09.00 Monday, off to Haven Products Hillington as part of the Scrutiny Board's investigation into work for those with physical or learning disabilities. This firm, approx 120 workers has 85% with disabilities and they are supplying goods and services to their clients at a profit, some of their clients are big players in the whisky industry.
The factory hums with activity and there is a great atmosphere, there is no room for sentiment here and none is sought, while speaking to some of the workforce a small bell rang and they immediately went off for the tea break, I wasn't that important anyway.
They are paid more than the minimum wage and they co-operate with each other to get to work through lifts etc, this is the the kind of place which keeps me in politics. I'm proud to say that it was opened by Angela Eagle Labour MP and the Govt. helped to set it up. I learned two other interesting things here one is that people with these difficulties find it far easier to get into the world of work in the USA and that the absence level at 'Haven' is less than 2% while in so called normal industries it is between 5 & 6% well done to them and to the USA.
NATWATCH - Liberal Democrat 'wee Jamie Stone' usually a nonentity, just called the SNP xenophobic, this caused a huge petted lip to appear on the face of the great charlatan Salmond, he was furious, or was he ? has he never heard this before about the SNP and nationalism in general ? was his anger synthetic ? Wee Jamie would of course have been more accurate if he had said anglophobic which means a hatred of the English.
The SNP have been trying to work a flanker over recent years about this, they realised that being anti English looked every bit as bad, and stupid as being anti Asian or anti French. The words English or England were to be banned, instead of 'English rule' we get 'southern rule' clever eh ? 'orders from England' become 'orders from over the border' devious or what ? 'English laws' became ' London diktat' pathetic eh ? the truth of this matter is that they have never changed, if England didn't exist neither would the SNP.
The antipathy they have towards the English is the only glue which keeps this sack dwelling bunch of fighting ferrets together. Alex wouldn't mind a defeat, it would allow him to continue living where he is happiest, well away from the fundies and nasties in London.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
81 comments:
Three months to the election;
Number of words talking up a local success story of people battling against the odds: 214
Number of words attacking people of a different political hue who are on the National stage: 219
Nice positive campaign from Scottish Labour again then?
If Alex Salmond is so keen to remain at Westminster (a dubious suggestion to say the least) he certainly cannot be anglophobic can he?
You add staggering hypocrisy to your list of character defects. Didn't you say you disliked the English in the comments a while ago.
Still otherwise this is a better post. You're using paragraphs now. And you said something good (I think - your syntax is still a bit strangled) about the USA .
6/10.
RFS - Do I attack the SNP ? you bet. They are beneath contempt, Salmond is the most dishonest, odious politician I have ever come across in 45 yrs of activity, that includes some of my own party !
Jackart - show me where I said I didn't like the English, either you are not up to this or you are lazy, do you really think I would say that I dislike the 'English/Americans/Italians/French, are you that off off the pace ?
Syntax - spelling - paragraphs - you and the rest of the right wing crew have forced me to improve on these. I am only doing it to prevent you lot from avoiding the issues by focusing on such trivia, I fully intend to go back to my bad old ways after a little while. My problem is, that in most cases the comments I'm sent, with a few honourable exceptions are just not worth spending time on. Yes, you are a classic example.
jpj2 - You are inadvertently correct, Salmond is not anglophobic, if you think my suggestion is dubious I would advise you to talk to some people from the Westminster village.
The vast majority of Nats. are anglophobic but wee Eck knows where his bread's buttered all right, he's a copper bottomed shyster and he's conning you lot.
10th comment on the Fitba post
"RFS - If you are referring to the question "don't you like the English" ? the answer is no I don't, don't like the English"
Do I win a prize?
RFS - No prize I'm afraid " no I don't, don't like the English " it's a piece of tortuous word play. I really am taken aback that you would think I would say something like that.
The family of man - International Solidarity etc. you haven't been paying attention. I dislike lots of people for lots of reasons but never, ever, because of their origins.
Word play only comes into it when you remove the comma. Leaving it in changes the meaning. Try saying it out loud with a pause at the comma.
The correct word play should have been "the answer is no I don't don't like the English" ensuring the sentence is not broken up by punctuation. This ensures that the sentence has to be taken as a whole.
