Forum Replies Created

  • Author
    Posts
  • in reply to: Johnson #264529
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    “Also looking forward to Uncle Joe and Hunter and Hilary being brought out”..

    What has that got to do with Jonhnson?

    If it is relevant, you missed Netanyahu off your list.

    Hi Heath. I don’t think you read Deerey’s post. It was about holding politicians to account …. not setting precedents….protecting democracy etc I simply made reference to a particular area of concern for me as another example ( … and I’ve got IA’s permission to believe what I want so I’m in the clear there).
    Just to clarify something … especially after our last exchange when your line of argument was something like ‘You’re wrong and I’m right … have you taken a dislike to me? I’m just sensing a bit of frustration that I’m somehow not striking the correct notes.

    Yet holding Trump to account is apparently anti-democratic.

    in reply to: Johnson #264528
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Agreed. Also looking forward to Uncle Joe and Hunter and Hilary being brought out from under the cloak of protection that is currently undermining democratic norms over the pond. Long live equality under the law.

    It wasn’t Biden or Hillary who refused to hand back documents, nor is it them who initiated this process. The only undoing of democracy would be Trump expecting to be above the law.

    in reply to: Johnson #264496
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Contrary to what’s claimed by some, holding politicians to account is good for democracy. It prevents precedent and punishes those who want to play fast and loose with democratic norms. Today is a good day for democracy. Charlatans like Johnson can’t get away with lying to parliament.

    1 user thanked author for this post.
    in reply to: Nelson has gone #264494
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    There is absolutely no evidence for this conspiracy theory. Ironinsider and IB may be persistent with their chatter against Hilton, but the accusation was that they were being conspiratorial. How does being conspiratorial against them solve anything?

    in reply to: “lord” Coaker “Sir ” Kier Starmer #264476
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Ha yes of course, like burying Ford .
    Trying to bury this now eh/ You’re sort are a joke, should we really accept today’s performance go unchallenged ?

    Not really, your post was quite cryptic so I wasn’t engaging with a content devoid opening post. I was just pointing out that none of us ‘Blairites’ are going to take any lessons in conscience from ardent Corbyn fans on this given what they supported.

    As for this, Coaker made it quite clear he wasn’t going to oppose, since the Lords is an amending chamber, not for legislative or ideological disagreement, and that doing so would destroy precedent. Labour have criticised the government for playing fast with the rules, so they would be massive hypocrites for doing that, even if honourable. The consequences down the lune could be huge too, because Tories in the Lords can do the same thing and it becomes a more unruly mess. The idea this creates a problem with conscientious voting is a bit daft, given the reason why, but to be honest, you wouldn’t view it differently, regardless. So the effect is lost because I don’t think you would ever judge it bearing in mind such issues over parliamentary process, so your comment on conscientious voting becomes worthy of a shoulder shrug because of this, as well as your stance in supporting someone who let anti-Semitism into the party.

    I can’t take such claims from Corbyn’s big fans seriously.

    in reply to: “lord” Coaker “Sir ” Kier Starmer #264472
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    I mean it does make you lose all credibility when you talk of a conscientious stand against Starmer’s Labour, but sure.

    in reply to: “lord” Coaker “Sir ” Kier Starmer #264470
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    If only Labour had someone who claimed the hand of Israel was behind ISIS terror attacks, attended vigils for terrorists, supported anti-Semitic art and called for Ukraine to give up and accept Russia to slaughter them. Then it would have a leader with conscience. ;-)

    in reply to: Ground Requirements (Step One, Two etc.) #264422
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    He has the bulk of the support in your position, at least, les. If he is going to call it a day because a smaller number question him, then maybe being a cult leader is more of his thing.

    in reply to: Shirt Numbers. #264406
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    I think the doom will reduce once ground issues subside, if they do. I am still amazed that when we don’t own our ground, with unclear positions on whether we can play at Glanford Park and possible groundshares with an unknown club (and no knowledge of the existence of any groundshare deal), some are annoyed that some people are concerned about it and aren’t jumping for joy . Regardless of which party is at fault (the question will be how much Hilton is, because Swann has already demonstrated his ineptitude which has brought us this low and mired in issues), the consequences of the stadium dispute is potentially severe.

    in reply to: Shirt Numbers. #264399
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    with greatest of respect to you if we see the new shirts or any of the new players donning them on first week in august i will be surprised, we are gone ,

    Based on what?

