Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Everything posted by Distortio

  1. why thank you sir! HARMONIOUS too, i might add. well, 2 of us are shouting at the same time and i'm pretty sure we're not doing the same note...
  2. ^^belated cheers, davie! latest effort: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SufQevoH6Yk https://brundlehorse.bandcamp.com/
  3. DOWNLOAD 4 TRACK EP>>> "SHUT UP AND EAT YOUR FIRE" https://brundlehorse.bandcamp.com/album/shut-up-and-eat-your-fire
  4. Streaming & Free Download: https://lesscott.bandcamp.com Sep 2008; alternating between a bottle of morphine, a bottle of oxygen and a bottle of beer, Les laid down the vocal and harmonica parts to some of his favourite songs. Recording began one year into a 12-18 month cancer prognosis, and Les died before the project was complete, but finally overdubs, editing and mixing are done and it's high time it was released. for friends, family and strangers x Suggested donations to Macmillan Cancer Support: www.macmillan.org.uk/donate there's also a farcebook page if you're so inclined: https://www.facebook.com/LesScottBlues/
  5. funny you don't hear the same complaints about the frog king farage not mentioning in his election campaign about his past as a banker/stockbroker... the info is out there, but you know, you'd think he'd mention that for the benefit of those who don't have the internet eh? similarly carmichael, shouldn't he have mentioned his support for the bedroom tax and other tory policies in his leaflets? how do these "lies by omission" differ from skene not mentioning a school or religious leanings? http://www.shetnews.co.uk/news/10978-did-cameron-hang-carmichael-out-to-dry it's getting interesting. i wonder who else knew about this before it was leaked. after all the contents of the memo leak mainly seemed to benefit tories...
  6. this is getting beyond farcical. i would have replied to all the absurdity but didn't fancy sitting typing for 3 days only to be met with more of the same. and this was more fun. *any resemblance to persons etc... S] do you want eggs? G] far more relevant i'd have thought would be the farm the "chicken" was raised on, if indeed it was a chicken. S] indeed. and i wonder if this "chicken" has council affiliations... G] that may well be so, but as usual the real issue here is being avoided by those public school establishment figures in their ivory towers making stupid unqualified decisions about poultry they clearly know nothing about. S] yes G, you're right again. hypothetically you could ask that "chicken" a number of questions, to which i could provide entirely unsubstantiated answers which i think you will find will lend weight whatever point i think i'm making at this moment in time. G] perhaps that could be construed as such, however in my book, as i have said all along, this is really about who is having "bacon" and whether or not that "person" is cooking that "bacon" (assuming it is to be cooked and not eaten raw) uses a non-stick "pan", which in my book is at best highly questionable. S] well, yes. still, at least bacon doesn't have any religious leanings... G] probably not. though in my book the extent to which these alleged strips of dead pig can read, or indeed, comprehend the content of particular "religious" texts is irrelevant compared to the real problem which is about whether or not "bacon" (or indeed "chicken" if it so chose) is actually proven to be composed of strips of pig, a claim which i have not been convinced of, following the multiple reports in the "newspapers" which i don't read and the "television" which i don't watch. S] quite right! i never mentioned the fecking (cultural reference, it was funny 20 years ago, finger on the pulse) news reports! G] whether or not one mentions anything neither proves nor disproves anything, and in my book any "disputes" arising from the absence of information is arguably no less significant than the perceived assumptions which preceded it, and indeed form the basis for my understanding of this "situation". i voted ukip incidentally. S] i can't tell if i'm blinking uncontrollably or having a fit. G] personally speaking i see no reason to distinguish between the two, blinking can happen while fitting and vice versa, therefor it is entirely irrelevant to the question of whether a particular so-called "chicken" is part of an old boys network and proactively advertises its establishment credentials... [G&S are found slumped over the table. eggs remain uncooked.]