What you said can be broken down and said as "the answer is no I don't" and "don't like the English". It can be said that your way is akin to "I don't like the English. Nope, don't like them" (imagine that the first sentence is being said out loud and the second is almost being said to yourself to re-enforce your conviction).
Of course I learned this important difference AFTER I left the Renfrewshire education system and started teaching myself the English language.
PS: I have to tip my hat to you Terry. With formatting it is now so much easier to see where and why you are wrong. Please don't revert to type!!!
Impressed with the improvements in spelling, syntax etc., Councillor, even if as you say they are only temporary. That these coincide with your first sensible blog post in an aeon can surely be no coincidence.
Are Miliband's people writing your blog now, too?
RFS - I'm beginning to feel as if I'm being stalked by a spiteful child.
I know you must be smarting but, 2/3 comments a day ? all that effort to find a missplaced comma.
Get over it man, you're not the first and you wont be the last arrogant right winger to make a fool of himself, think of it as a learning curve.
'They are payed more than the minimum wage'
I came here from Mr Eugenides in search of challenging English - it did not take long. Looks like all those years of hard pressed English tax payers throwing money at the welfare junkies in Scotland have not resulted in very good education.
Come on the Nationalists, an independent Scotland and we can send all the Socialist Labour spongers back home.
t-mann - Thank you for that. Did you know that Winston Churchill was a fully qualified dunce ?
'The English paying for Scottish subsidy junkies didn't do much for Scottish education'
Then you say 'vote nationalist and we'll send all the socialist Labour spongers back home'
Have you been on the ' gargle ' ?
A missplaced comma, which means that you clearly said you don't like the English. And that from a man who is "Against Racism". I can't see how that can be read any other way. Are we to assume that evey utterance of yours needs to be put through a process of putting in random punctuation to check for any other meaning?
Are you denying that Anti-English feeling is prevalent in your part of the world? (I was a student in Scotland, so don't even think of denying it). That you, a socialist Scotsman harbour anti-english prejudice is hardly beyond the realms of belief.
Detail is important. We can't hear the tone of your voice on the internet (not that we sassenachs would be able to understand you even if we could). Remember when writing, that's what punctuation is for.
And given that you didn't see fit to publish my last comment - I'll say it again: RFS! Thanks for finding that.
I'll end with the anecdote: one of churchill's editiors picked the great man up for starting a sentence with a preposition. He remarked in the margin that "this is the kind of impertinance up with which I will not put"
Again with the personal attacks Terry. Although you are at least waiting a comment or two now.
You don't like me posting so many comments? Stop writing this ignorant dogmatic pile then.
Oh, and your use of the "no" in the comment before the double negitive changes it to triple.
Subtle - the way you worked Churchill into your last comment, almost seamless
I think t_mann was referring to Gordon Brown, (Dr) John Reid and the rest of the mendacious statists currently infecting the Westminster sewer. Of course, he (and I) probably would include Alex Salmond in that crowd as well.
S-E
RFS - I'm sure you know that I could have listed a lot of other dunces, some of whom you stand to attention for.
What is an 'evey' utterance - What is an 'editior' - churchill should be a capital 'C' - impertinance should end in 'ence' - god, how stupid is this, I'm becoming as demented as you lot.
I don't dislike anyone on the basis of their origins, I find you for instance stupid and odious but it's not because you have just identified yourself as English.
jackart, you are right, anti English feeling is rife here and people like you are not helping.
I've never left out any of your comments, why would I ? You make my case for me.
Churchill's off the cuff remarks were well known to be rehearsed for days / weeks. BTW how would you like to go into action led by prince Harry ?
S-E You remind me of a saying which went like this ' the English claim to be self made men which relieves God of a terrible responsibility'
Thank goodness you are not typical of the average, decent, genial Englishman.
Prince Harry is a Sandhurst grad and a holder of the Queen's commission. He has also undergone trade training. I hope this answers your question.
And for the record you stand to attention for the national anthem and officers superior in rank, no-one else.
RFS - So Prince Harry is a fine leader of men, 'well said that man'
Let's get it straight here, 'you' stand for the anthem and 'you' stand for 'your' superiors.
I believe that you can't eat flags, and respect has to be earned, you don't get my respect through an accident of birth.
