John – no idea. Was it posted to …

Comment posted Council Elections: Candidates Election Leaflets by newsroom.

John – no idea. Was it posted to this story? I’ve been on duty since 07.45 and I’ve not removed anything.

I suggest you repost it and, provided it’s not libellous (not having seen it at all) it will get approved.

Ans apologies for the gremlins.

Recent comments by newsroom

  • The view from Lochinvar: party of the century from the Commonwealth Flotilla
    We dealt with this issue when the RYA initially made their rather ill-judged public complaint.
    There were two competing versions of what happened and no third party can know which was the closest to objective truth.
    The Waverley’s owners’ version was that her less than precise steering was judged by the harbour master to be a risk to other boats in the flotilla, should any unforeseen incident on the water occur.
    As we understand it, CalMac would have had their boat in the flotilla anyway; and Cruiser’s presence was an independent commercial enterprise by Clyde Marine.
    The RYA chartered Clyde Clipper from Clyde Marine for their own guests on the flotilla, amongst whom was Mike Cantlay Chair of VisitScotland.
    Since the RYA’s list of those it deemed Waverley to have let down included its own guests; and since it complained that the paddler’s owners had chosen ‘instead to pursue a corporate charter on the same day’ – it looks as if the RYA had expected to put its own guests on the Waverley at no charge – which seems a bit cheeky.
  • The view from Lochinvar: party of the century from the Commonwealth Flotilla
    You’re absolutely right. Apologies for the error – and we’ll correct the text now.
  • The view from Lochinvar: party of the century from the Commonwealth Flotilla
    Thank you – and I wasn’t looking for this.
    Lynda
  • The view from Lochinvar: party of the century from the Commonwealth Flotilla
    Thank you for your kind comments about the piece.
    I never know to whom comments refer – so to be clear, in what I said to defend For Argyll’s and my own very real independence of anything and anyone, I had not suggested in any way that Mr Black was a supporter of anything.
    I was – and am – concerned only at his assumption that For Argyll is different from what I know it to be.
  • Managed protest at Pacific Quay shames pro-indy campaign
    For Argyll editorialises as a matter of policy.
    With interactive media today, since any reader is free to comment [unedited] – and many do – a news platform is free to take a position and not contribute to a fraud on the public by pretending that there are two sides of equal weight on a specific issue, where this is not the case.
    Our positional judgments are made on the basis of evidence and not on the basis of preconception or bias.
    The powerful evidence for this is that we publicly supported potential independence for several years from 2007. The reasons why we have come to oppose it today are evidential and arise from serious independent researches of our own. These have shown us that the prospectus on which the country will vote on 18th September is incomplete and knowingly deceptive; that promises made cannot be fulfilled as the prospectus stands – and more are being made on a daily basis now [today's is that if you vote 'Yes', wages will go up]; and that controversial decisions planned to be taken [as on various aspects of taxation] have been suppressed until later for fear of losing votes.
    We have also become increasingly concerned at the degree and speed of implementation of a totalitarian political philosophy; and about the willingness to exert intimidation and deploy patronage to suppress criticism and resistance to this direction of travel. Ironically, this is the modus operandi indy is supposed to free us from.
    All that this indy would do is bring those instruments of manipulation even closer to home – and in the hands of a party of majority government now very experienced and skilled in using them. This is quite a frightening prospect.
    Economically and socially we can see nothing supportable arising from this prospectus or, now, from the party promoting it – so we do not support it.
    Personally, I have voted for the SNP in the past – and joined the party for several years – because it showed signs of an objective attempt actually to govern Scotland.
    I departed when it became progressively clear that principle had been discarded in favour of a obsessive will to gamble that the country will buy a false prospectus if it is bribed enough and emotionally manipulated enough.
    Personally, I prefer to hope that people will scrutinise, learn and think enough – but I do not discount disappointment on that hope.
    The methods used to conduct the campaign are below civility and simply insupportable – the bullying, the unachievable promises, the rank dishonesty, the sleight of hand statements to shore up decomposing positions.
    No one to whom honesty and straightforwardness matter could put their name to taking Scotland into an uncertain independence on the back of this prospectus and this campaign.
    I have learned to disrespect the SNP as a party – never a position I had imagined I would arrive at. Whatever the outcome in September, I will not vote for them again.
    Lynda

powered by SEO Super Comments

11 Responses to John – no idea. Was it posted to …

  1. First thing Ive heard from Mr McIntyre that makes sense – “Time for Change”
    Time for a new Administration and a new Transport Convener-
    Aye Right!

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  2. Its a hard job being a candidate but I’m pretty sure I have said some sensible things.Maybe not to the SNP supporters like yourself Gerry but I don’t dance to anyone’s tune.
    Power to the People.

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  3. Newsroom,
    Simply cannot get media fire beyound ‘temporarily unavalable’, please check back soon, for the last several days on the few listed candidates highlighted in red. For the others, nothing.
    Iain

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

  4. I note that very few have provided leaflets above. Are the candidates just too busy going door to door or are they apathetic or plain lazy in Argyll? In my particular village we have received only 2 flyers through the door (that’s out of 9 standing!).

    Like or Dislike: Thumb up 0 Thumb down 0

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>


All the latest comments (including yours) straight to your mailbox, everyday! Click here to subscribe.