Jump to content

Ghostrider

Members
  • Content Count

    9,319
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    350

Ghostrider last won the day on May 17

Ghostrider had the most liked content!

About Ghostrider

  • Rank
    1crankymofo
  • Birthday 01/01/1921

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling
  • Location
    Oot-a-daeks.

Recent Profile Visitors

1,365 profile views
  1. This is what I was referring to: https://www.computerweekly.com/news/450414606/NHS-Scotland-launches-GP-information-sharing-system Yes, 'they say' all data will be anonymised, only be shared with outside third parties where there are clear medical benefits in doing so, and that the data will be deleted once it no longer has relevant usefulness, and that's fine. The trouble is, governments say a great deal, and stick to very, very little of it in the end. Moving goalposts and muddying boundaries are their stock and trade. Yes, its a far weaker version of what NHS England are talk
  2. Really! I have good reason to conclude that those keeping tally are being rather economical with truth in making the statement I've highlighted in red. 99.99% may well have had at least one shot, I'm in no position to say either way, but 100% most certainly have not. I hate Big Brother propaganda, wherever it rears its ugly head. (Quote from SIBC headlines this morning).
  3. ^ Boris and any list he may have is no more and no less culpable for the present situation than any other national/global 'interferer' and whatever they did or didn't do. We are where we are due to global scaremongering creating hysteria, which the 'powers that be' have reacted to. That would have been fine if anybody knew much of anything about the 'virus' in question, they didn't. They made it up as they went along changing their minds as often as their underwear...... Even if they'd known everything there was to know about the 'virus', that was only half the story, effective
  4. Unless I'm very mistaken the Scottish NHS were involved in some sort of 'centralisation of data for research purposes' (exact small print may well vary) quite some time back, to the point I recall filling up an 'opt out' thingy at some point over it.
  5. Tony Blair was brought up in Edinburgh. Any tangible contribution to Scottish politics by any of the two has been less than minimal, and has only come about through their involvement in English politics in the UK political sphere. IOW, coincidental rather than intentional.
  6. ^ You believe an English politician.............
  7. By forming alliances with other members of the opposition on issues that can be agreed on, and working on garnering public opinion support via the media. Successful politics, especially party politics is only achieved by playing the long game. You need to prove to the majority of the public while you are in opposition that you have the better ideas than whoever they chose to form a Government last time around. Then they might just vote for you next time. Relegating themselves to sniping at everything the current Government says or does, sometimes in contradiction with their own publi
  8. The trouble with Blackford and his fellow SNP MP's is perhaps not so much how much they cost, but of the value for money they represent. SNP MP's especially have re-written the definition of an 'opposition MP'. the purpose of an opposition MP or party is to attempt to negotiate with the Government to try and win some of modification or concession that benefits the portion of the electorate they represent. The SNP MP's are by no means the only ones at it, but they make the biggest meal out of it, in that they interpret the role of being an opposition MP or party as simply criticising and v
  9. They're all as bad as each other as far as I'm concerned. Its Holyrood who are courting our vote at the moment, so its the arrogant know-it-alls who hang around their that are the current concern. When Westminster are seeking our vote, I'll say the same about those there. I'm non-discriminatory like that me. I'll call em on how they act, party colours are irrelevant.
  10. Its a pish stop for young eens cruisin in cars, a park up for shaggin wagons. Somebody probably a bit tanked up on falling down water and egged on by somebody, found a rattle can and thought it was a good idea (at the time) to leave a few 'Shock Jock' comments on a ruin. To be taken about as seriously as political pre-elections promises. Its a wind up, designed to get a 'reaction', because it was sure to, and it certainly has with the Flea wading in among all the kye and sheep sharn, that's on the floor below it. There's about as much chance of finding a pot of gold at the end of the
  11. ^ Very true. The trouble is the arrogant know-it-alls who are trying to convince that Scot's independence is the thing and have their eye on the top jobs of such an entity. are giving scant sign of even giving a damn how others have made it work, let alone taking any of their tried and tested ideas on board. The 'Document' produced by the SNP prior to the last referendum is all the evidence you need, extremely heavy on soundbite, catchphrase romanticised 'independence' and fluffy light on any meat. Make the idea work robustly on paper, with hard facts and numbers, and enough folk mig
  12. The nation put BJ in charge knowing full well what he was like, so far he's running to form. Expecting anybody to change their spots just because they've been given a new job title to hang round their next is an unrealistic and forlorn hope. Parliament is not one person, nor is the government (well, okay, Thatcher did her best to be.....), every one is rattling full of characters and acts that are 'questionable' and 'dubious', this one is no different. Half-truths, lying by omission, dressing things up as what they're not and denials are their stock in trade, get used to it. You're m
  13. ^ Well, he would say that, wouldn't he. He's a top layer politician. Or he forgot he said them. I seriously doubt anybody can remember every remark they made in every conversation they've had recently. Especially politicians, as not talking is something the majority find very difficult to do. The paper says he did, he says he didn't, who knows who said what. Whoever said it, is not particularly irrelevant and can be fought over and settled whenever, the point is, that it has been said, that is the realism and straight talking part. Its now out there, where it belongs and should have
  14. ^ The fat lady hasn't sung yet on the 'rona. An awful lot of folk worldwide have done and said things they may well yet live to regret (or die regretting) before its all over. New Zealand, and Scotland may yet see 'bodies pile high in their thousands' and there be nothing they can do to stop it.......just like 1918-20. While BJ's remark and attitude may well be 'ill-considered' given his position, it could also be argued that he is just being a realist and that he is being no more 'irresponsible' than those relying on closed borders to keep the virus out of countries and away fr
  15. I'm not going to try and justify that they're 'better in every way', even thiugh they very probably are. What I will point out though, is if you check out cheapest (by price tag) products which contain 'tomato sauce' of some sort, you'll find many of them 'bulk out' the tomato puree with fructose syrup. I'm not claiming to have any nutritionalist knowledge but if someone offers me a choice between liquidised tomatoes or concentrated fruit sugar, I'm not thnking I'll be picking the latter as being likely to feed me best.
×
×
  • Create New...