Anyone who thinks that a person is due respect because of their family connections is truly pathetic.
Go back and read my last.
Regulations state that you stand to attention to those "superior in rank". I bet a lot of people reading that got the reference!!
What I said before is that I stand to attention by order of regulations and not for any other reason.
So you are saying that Harry can never be a good officer in your eyes because of who his gran is?
Remember what happened to Edward? The armed forces do not take kindly to being used as baby sitters. Please address all concerns to the OC The Blues and Royals.
You Salute the office, not the man. It's the same for royalty. In the institution of monarchy, the person is less important than the office.
Think about debate... one attacks the arguments, not the man.
But you have no respect for anyone or anything, so you wouldn't know that.
You are now insulting a man who is clearly willing to go and serve his country, and who is willing to put his life on the line to do so. You insult him because of accident of birth....
Yet Again I catch you playing the prejudice game. This is fun...
RFS - I missed that point ( well done that man ) You've probably spotted by now that I don't much care about these traditions, do they make you fight better ? I don't remember the 3rd. World Vietnamese peasants doing much drilling, saluting or flag waving when they beat the mightiest military country in history, do you ?
So, 'I'm saying Harry can't be a good officer because of his granny' well, I don't think I said that did I ? I keep forgetting that I have to spell it out to stop you from twisting what I've said. Harry, based on my perception of him might develop into a common or garden private no more than that, and so what ? The problem is that he's going to be in charge of men in a combat area, he will of course be kept as far away from danger as possible. Is he suitable though? Does his accident of birth help his progress ? Does anyone ( outside your circle ) deny that ?
A couple of hundred years ago Napoleon got rid of the military corruption which still infests Britain today, that was why he nearly conquered the world, 'espri de corps' soldiers respected their officers and vice versa.
Harry, Charles, Andrew, Edward, Phil the Greek and the rest of the rotten 2nd. rate upper class officer crew are an embarrassment to the country, and a liability to the men and women who serve under them.
As I've said before 'It might be rubbish but at least it's British rubbish' the more I see and hear from these nonentities the more sympathy and respect I have for those under them. When will the British armed forces be opened up at every level to talent and ability alone ?
Jackart - Do you realise that every time you write to me you include personal insults ? What else did you learn in the military ?
I was taught by my parents that if you revert to insults, you are losing the argument.
Can I refer you to my response below to 'rightforscotland' re. the rest of what you've said.
jackart - sorry, I meant response above.
Jackart - I can assure that you might, but I don't, regard this as fun, people are dying out there, while you stand there waving your flag.
I don't insult Harry because of an accident of birth, he can't be blamed for his family anymore than you or me. Just look at them, he has my sympathy, is it any wonder he regularly falls out of cabs drunk at 4 am dressed as a Nazi, it can't be easy being brought up by that lot.
Still your faith in him and them will, I'm sure sustain all of you, I'm just glad he's not my C.O. And pity those under him.
You say that you did not say Harry could not be a good officer because of his family and then in the same paragraph state that he cannot be a good officer because he will be kept out of harms way.
Officers do not need a lot of combat experience to progress through the ranks. Harry will do this tour, maybe one more and IF he is promoted his duties will change. Other tours will be in roles different from the one that awaits him. By contrast the soldier will probably always be on the front line but then again that is what is expected of them. Officers are expected to fight on the front line, get admin experience, command larger units, get admin experience, command battalions and regiments, go on staff officer courses, command the army.
You avoided commenting on the Edward case which proves that in today's armed forces you can still be turfed out on your ear if you are not good enough. Harry passed the course and the Army has certified him as a competent officer, he went to the Blues and did trade and they certified him as a competent troop commander. He did not come top at Sandhurst and is subject to the same criteria as everyone else.
I am saddened that you think the British Army is corrupt. I can certainly arrange to have you discuss your concerns with a good friend of mine who is currently serving as WO1 with the Argyles and in a previous posting was WO IC the Paisley Army Recruiting office. He would certainly have some strong opinions about your point of view and would welcome a robust debate on the subject.
Jackart draws a conclusion from your body of work. He was not engaging in a personal attack he was attacking your ideas.