  7. What's the point of chopping one heads off the monster when it has hundreds of the things? Calling one to account is about as much use as catching one mouse, when your house is alive with them. Its the system that is rotten, and the participants either have to get with the program or fail. It is the dishonesty and lack of democracy of the system that gets my goat, and no amount of shuffling the deckchirs on the Titanic by exchanging faces is ever going to make one iota of difference to that. If this was a campaign to revolutionise how we are governed by imposing greater accountability and standards I could be persuaded to back it, all it is though is a small slightly distracting side show, which regardless how it plays out will not make one iota of difference in the final analysis - business with continue as before, and as is - aka. a monumental waste of time. if it makes so little difference to you i find it surprising you've been such a regular contributor to the 17 pages of discussion on it... fair enough, the system is flawed. not many would argue with that. you must find it a little ironic though that the party you're spending so much time criticising is one of the few which actually supports PR which would make a more representative system? (despite the fact it would result in them winning fewer seats) inviting others to join in the same dirty tricks campaign which prompted this thread and the complaints, investigations and legal action probably isn't the best way forward... there's a pretty big crossover though. the vast majority of people get their political information from tv/newspapers and if that media has a clear right wing bias then it seems pretty obvious there will be a similar right wing leaning in the voting patterns. well, how do you think turning a blind eye helps? you're basically saying "yeah we know you're all corrupt, noses in the trough etc, but that's fine, carry on, we don't really expect any better." surely if they saw their noses could be pulled from the trough they might be more inclined to get their house in order? ...but odin? really? i thought you didn't want anyone with religious convictions representing you? (course, that would rule out carmichael too, being a church elder and all...)
  8. You're only feigning concern for honesty, deomcracy and a level playing field, by blowing up out of all proportion a minor and inconsequencial incident just because it might gain political capital for your left wing bias. not at all. i just find it telling that while you regularly complain about dishonesty and lack of democracy you are perfectly happy to actively brush it under the carpet when it suits you politically. and furthermore you will label calls for accountability for the actions you complain about "a witch hunt" etc. even if it was a witch hunt (which for the most part i don't believe it is) what's your problem with that. surely by your measure that's just part of the ruthless cut and thrust of politics, how did you put it? "kill your opponent by any means possible" wasn't it? so you don't like it when you think your political opponents are playing by the same rules you are happy enough to endorse/accept when it suits you. you're right there. there is a massive inherent right wing bias in the media. here's the figures again: in order of readership to give a broad picture of overall reach (figures for 2015): 1,978,702 the sun (tory) 1,688,727 daily mail (tory) 992,235 daily mirror (labour) 805,309 evening standard (tory) (figures for 2015 unavailable, 2014 figures listed) 494,675 daily telegraph tory) 457,914 daily express (ukip) 425,246 daily star (previously tory, but owner richard desmond donated 1.3m to ukip) 396,621 times (tory) 280,351 i (mini-publication of independent) (tory lib-dem) 219,444 financial times (tory) 203,725 daily record (labour) 185,429 guardian (labour) 61,338 independent (tory lib-dem) well there you go, all the more reason to support accountability. while of course it won't eradicate corruption and lies it would at least discourage it.
  9. http://www.shetnews.co.uk/news/10828-carmichael-opposes-election-petition so carmichael now "misstated his awareness of the leaked memorandum" (!) presumably what he meant to say was something more along the lines of "yeah, that was me, i totally leaked that." funny how many of those defending carmichael say the leaky smear and subsequent lie are "all part of the rough and tumble of politics and the kind of ruthless opportunism to be expected at election time" are painting any objections to this behavior as "a politically motivated witch hunt, baying for blood..." etc. you're not concerned about pursuing honesty, democracy or even a level playing field. anything goes as long as it favours of your own right wing bias.
  10. yep, shame about ck, he was one of the better ones. shame the last he'd have seen was clegg flushing the last of his legacy down the political plughole. so inquiry underway... he could reasonably be pulled up on any of those, guess we'll just have to wait and see the outcome. how long do these things take? looking likely the legal action will be happening too, less than £7k short now.
  11. and unless we hold them to account that will continue to be the case. unless they actually feel they are answerable to the us all the promises to clean up politics we hear around election time will continue to be empty platitudes.
  12. just found this: http://www.haringeyindependent.co.uk/news/12931405.Labour_candidate_forced_to_issue_retraction_over__false__letter_about_Liberal_Democrat_opponent/ a labour candidate accused of smearing the lib dem candidate and the lib dems threatened legal action!
  13. unlike ukip who just make up policies as they go along and abandon/adopt them depending on what press they get... yeah, solid principles there. by the way, you seem determined to make out that i'm connected with the snp somehow. just to clear this up, i'm not. ok? yes, i don't doubt unsavoury types will crop up in every party and the snp will be no exception. "anti austerity welfare bummage" though? you sound like you're only a channel 5 documentary away from starting a militia. are you aware that most people who receive benefits are in work? http://www.neweconomics.org/blog/entry/mythbusters-strivers-versus-skivers still, follow the tory rhetoric if it helps you froth yourself to sleep. i honestly don't know who would better represent shetland out of carmichael or skene. but i'd be happier if whoever did was fairly elected. that's the thing with farage and ukippers in general, they seems more forthright than most politicians (the above quote being a good example). it's like they don't have a mental filter, they just blurt out whatever they're thinking, which is refreshing yes, but is also the reason so many of them have been forced to resign for their absurdly bigoted views.
