Ghostrider Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 (edited) He did his very worst to dodge a question from a group member he should be able to answer and went nuclear instead. Call that reasonable behaviour if you like, but I can't imagine anyone wanting to ask John anything much after this. "...went nuclear...." ? Sorry, but that's a new one on me, I ain't following. And just for the record, he did answer her question, not once but twice. I can't speak for anyone else, but if I felt any question I was inclined to ask WS was unwelcome, I would have alredy left the group. Edited April 11, 2016 by Ghostrider Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post crofter Posted April 11, 2016 Popular Post Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 He did his very worst to dodge a question from a group member he should be able to answer and went nuclear instead. Call that reasonable behaviour if you like, but I can't imagine anyone wanting to ask John anything much after this.He did not dodge the question, he answered it. The dodging and evasion was done entirely by Amanda. Da Burra Shop, Ghostrider, George. and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roachmill Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 You're obviously very easily satisfied if you call one word an adequate answer as to why WS has pulled a stunt like that. Add to that his "answer" was one word in a sentence that carried on pushing Westlake on an unrelated matter. And you're just being obtuse Ghostrider re going nuclear. Unless you think schools aren't an important topic of course. Westlake would be a fool to have answered John definitively, which is glaringly obvious and I'm pretty sure John's not daft enough to think otherwise. So why push the question on an open forum knowing full well he would put Westlake in a very awkward position she wouldn't give him an answer from? I'm in no way defending Westlake as, like I said previously, there may be meat on the bones of what John was pushing at. However, the way he handled a perfectly fair question was way off the mark whatever juicy bits of info he's heard on the (ever trustworthy!) grapevine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crofter Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 You're obviously very easily satisfied if you call one word an adequate answer as to why WS has pulled a stunt like that. Add to that his "answer" was one word in a sentence that carried on pushing Westlake on an unrelated matter.She asked if there had been a poll of members. There are only two answers to that question, "yes" or "no" and John Tulloch answered "No" (Twice) Whereas Amanda did not answer his question at all. Suffererof1crankymofo and Da Burra Shop 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Ghostrider Posted April 11, 2016 Popular Post Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 And you're just being obtuse Ghostrider re going nuclear. Unless you think schools aren't an important topic of course. Westlake would be a fool to have answered John definitively, which is glaringly obvious..... I wouldn't know whether I'm being obtuse, or not, as I haven't a clue what the term "going nuclear" means as and where you used it. Likewise, it may just be a case that "i have not brought my specs with me", but I fail to see how Westlake would have been a "fool" to answer the question put to her. Does she, or does she not support CURE. Yes or No? Thats not that difficult, nor something that there's any need to make a secret of, surely? George., Da Burra Shop, crofter and 1 other 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roachmill Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 Whether she personally supports CURE (or not) could quite easily be at odds with her role as a councillor. To publicly state a definitive yes or no would therefore be a foolish thing for someone in her position to do as she would most likely get beaten over the head with it in the future whichever way she went. This does not apply to you as you are not a councillor, obviously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 ^ I'm not saying I agree with your reasoning there, but to hypothetically follow through for a moment using it. Whether she supported CURE (of not) was seen as being at odds with her WS membership, hence she was put on the spot. By attempting to fudge the whole issue behind a wall of political waffle to apprently save her ass as both a WS member and Councillor she only succeeded in losing the former and very probably damaging her future prospects as the latter. There were many ways she could have played the situation that would have allowed her to win on all fronts, she chose not to go those ways, her loss. Da Burra Shop 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffererof1crankymofo Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 Whether she personally supports CURE (or not) could quite easily be at odds with her role as a councillor. To publicly state a definitive yes or no would therefore be a foolish thing for someone in her position to do as she would most likely get beaten over the head with it in the future whichever way she went. This does not apply to you as you are not a councillor, obviously. Who is going to beat her over the head given that she stood as an independent? She quotes on her Facebook page:- "“I feel dat wir bairns have da right tae a positive future in Shetland” Another entry:- "Why am I standing for Council?I believe that I have the ability to help the next council make some important decisions