"I was taught by my parents that if you revert to insults, you are losing the argument" - Jesus wept;
"being stalked by a spiteful child";
"Have you been on the ' gargle ' ?";
"I'm becoming as demented as you lot.";
"I find you for instance stupid and odious";
And those are just some of your responses to this thread. If I were to go on an all out trawl I could fill so many pages. You must have lost the argument quite some time ago by your parents standards.
RFS - I think I said that Harry IMO is not up to it, if the forces were genuinely open to talent and ability instead of being corrupted by privilege, Harry and many others would not be such an embarrassment, it's not their fault.
I am going to pay you a compliment here, I think that you are intelligent enough to know that the Royals and their association with the military is a farce and has everything to do with propaganda and nothing to do with fighting. I realise you can't admit that but, please, don't tell me that you think Harry will be put in harms way, I may have to stifle the debate if that's where you are heading.
" Field Marshall Montgomery was a dirty, lying, chinless upper class B_ _ _ _ _ _ d who never heard a gun go aff in anger, he couldnae organise a turn o' the wash hoose key never mind fight a f - - - - - g war " - - - (Private Terence Kelly 8th. Army - Egypt, North Africa, Salerno, Monte Casino etc. etc. - - -) The old imbecile kept promising Private Kelly and his mates leave which didn't come after 4 & ½ years. B.T.W. you should have heard Private Kelly on Churchill and the Hitler loving Royals, you flag wavers would have had him and his army mates strung up for treason.
Did you think Blackadder was just a comedy ? Did you know that history teachers are using the first world war stuff to teach students what it was really like, and what the leaders were like. Lions led by donkeys eh ? Poor Harry proves that It's not that different now is it ?
The rest of your comment is repetitive and not really worth an argument, sorry !
The insults I think you will find are retaliations but I accept that I have been dragged down to your level by the relentless personal attacks and mind boggling boredom which passes for argument / debate with you and those you associate with. I will try to improve.
I like the way that you will have to stifle debate any time we ask you to defend your position.
Instead of defending it you choose to talk down to us like we have some kind of mental problem.
Again I note that you choose not to address the issue of Edward or my offer of chatting with the Argyles WO1. I can also offer up a working class Scouser who became WO1 of the Royal Engineers and whose daughter passed through Sandhurst in the intake before Harry, I am sure he would be interested to talk to you regarding your claim that the officers of the Army (I assume you also include the RAF, Navy and Marines?) are all corrupt.
So lets leave this then and turn to something much more important...which 4 of your mates on the council are on the fiddle then?
Incidentally I thought I would also point out that my quotes are just from this thread and I can find other from other threads. Your very first comment on me was to call me a nazi misogynist, you just cannot help yourself.
WWI - Monty saw action at Mons and at Meteren was shot by a sniper through the lung, his grave was dug as he was not expected to survive. Then, as I explained before he rose through the officer ranks experiencing different staff positions particularly at integrating artillery and engineers he kept 9th Corps casualties as low as could be expected in that campaign. So your dad was dead wrong but I accept that soldiers throughout history have bitched, your problem is that you swallowed these lines uncritically.
Unlike your dad you have the power of Google to help you out.
While I stand there waving my flag eh... You calling me a coward? If you knew me, you'd have a lot of egg on your face.
So far in the comments of your blog, you've expressed support for every dirty little dictator from Napoleon to Castro and Chavez.
You've expressed contempt for the institutions that have kept you free to spout your poisonous drivel.
You've cited the opinions of your commie father against the one General of WWII who gained a reputaition for care with his mens' lives.
You have no respect for anyone, or anything and you have demonstrated this often enough. You are incapable of rational debate, and whenyou try you descend to childish insults.
I would love to say you're a disgrace to your party, but you're not. You represent the Labour party's soul in all its bigoted, ignorant glory.
You're magnificent Terry, Keep it up!
jackart - Thank you for those measured comments, I'm delighted to let everyone read them.
I try to tell the truth about these institutions, by denying that truth it's you who shows contempt, not me.
The British military hierarchy will continue to be corrupt and rotten at the core, as long as they have gullible people like you to give them blind unquestioning support.
Can you prove to us that what you speak is the truth Terry? Could you cite a few sources on or off line that could back up your statements?