  14. to get back on topic for a moment... would that cut it in any other sphere? "yeah, sorry, i totally cheated at that 100m dash, but to make amends i'll just take that gold medal, cheers."
  15. yes, no doubt you would. which tory policies do you think are fascist?
  16. try reading the question again, i never said anything of the kind. i was pointing out that ukip attract bigots. just google 'ukip resignation' if you don't believe me. (quite telling that you recognised that as ukip even though i never spelled it out though. well done you.) how should i know? try asking the french ambassador? @capeesh presumably carmichael supported right of recall too then? seem to remember in the 2010 tv debates cameron was all in favour of that idea. he dropped that one quick enough, probably realised he'd be recalled for abandoning all his other pledges...
  17. Nah, I'm not that difficult to please. I'll live with a lot of things as long as they keep either socialists or fascists out. given you seem to view anybody to the left of genghis khan as a socialist that doesn't give you much wiggle room. just out of curiosity, which party do you do think all those fascist bnp/edl supporters gravitated to?
  18. There's an awful lot having to ride in the strength of that "may have" to make that suspicion have any credibility. In a Scotland only context it was never going to matter to the nationalist socialists voters who anybody alledged Nicola wanted to get in to bed with, the election result would have been virtually the same, and in a national context it would have mattered even less. well, we'll never know for sure without a by-election. but i'd actually go so far as to say "probably would have". 817 votes is a paper thin majority (both the online polls suggests the majority think he should resign, yeah, not conclusive i know, i'd like to see how many lib dem voters would have changed their vote had they known). yes, it was "unverified tittle tattle" but let's not forget it was carmichael who gave the ok to leak this unverified tittle tattle in the hope of discrediting his opponents. but like you said many pages ago, it doesn't really matter to you that he leaks or lies or breached protocols, as far as you're concerned the end justifies the means, and until those leaks or lies keep some ukip knuckle out of office you'll find a way to justify it, so there's really no point debating this with you. @justme did he say it was his last term? i missed that.
  19. still, there are worse things, eh? surprised you think it's even worth mentioning considering the big blind eye you're willing to extend to the lie which may have influenced the outcome of an actual election.
  20. too busy having fun, will reply to some of this desperate issue avoidance moral equivalence absurdity tomorrow, hangover permitting.
  21. yeah, we should really be remembering what he hasn't done. he hasn't murdered some pensioners in the face with swords and sold their body parts to people-trafficking isis witch doctors while taking legal highs and claiming unemployment benefits... let's let him off!
  22. this whole defence of "they all tell lies, everybody tells lies, it's expected of them, so when they're caught lying let's accept it and do nothing about it" is pretty lame, no? how do you ever hope to "curtail the level of lying that occurs" if you just want to brush it dismissively under the carpet when it happens right under your nose? and it's ridiculously presumptuous to assume that every politician would have done the same. i'm fairly certain there are those who wouldn't. carmichael was elected to a position of power to represent us in parliament, and like it or not he is now tainted with this lie. so when he goes to negotiate anything on our behalf will he be trusted to do so honestly and fairly? some will say yes on the grounds this was just a white lie and was purely about gaining an election victory. others may wonder if it shows he's not averse to underhand tactics and will lie to cover his tracks to get whatever result is best for him, not necessarily his constituents, and he just happens to have been caught out this time. either way, can those negotiating with him trust him? or will they wonder if he's going to leak some spurious claim to undermine them to the press under his usual cloak of anonymity?
  23. @but-cheese is there a way of changing usernames? ever thought of using "man solely interested in douglas carswell"?
  24. well. he probably has become quite comfortable in the job, he's been doing it for 14 years after all. and with the connections he'll have made it's not like he couldn't pick up a cushy directorship somewhere, £50k for attending a couple of meetings every 6 months or so if he wanted to. thing is he wasn't a terrible local MP. i nearly voted for him myself in 2010 in the high hopes days when it looked like it might actually become a 3 party system. glad i didn't with hindsight, fair to say i haven't been too impressed with his record in the coalition, defending tory policies, and as party whip his role was to encourage potentially wayward lib dems to do the same. and of course this smeary memo lying debacle hasn't endeared him to me any further. bring on the by-election.
  25. it's just struck me, funnily enough the one decent thing i can say about douglas carswell is that when he defected from the tories to join ukip he didn't just hoodwink his constituents and stay on in his seat as a ukip MP, he resigned as an MP, stood again as a ukip candidate and won a by-election! why aren't the outspoken ukippers here looking for carmichael to display the same moral integrity?
  • Create New...