on Education, Social Care, moving forward with Sustainable Development and a positive outlook for Shetland and renewable energy. I feel that matters left from the last outgoing council, such as the new high school, school closures, cuts for music development and increased costs in music tuition must be revisited. It is imperative to protect and nurture Shetland’s greatest assets, our children, the vulnerable and our aging residents, I feel there is room in the voluntary sector to take over areas such as the Freefield Centre to build and run them better for all concerned. Housing needs to be addressed, with over 700 people on the waiting list it is time to tackle these issues and make positive improvements. Maintaining Shetland’s culture and heritage must be a priority, to preserve the unique environment of Shetland, land and sea, flora and fauna, while balancing changes in the economy. There is a need to attract new external expenditure into the area to maintain the service economy and provide new job opportunities for the future. Equilibrium must be met between the private and public sector for the economic development of Shetland’s future. I feel that Shetland has a right to fair treatment from the Scottish Government with its transport ferry links from Lerwick and the UK mainland, this service is our life line." And she also states:- "I believe that:»» Councillors should be open and honest and should listen to you.»» Councillors should be accountable for their actions.»» Councillors should act as your voice for what you feel is important.»» Councillors should encourage Inward investment and business growth to keep the Shetland Economy a prosperous place to live and work.»» Councillors should understand local issues and be committed to make important decisions for Shetland’s future.»» Councillors should concentrate on stabilising Shetland’s finances and look positively to improving:• Education• Social Care• Housing• Culture and Heritage• Transport• Sustainable Development" She knew what she was playing at when she decided not to pm or pick up the phone or e-mail. How is she being open and transparent by not answering whether or not she supports CURE? Can we expect a press release from her any day now or is she going against her OWN beliefs by not being open and transparent? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roachmill Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 Ask her. You two clearly aren't going to see anything other than John being a model of virtue. It appears he's the new Steve Jobs... hopefully he can park his car a bit better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffererof1crankymofo Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 Ask her. You two clearly aren't going to see anything other than John being a model of virtue. It appears he's the new Steve Jobs... hopefully he can park his car a bit better. Oh believe me, I'm seeing Amanda's reluctance to answer more than one question put before her. I'm seeing her not wanting to state what our message is when John sought clarity. I'm seeing her making pathetic excuses about wanting to know what Wir Shetland's policy was about CURE before answering whether or not she supported CURE. I'm seeing her not being open and transparent. And if that is an example of the standard of debating going down in the town hall, gawd help us all. And honestly, making a cheap jibe at Steve Jobs - yes, the press reported in 2008 onwards that he parked in disabled bays. It might help if you paid a tad more attention to detail; he had pancreatic cancer since 2004. George. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capeesh Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 Is the pillorying of Amanda Westlake part of the new "wir Shetland" recruitment drive?Seems a bit self defeating to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roachmill Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 But you're fine with your leader being less than gentlemanly. I'm being polite. As for Jobs - if he couldn't park a car he likely shouldn't be driving. As I said, I'm seeing the same behaviour directed to JT as SJ. Thanks for proving the point! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghostrider Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 If Westlake will set herself up as something shes not, and other folk come along and persistently prop her up as something shes not, it is going to attract rebuffing. Call that whatever it pleases you to. Suffererof1crankymofo 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suffererof1crankymofo Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 But you're fine with your leader being less than gentlemanly. I'm being polite. As for Jobs - if he couldn't park a car he likely shouldn't be driving. As I said, I'm seeing the same behaviour directed to JT as SJ. Thanks for proving the point! I'm happy with a leader who is forthright regardless of what gender they happen to be. Jobs parked in disabled bays; nice (not) to see that you feel somebody disabled shouldn't be parking in a disabled bay but hey, he can't come on and defend himself, given he's dead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Roachmill Posted April 11, 2016 Report Share Posted April 11, 2016 Any defence I am granting Westlake is not for her personally. You clearly have opinions on her as a person and that makes treating her the way John did okay somehow. Refusing to see how he pushed her into a corner doesn't mean he didn't do just that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now