RFS - Are you honestly comparing my bad language to yours and your associates ? what next ?
Monty, as I think you know was the 'everyman' toff, career soldier that Private Kelly and his army comrades despised, with good reason.
You're clutching at straws by pretending not to understand the point being made.
RFS - When I think it's gone far enough I'll move on, you're being very childish and I'm too busy.
I think I have made it plain what I think of the military hierarchy and the Propaganda which sustains it. And no, I didn't say they were all corrupt, you're trying my patience by twisting what I say, that's not a debate.
My four mates ? now you're on more familiar ground aren't you ?
I think It was Cumbernauld where the SNP used to accuse the Labour Group of corruption and the authorities were then legaly obliged to investigate.
This was done to coincide with any election coming up, they then put out leaflets saying, the Labour Group are being investigated for fraud etc. it's not new.
Well, no. The quote you presented said "..who never heard a gun go aff in anger". This is a fallacy. He was besmirching the reputation of an officer without checking his facts.
So you are saying that what Pte Kelly actually meant was that he despised EVERY career soldier? So now we move on from despising officers to despising those who would choose the Army as a career? Those who would enlist at 16 and retire an RSM? You despise them?
Terry, Terry, Terry...
And just for giggles here is some more examples of your language:
"anonymous coward" (ad nauseum),
"I must remember not to overestimate some folk when I'm writing",
"are you writing from some kind of secure unit somewhere",
"you are beginning to sound like the noise from an empty drum being beaten",
"I'm trying to take pity on you, you are making a fool of yourself",
RFS - You've lost me.
"Napoleon got rid of the military corruption which still infests Britain today"
"and the rest of the rotten 2nd. rate upper class officer crew are an embarrassment to the country, and a liability to the men and women who serve under them."
How would you have us interpret these statements then?
And who are the four being investigated? Are you one of them?
You claim it is just a malicious allegation but the Crown Office have passed the case over which means that there is certainly enough evidence to warrant an assessment of whether there is public interest in a prosecution.
In your comment:
"I try to tell the truth about these institutions, by denying that truth it's you who shows contempt, not me."
Can you back up these statements you have made as being true? Again we don't really just take someones word for something. If you can cite a website or maybe a book we can get at the library to verify that what you have written is indeed the truth about the military then we will concede.
RFS - OK I'll indulge you for the last time on this.
Private Kelly and his army comrades despised the forces hierarchy including Monty because , as they saw it, they were despised by them and they were right.
Did he, and they, despise every career soldier ? well no they didn't, but you already know that don't you, this isn't debate because you are deliberately running away from it.
Is there nepotism at the top of Britain's armed forces ? Old school tie corruption ? Are our leaders appointed on merit and talent alone ? is the pope catholic ?
You're on a winner printing examples of my bad language. You know that I would not print the filth that you and your crowd regularly print. I can only advise people to read what you write and make up their own minds.
RFS - If you are really having trouble interpreting what I've said about the people who run our armed forces then I can't help further.
About the rest,it's contemptile but your keen interest doesn't surprise me.
Again, can you cite a source that showed that Monty had contempt for his men and that contrary to good discipline he openly displayed this contempt in front of them? If not then what did Kelly and his mates base this opinion on? And what about the Hitler love the Royal Family felt? And what did they have against Churchill?
"Is there nepotism at the top of Britain's armed forces ? Old school tie corruption ? Are our leaders appointed on merit and talent alone ? is the pope catholic ?"
Would you care to revise this statement so that it is no longer self contradictory?
Perhaps you or your Councillor daughter can provide an example of nepotism at the top of the army to back up your claim?
Mr Kelly,
Sorry to change the subject but are you shocked that four of your colleagues are in hot water for suspicious expenses claims? Did you suspect that anything dodgy might be happening? I'm stunned.
Is this evidence of a culture of Labour corruption on Renfrewshire council or just four bad apples?
You must be kicking yourself for your earlier joke:
'Having been involved in corrupt Labour politics for 40 yrs. I'm already rich, I don't need the money I've stolen enough, so I'm retiring, now crawl back under your stone.'
