peeriesooky Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 wan o his mates, complete wi save sakchai campaign poster in back seat o his car, almost ran ower my peerie boy yesterday due tae being too busy showing aff tae his mates etc tae actually adhere tae basic road safety etc. it's nae right tae judge sumboady on da actions o his mates, but it is a human thing tae do. i will admit dat my initial thought wis if he's onything lik his mates, how good could he be? efter aa, it wis my sons life dat wis put at risk, so i think i wis entitled tae be p****d aff and angry, but upon reflection decided dat he wisna dere so why judge him. but dis is a very human thing tae do, judge sumwan fir actions dat u dinna lik. so on dat reckoning, vailron is entitled tae think whit he liks re swagger etc. hooever, he never actually said dat dis means he shud be deported, jist dat he didna believe he wis as nice etc as folk say he is, which he's entitled tae think Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plucker Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 HAHA I've heard it all noo!!! Funny as all i hear is wind, piss and white noise!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeriesooky Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 HAHA I've heard it all noo!!! Funny as all i hear is wind, piss and white noise!!! get ur hearing checked den. are u capable o posting anything wi any substance, or is it aaways jist pointless peerie posts designed tae disrupt things etc grow up Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plucker Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 So where are you from peeriesooky? I would hazard a gues you're from the NE of Scotland somewhere. Your Shetland dialect doesn't really stand up as you use nae only where a scotty would use it and get dee and du mixed up and in the wrong order too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeriesooky Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 So where are you from peeriesooky? I would hazard a gues you're from the NE of Scotland somewhere. Your Shetland dialect doesn't really stand up as you use nae only where a scotty would use it and get dee and du mixed up and in the wrong order too. i'm fae shetland, but travelled aroond a lot when i wis a kid. noo, whit relevance dus dis hae wi onything plucker? give it a rest Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim-jam Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 On the subject of relevance..... I really don't see any relevance in the fact that somebody had a campaign poster in their car window and drove erratically. I saw a man driving erractically yesterday who didn't have a campaign poster in his car window. So what? Are people's driving skills somehow reflective of the merits of Sakchai's case? I have watched this thread degenerate into nonsense several times, but I think that is the cheapest shot yet. This 'debate' has reached an all time low. No doubt the reply will consist of a 'if you actually read what I said then you'll see that the point I was making was that I'm in support of the campaign, BUT....' So why mention it? It's absolutely irrelevant. I've been trying very hard to take the 'don't feed the trolls' advice, but I think this point needed to be addressed. (I await the usual 'freedom of speech' and 'but this is a debate' response) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derick Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 Could the moderateors reassure us that 'Vailron' and 'Peeriesooky' are not the same person, and not 'Segatrix' back again in different guises? Is there any way of telling? - sorry, but the recent utterances again seem to be getting rather nearer deliberate smears than constructive debate suspiciouslyDerick Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeriesooky Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 On the subject of relevance..... I really don't see any relevance in the fact that somebody had a campaign poster in their car window and drove erratically. I saw a man driving erractically yesterday who didn't have a campaign poster in his car window. So what? Are people's driving skills somehow reflective of the merits of Sakchai's case? I have watched this thread degenerate into nonsense several times, but I think that is the cheapest shot yet. This 'debate' has reached an all time low. No doubt the reply will consist of a 'if you actually read what I said then you'll see that the point I was making was that I'm in support of the campaign, BUT....' So why mention it? It's absolutely irrelevant. I've been trying very hard to take the 'don't feed the trolls' advice, but I think this point needed to be addressed. (I await the usual 'freedom of speech' and 'but this is a debate' response) if du wid read my post, i pointed oot dat it wisna relevant. I stated dat in a moment of anger ( my son coulda bin killed, am i no allowed tae be angry at dat?) i thought dat, but den calmed doon and thought itherwise. i wis pointing oot, re vailrons post dat it is easy tae jump tae conclusions etc, but dat is no always da right thing tae follow. I pointed oot dat it wis irrelevant, i wis using it as an example of how not tae jump tae conclusions as fir derick's comment, i have openly admitted dat segatrix is my cussin, but i hae no idea wha vailron is. hooever, i huv said nithing tae smear da campaign at aa, in fact i have bin repeatedly trying tae keep dis thread on topic and not start doon a smear line. dis is uncalled fir and irrelevant. is onyboady dat says sumthing dat folk mite no lik, regardless o whit it is gonna be linked inta wan inither? or can du jist accept dat der are a few folk dat mite be against it rather as wan almighty dissenter. be suspicious, but stop being sae paranoid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jim-jam Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 No doubt the reply will consist of a 'if you actually read what I said then you'll see that the point I was making was that I'm in support of the campaign, BUT....' if du wid read my post, i pointed oot dat it wisna relevant. I'm perfectly capable of reading posts. These debating tactics are very tedious and round and round we go.... As for Segatrix's reappearence, I urge forum users to draw their own conclusions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeriesooky Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 i'm nae interested and i'm nae getting dragged intae dis nonsense. i have not said onything tae smear da campaign in da slightest, if du wid actually pay attention tae whit i have posted recently du will notice dat my aunts sister and mother are in a similar situation tae sakchai (not been granted permission tae stay here and are waiting conformation as tae when dey hae ta leave Britain) so why in gods name wid i be against dis campaign? i never stated in my post dat da actions o sumwan in der car were a direct reflection o sakchai, i said in a moment o anger it flashed in my head and i decided mysel dat dat wisna fair. but whitever, du'll draw di ain paranoid conclussions Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trout Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 Keep this thread clean people! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeriesooky Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 here here Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sam Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 At the end of the day, the opinions expressed in this thread are all just "hot air" and won't matter a jot, as (thankfully) it is hard facts that the Immigration Tribuneral will use to decide Sakchai's fate and not opinions. this hot air is on both sides of the story remember. nether will make any odds as i have said many times before. As you say mm its hard facts that will count in the end of the day. After satch is ok i think we should work on the other people in shetland waiting to hear their fate, dont you agree? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbo Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 I know this thread is "supposed" to be for debating the Satch issue but there appears to be very little debate going on - just slurs, aggression and nonsense. Peeriesooky's latest contribution was a classic - "I thought of something to say but decided it was irrelevent so I decided to say it anyway but because it is irrelevent it is also relevent." I am paraphrasing, of course. Freedom of speech is, of course, important but this is too much. The thread has been spoilt by a trio of obstructionists. Would it not be better if they were banned? Or better still, bowed out voluntarily with the profuse gratitude of everyone else. The we could all get back to discussing the relevent issue in a intelligent and considerate manner. I await Peeriesooky's vitriolic backlash with resignation. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peeriesooky Posted July 2, 2006 Report Share Posted July 2, 2006 i have bin neither aggresive, vitriolic or any o da things du says. i have dun nithing tae merit dis singling oot dat folk have decided tae launch at me, but i refuse tae get dragged intae a slanging match wi folk wi far too much time on der hands and who are far too willing tae drag this thread aff topic by accusing ithers o doing it. 8O Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.