Comment posted Dunoon Observer invites voters to pick their ghoul by Simon.
Oh come on Gus spill the beans on Dave.
Dave having trouble locally with is comrades of the snp – never…. shurely shome mishtake
Simon also commented
- Never saw that comment form Bill Jardine – so thanks Ken.
Bill, I didn’t say Dave was ‘morally bankrupt’ because he holds a differnet viewpoint – most other people on here hold different viewpoints from me and I’ve never said that about them.
So what was different about Davve?
Well for a start, in his posts above whilst he professes to decry personal attacks on politicians (and accuses other parties of generating these)eg “those who stoop to personalised abuse and intemporate and aggressive language have obviously lost the argument.” He then makes a snide remark about a Labour candidate’s supposed “colourful past” and expresses his own personal view ” I’m surprised that some of Mick Rice’s more colourful episodes in bermingim haven’t had an airing”.
And, I surely can’t be the only one who noticed how he slipped in his anti-English-mocking ‘bermingham’ jibe? I can just hear Dave going into full attack mode if anyone dared describe Mike Russell as ‘the Bromley Boy from Kent’. If you don’t think so – well he certainly attacks a politician above for daring to describe ‘Wee Eck’ as ‘Wee Eck’ – quite “disfigured Parliament” that did according to Dave.
And of course Dave ranted about the SNP letting down the people of Cowal over their reneging on manifesto promises – “I didn’t join the snp to make things worse” – but only at the time… with an election looming you try getting a word out of him now on this subject!
So there you go Bill – I’ve clarified why I made the comments I did. I didn’t make the comments aobut Dave McEwan Hill because of his political views – rather I made them because of his double-standards-snidey-sleekit-hypocritcal-holier than thou comments.
Have a nice day
- Scruff, “How did you know…. before the two resignations were submitted?”.
On the basis that you keep this to yourself and don’t tell anyone – I’ll tell you .;)
I didn’t know – it was just a wee wind-up ….
- Dave, there are a shed load of people on here who don’t give their full name – but you’re only interested in my identity…????
Strange that your demand came so soon after I accused you of sleakit smear tactics? … (or to use your weasel words “mischevious remarks)
So, let’s get this right for once and for all – people who post on here can give their full name or not. That’s their right and that’s the rule. If you and Ken* don’t like that rule you have three options that I can see 1) Get the rules changed 2) Suffer in silence or 3) Bog off to some other site where there are no dissenting voices to your zealotory and indepence ideology.
So, now that we clarified thAT – Any comment from you yet on the snp making the Dunnoon ferry situation worse ???? MMmmmm??
* Ken – “clearly has some “insider” connection to the present administration at Kilmory ” – Rubbish, complete and utter tosh. Hey but don’t let stop you believing whatever cooncil-inspired conspiracy theorey you want to believe
Have a nice day folks
- Dave, “unsubstaniutated innuendo
Eh? Where did I do that?”
Eh… how about here with this comment of yours “I’m surprised that some of Mick Rice’s more colourful episodes in bermingim haven’t had an airing. I’m sure he is too”
What is that?? Political comment? Or personal unsubstantiated innuendo???? You tell mne Dave??
And why does your sleekit, smelly anti-english-mocking “bermingim ” crawl into your post as well..?? Mmmm?
You sound like the type of unprincipled weasel who would put the declaration of Abroath on his wall and then sook up to visiting English tourists – for their money.
You are morally bankrupt Dave. And in your heart of hearts even you know it.
But while I’m on – Any comment yet on the snp making the Dunnoon ferry situation worse ???? MMmmmm??
- C’mon Crazy fairs fair. – Dave McEwan Hill has posted a coupld of his nasty little sleekit articles full of unsubstaniutated innuendo directed at Mick Rice and in the same post polishes his mantra “those who stoop to personalised abuse and intemporate and aggressive language have obviously lost the argument”.
Any fair-minded person would say the Dave is a hypocrite.