Terry - I'm sure most soldiers would join you in complaining about the MOD, run as it it by lazy, paper shuffling, unionised turds who care more about their careers than mens' lives. That is not true now, nor has it ever been true ever of the Officers of the British Army.
The standard of the Officers and Men of the British Army is superb. Our small unit command is the finest in the world - the doctrine of the "strategic corporal" sees to that, something the americans and French for example just cant grasp (we lifted it from the Germans during the last war).
But you wouldn't know anything like that, you probably still think unions are a good thing! (chortle). You certainly wouldn't let the facts get in the way of some good prejudice. You keep peddling your pathetic class-war myths. I'll live in the 21st century, thanks.
Jackart - Delighted to publish your well constructed informative comments again.
You asked me in your last comment if I was calling you a coward, I wouldn't dare call anyone who talks as tough as you a coward, and, if the British Armed Forces are as tough as you appear to be we are all safe aren't we.
This is the last exchange on this subject between you and me.
Clairwil - So, you've crawled back out again. Read my post to RFS under 'false anger' about this.
It's entirely predictable that you would jump on this, similar to your exploitation of people with mental disabilities, surely a period of reflective silence would have been the right thing for you after that disgraceful episode.
Have you no sense of decency ? You are surely one of the last people who would try to claim the moral high ground on anything. Where / what next ?
RFS - OK my hands are up, well done, I've just had it explained what you and your chums are doing. Childish or what ?
Check my comment to you of Feb. 27 th. 4. 22 pm. for this one.
RFS - See my last post Feb. 28 th. 1.42. pm
So you cannot cite your sources then? Typical, spout your ignorant views that you should be ashamed.
You don't even have the courage to back your own convictions. You have made all these allegations and produced not one shred of documented evidence to back it up. Had you came out and said that, oh - I don't know, Alex Salmond was corrupt to the core then he would probably take legal action. You are nothing but a moral coward and we have all see this in this thread. I thank you for it.
I assume you are talking about the target number on the other thread? Well, I did put "60 - GET IN" on it so that should have been a HUGE clue. I should not have to then spell it out for you when you are being baited.
Pathetic.
Mr Kelly,
I don't recall saying I was angry about this unfortunate incident. In fact when it was brought to me attention I was killing myself laughing. It's not only me that's hooting, try a quick google search and see for yourself.
I'm also unclear what you mean by me being unable to take the moral high ground. Unlike your colleagues I have never been accused of fiddling public funds.
As for a sense of decency I would have thought most people yourself included would be saddened by local government being brought into disrepute by alleged fraud.
With regard to the mental health thing all I did was question you about your use of mentally ill as an insult and ask if you thought anyone who didn't share your politics was mentally ill.
That you think a member of the public should be ashamed for asking an elected representative a question says far more about you than it does about me.
And all I had to do was pretend to be angry and you would still post my comments.
Cheap fiddles (not a corruption joke this time!) have nothing on you.
anon - Identify yourself, and then try to explain yourself.
Clairwil - Nothing that you might find funny would surprise me.
Following my last engagement with you, I am of the opinion that you wouldn't be able to claim the moral high ground on any issue. In case you're wondering I'm referring to your contemptible behaviour to people with mental disabilities.
Your eagerness to use them for your own narrow ends marks you out as a nasty piece of work, I'm proud to count you as an enemy.
If you shake off your torpor you might see that fraud allegations are not confined to any one group.
Anon was me. Damned Blackberry, went to hit the post button and it scrolled up, hit the Anonymous radio button then submitted anyway.
So are you saying that the fraud allegations in Renfrewshire Council go beyond the 4 Labour members reported? If so then this contradicts your claim not to know the identities of anyone accused.
Will you now name names?
RFS - I'm saying that fraud allegations in Renfrewshire Council and elsewhere are not uncommon and not confined to one party, I would have thought that was quite plain.
Put your rope away and let the authorities do their job.
Mr Kelly,
Would you explain exactly how I have exploited the mentally ill? I would again point out that I do suffer from a mental health problem myself. So why do you believe I have some sort of evil intent towards my fellow sufferers. I did direct a few of my friends from my D.A support group towards your blog and they are as baffled by your assertions relating to my questions on mental health as I am.
