroat world of personal and party advantage.
Such being the case it surely follows that anyone involved in the process must surely be tainted with the same lack of moral values.
This is a hard pill to swallow - surely there must be outside there, some who are altruistic and not afraid to speak up for truth- however unpalatable, in the political camp.
Come on Nick, just for once, to prove that you have a fair view of the political scene, post on these pages an utterance which one of your political representatives has made which was economic with the truth.
And the defence that this is impossible, is inadmissible, as even you will be aware that there is no political party is squeaky clean.

jimcee wrote:Come on Nick, just for once, to prove that you have a fair view of the political scene, post on these pages an utterance which one of your political representatives has made which was economic with the truth.

I presume you mean you want me to open fire on an SNP politician?

I believe that in general they have a very good record, both at Holyrood and at Westminster.

So really that's not up to me Jim - why don't you do it?

More significantly, why don't you address the subject of this particular thread, which is not about politicians in general, it is about the actions of Alistair Carmichael in the run-up to the recent general election.

Nick, my presence on these pages is not to denigrate, or support any politician, others seem to take a delight in performing these functions.
All I am trying to do with my occasional outbursts of intervention is to try and provide a balance to some of the more extreme character assassinations that have appeared on this site. You have every right to vilify anyone you want to, but I have a right (until I am barred) to point out that your attacks are biased, and therefore of less value than a balanced view.

jimcee wrote: . . . I have a right (until I am barred) to point out that your attacks are biased, and therefore of less value than a balanced view.

You have a right to do so, but I am afraid that if you are not prepared to supply any evidence then your view can only carry limited weight and authority.

Now, tell us why you think my 'accusations' against Alistair Carmichael are biased.

I think you will find that all I have done is reported the facts.