Have a nice evening Crazy
Recent comments by Simon
- Castle Toward community ownership bid issues pursued
I don’t know about anyone else but if I was asking for a one million pound reduction on an independent valuation price I think I might be trying to get alongside the sellers and understand their problems and their real difficulties rather than trying to publicly embarrass them with allegations.
As I’ve said elsewhere this ‘attack dog’ policy is misguided, badly advised and surely can only be counter-productive. A project with significant potential might just wither on the vine because the increasingly politicised and polarised handling of this matter. I’ve also said previously that this decision is not an easy ask (Dick Walsh refers obliquely to just some of the difficulties)and that this group would be far better trying to understand and help resolve those problems instead of naively trying to publicly pressurise and embarrass individual councillors.
On a very human level I must confess that if I was a councillor on the receiving end of manufactured emails and personal attacks I would be disinclined to give the group responsible my support.
- An unexpected pairing to email in Day 8′s Save Castle Toward Advent Calendar
In the event the council did sell the property at £1 million below valuation what would happen if(despite all the cosy assurances and claims that ‘it makes sound economic sense’) the project fails? What happens then? What happens to the property? Does it revert to the Council? Or, is it sold at a knockdown price to pay off debts?
- Castle Toward: Councillor Breslin asks straight questions of Council Leader Walsh
Aral. Are these jobs guaranteed? What if the project fails – does the property come back to us the council taxpayer? Can the council even give away a property valued at £1.75 million for £750k? What other project anywhere in Argyll has received this level of subsidy?
I’m not being anti the local group but there are some serious questions here that need answered. And indulging in childish stunts or making personal attacks does NOTHING to advance their cause – neither does suggesting that I’m employed by ABC – I’m not.
I do however have genuine concerns about this project and as a council tax-payer being asked to subsidise this group to the tune of £1 million I would ask – would everyone who backs them agree to underwrite the losses in the event the project fails?
Would you Aral?
I’ve already said I’m not involved with the council – are you involved directly/indirectly with the project Aral?
I’m a neutral observer in this – are you?
- Castle Toward: Councillor Breslin asks straight questions of Council Leader Walsh
I posted this on another article and feel it is still relevant.
‘If ownership rather than lease is so important for their business plan then should they (the local group) not be concentrating their efforts on raising the money to pay the valuation determined by the District Valuer? Or appealing the valuation?
That’s would seem to be a more constructive route than pushing this cheap gimmick of an ‘advent calendar’. A gimmick that does absolutely nothing to promote their case and quite obviously is nothing more than a blunt attempt to pressurise councillors.
I don’t know who advised them to take this approach but it seems to be spectacularly inept and this orchestrated gimmick might yet prove to be counter-productive. Of course, the fact that it is being promoted by Newsie of this blog will of course do absolutely nothing to help their case
If this group are serious about their project then surely they require to treat councillors equally seriously? They need to understand their position. They need to understand that a) even if the group had a cast-iron case this request of theirs is not easy to agree to and b) regardless of what it takes, they would be far better using their time to develop a more effective working relationship with the council and councillors rather than promoting such a childish stunt.
Granting a group a discount of a £1 million is not a trivial matter and they are being silly beyond belief if they think otherwise’.
I would only add that I’m also a Council tax payer, that is one of those who are paying the £20,000 per month to keep Toward Castle (valued at £1.75 million)secure. I am appalled at the attempts of some to reduce, what is a very difficult decision, to a personal attack on individual councillors within the Council.
It seems that this issue has been engineered to become a political ‘hot potato’.
Who benefits from that?? The local group????
- Argyll Labour politicians warn of the anorexic ‘thin blue line’ of Police Scotland
You are talking nonsense Jamie.
I quoted “According to the Institute of Fiscal studies the impact of Osbourne’s Autumn statement is that we’ve had £35 billion of cuts with a further £55 billion of cuts yet to come”.
You’re suggesting it’s all the SNP’s fault with their ‘vanity projects’.
£55 billion pounds of SNP vanity projects??
powered by SEO Super Comments