All I do was wonder why you felt describing someone as mentally ill was an insult, something you have failed to answer. Instead you have made a series of peculiar assertions that you cannot back up with any evidence. If I didn't know better I'd say you were trying to bully me into 'crawling back under my stone'.
As for corruption I do not recall saying it was confined to the Labour party, just that it seems to be rather common in it.
Being 'awful and thick' I'd like you to explain exactly what leads you to believe that I am a nasty piece of work. Disagreeing with you? Feeling let down by the Labour Party? Expecting standards in public life? Asking a question about mental illness? Do enlighten me.
As for being proud to count me as an enemy, feel free. It must be difficult being a member of a political party that has done so much to be ashamed of over the last decade. Even I'm not evil enough to grudge you a little pride.
Clairwil - You deliberately misrepresented what I said and then accused me of insulting the mentally Ill, you then mawkishly wrapped yourself in your own problems to gain sympathy and make me look bad for attacking you.
I didn't say you had 'evil intent' toward your fellow sufferers I said that you cynically used the issue of mental health for your own ends, just like your comment today, that's what makes you a ' nasty piece of work ' and beneath contempt.
Terry,
Just so we are clear:
I accept that fraud allegations in the rest of the country cover people of all parties and none.
Now...
Back to my original point; are the allegations of fraud reported in the local and national press regarding Renfrewshire Council this week confined entirly to those currently serving as part of the ruling Labour group.
Mr Kelly,
For someone who spends so much much time insulting people you're not terribly good at it.
The facts are that I belong to a number of organisations concerned with mental health. I myself have suffer from a mental health condition. As a result of my own experiences I have an interest in issues surrounding mental health. I and many people with similar health problems have encountered a great deal of prejudice as a result of our health. Perhaps we're a wee bit more sensitive to mentally ill being banded about as an insult than most because of this. Similarly we're all well used to being accused of 'putting it on', 'skiving' and looking for sympathy and attention by employers and pig ignorant colleagues.
Your insulting insinuation that I'm looking for sympathy is water off a ducks back. You don't know, you have no medical qualifications, you really aren't in any position to speculate. I only mentioned my health to give some background as you had accused me of picking an issue I had no real interest in. All I was trying to do was explain why I did have a genuine interest.
As for your peculiar notion that I'm trying to make you look bad for attacking me. Nothing could be further from the truth. If I wanted special treatment I wouldn't enter into a debate with someone so obviously incapable of arguing with resorting to ad hominem attacks.
To be clear, I accept that in the rest of the country fraud allegations are made against people of all parties and none.
But my original question was thus:
Are the subjects of the report to the PF (as reported in the national and local press this week) regarding fraud exclusively members of the ruling Labour group. Yes or no?
RFS - Just so we are clear, you are asking me to work on your behalf and supply you with information, and, correct me if I'm wrong but, after repeated requests you won't even identify yourself.
Bloody cheek !
RFS - In the words of that great Scottish philosopher K Dalgleish, 'mibees aye an then again mibees naw'
clairwil - You are shameless, you are doing it again, will you not give these people a break.
Don't you think you are now 'protesting too much' if you want to argue with me then get on with it and leave these people out of it. I have plenty of things I could say about mental health issues but I wouldn't stoop to your level, try standing up for yourself without using crutches that you don't have permission to use. You accuse me of 'ad hominem' attacks, for god's sake woman !
Can I offer you a deal ? If I tell the world that you are wonderful will you leave me alone ? I'm beginning to feel tainted by you.
Terry,
We have been here before. You want to know my name? Simple, search my blog for NHS computer systems and you will have all the information you need. You say to me to get off my arse? You try doing it!!! In fact, you know what? Screw it, my name is Greg Scott, I started to post anonymously because I worked for the NHS at the time and I wanted to write about them without risking my job.
But why would my full name affect the answer to the question? The more you dodge this the more you look like you are one of those being reported.
I have let your laziness get its own way so now do you think we deserve an answer? Are you or your daughter one of those being reported to the PF?
You know what? I think it is time to call your bluff Terry.
I posted anonymously because I worked at the time for the NHS and was disgusted by what I saw there. I wanted to write about it without risking my job. I don't work for them anymore. My name is Greg Scott.
So how does now knowing my name alter the answer to the question?
You may think you are being smart Terry but the more you duck the question and make half hearted jokes the more you look guilty. Are you one of those who are in the report? And can you confirm the reports in the press that the report concerns itself only with the Labour group?
Mr Kelly,
What do you mean by 'leave these people alone'. If by 'these people' you mean the mentally ill. Then having a mental health condition makes me one of 'these people' does it not?
If you are accusing me of lying then make it clear. As I've said previously I'm more than happy to supply you with reports from my G.P, psychologist and CPN which will demonstrate that I'm not lying.
I'm not using my condition as a crutch. I only brought it up to explain why I have an interest in mental health issues. Why on earth would I want sympathy from you or indeed anyone else. I'm fortunate to be well most of the time, I just have the odd turn. It's a pain in the a**e, but I don't have to look for to see people worse off than me.
I'm also unclear as how mentioning one's health constitutes an ad hominem attack. Can you explain?
No offence but I'd prefer it if you didn't tell anyone you thought I was wonderful. I won't say why.
As for feeling 'tainted' by me, if you can't stand the heat....
clairwil - I didn't accuse you of lying, I accused you of using your condition and that of others in a cynical and manipulative way for your own ends, and you are still doing it.
I've had enough of you, from now on if you don't drop this pitiful whinging about mental health I will print your pathetic stuff but I won't respond.
I reckon the peopkle with mental health problems are due a break from you.
Mr Kelly,
As you've mentioned before I am awful and thick so I'm still confused by your attacks on me. Can you show what I've said that constitutes pitiful whining? Can you also supply evidence of me using my condition in a cynical way?
I'm genuinely intrigued.
P.S What do you think of your new fan site?
http://terrywatch.blogspot.com/
Please leave a comment or two. We don't censor ours.
RFS - I don't believe that you feared for your job.
Go and find out this info. for yourself, don't you know how to do this ? are you just lazy ?
Greg Scott, I think I prefer RFS. Anyway, fill in the rest, give the same information as I do
RFS - If a job's worth doing, it's worth doing twice isn't it ? I think I've answered this.
Are you quite well ? I hope you're not beginning to unravel, first your name and then this.
Poor network connection on Friday, I hit the Publish and then I got no feedback that it had been successful so I posted again.
Still...We are not talking about you doing my work for me. We are talking about you giving me a simple straight answer. You know the answer and you know that the answer is "yes, it is only the Labour group being investigated" and you just cannot bring yourself to post it.
Quite sad really, such a big ego you have on you.
Greg.
RFS - You are wrong again, you don't seem to have learned anything from the last time I kicked your butt, with your assistance of course.
So you are saying that other parties have members in the four reported to the PF?
RFS - I'm saying that you should do your own work.
Cllr Terry Kelly said...
RFS - I'm saying that you should do your own work.
Why so coy and why not come out and say it Terry? What is the secret?
It might be worth quoting yuo a definition of honesty from Wikipedia:
Superficially, honesty means simply, stating facts and views as best one truly believes them to be. It includes both honesty to others, and to oneself (see: self-deception) and about ones own motives and inner reality.
Stating facts and and views as best on etruly believes them to be? Honesty to others and oneself
Shall I tell you something honest? One of the main reasons I find you so tiresome and keep coming back is because I believe you are not honest with yourself and you don't really believe what you say. Look at Beb Elton-Billy Bragg-Richard Wilson etc. etc. good old fashioned socialists who dumped their ideals when they got sufficeintly rich and finally realised that it was utter shite.
I believe you are the same but still rely on council loot for your 'occupation'
BTW: Are you standing in May?
The most sickening sight in the country is the cowardice of scots who are bullied out of standing up for themselves by accusations of racism..... a fucking endless seam of gold for those theiving snidey brits telling us that we are poor beggars in their cosmopolitan nirvana.....
Yer a blind beaten dog thats grateful when its kicked and mesmerised by the mirage of Isael.... The USA is ten times more aggressive than that wee country.... yet you'll blether on about Palestine while refusing to defend your own people. You'd pimp your own granny for a lick of the union boot!
Helen - As always I'm delighted to let people read this stuff, you see, some folk don't believe that you and others like you actually exist.
Post a Comment