    Well, well, well Ellis, why are you so interested in anybody’s opinion on here?
    I thought you’d made it plain on your Facebook thread that you have no time for either this forum, the owner and moderators or indeed the members of the forum.
    Then why do you put yourself through the obvious trauma of reading and posting on here?
    You even have your own thread in “non football”, perhaps you’d post your explanation in there.

    Ellis isn’t Pat O’Cake.

    in reply to: Ground Requirements (Step One, Two etc.) #264377
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Many of those berating criticism of Hilton will also be moaning if things go more awry, when Hilton sceptics will inevitably say “I told you so” and criticise them for backing Hilton. Some after backing Swann too. They will then call for unity or understanding from those they slammed.

    Of course I hope this doesn’t happen and if it does, the I told you so statements won’t help. However, I suspect ironinsider and others would make them and I won’t have full sympathy to some, given the way they have reacted to people who don’t just accept whatever Hilton says.

    2 users thanked author for this post.
    in reply to: Hilton #264375
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    i won’t say i told you so as it will be too painful but just know i tried and nobody heeded my warning. my last post for a while, vest wishes all

    Myself, DeereyMe and CMC seem sceptical. The ground stuff proved to be a real concern. I hope for the best, but won’t suspend scepticism.

    in reply to: Hilton #264347
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Come on wondergoals, AA has said enough about affairs of the Iron and Scunny in general to assuage the most dedicated of doubters. As for this:

    ‘Wasn’t he/it the same poster who told us about that daft hit piece regarding Hilton on the code fishy forum to read that stupid article about Hilton insinuating he was some kind of criminal mastermind/gangland boss ?’

    Before AA signposted to that article and attachment on The Fishy, I and I suspect numerous others on here had already seen it and were anticipating some sort of mention or reference to it on Bru. AA was just the first to do it.

    AA is seriously underrated by a lot of members on here. He’s subtle and should post a lot more.

    If I recall correctly he mentioned Carl Fellstrom and his book – Hoods: The Gangs of Nottingham, A Study in Organised Crime. Chapter 12 caught my eye, especially the mention of the pawnbrokers.

    What relevance does this have to us? I looked at that chapter and can see nothing of note for Scunthorpe Utd.

    1 user thanked author for this post.
    in reply to: HIGNFY #264330
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Cheap maybe, but such a show is always going to do that with political figures. They regularly made jokes about Eric Pickles’ weight, which isn’t any more classy.

    The annoying thing is that some people have deluded themselves into thinking Biden has dementia, and this joke does nothing but solidify that silliness. Somehow a dementia patient recently managed to out manoeuvre the Republicans on the debt ceiling. Doesn’t look good for them if they get outsmarted by someone allegedly senile.

    in reply to: Peter Tatchell #264302
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    I couldn’t care less if my moral system is ‘rebelling against God’. I don’t believe it exists, so I am not going to live my life concerned by such. If God exists and is all loving it should be able to understand empathetic values of mine.

    in reply to: Iron Bru receiving bad press. #264289
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    I don’t get why people being sceptical of Hilton, even in an absurd and OTT way, bothers people so much. It’s not stopping others from backing Hilton. It’s people airing their free speech.

    in reply to: Peter Tatchell #264288
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Already you demonstrate your holier than thou attitude.

    If God wants to torture me for eternity, while claiming to be loving it can expect a lengthy diatribe as to why I find that monstrous, if there is a judgement day. ;-)

    in reply to: Peter Tatchell #264261
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Given you regularly chastise us about morality and living life as we want without God, I am going to raise my eyebrow and disagree that you haven’t displayed a holier than thou attitude.

    in reply to: Peter Tatchell #264251
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    It didn’t come across that way.

    in reply to: The honours system #264246
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Aye. Surely with some of the rushed through parliament over the last few years, the value of a second chamber has been demonstrated. It’s the unelected nature of it that is archaic.

    in reply to: Peter Tatchell #264244
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Aye, you never criticised him for not standing up to us non-believers with his beliefs and for being too pally. Even though you did.

    in reply to: Peter Tatchell #264219
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    H is next to J, so it was an innocent typo. I am sure JI realises this given I was backing him. :-)

    in reply to: Peter Tatchell #264216
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Unfortunately all the victims of the great purge were all no good terrorists of the Trotskyist-Zinovievite group out to kill Stalin. The great one had the great foresight to know who was worthy of death, but he’s all loving.

    You say you’re friends with HI, but you spend all your time slagging him off for being too cordial with us heathens.

    in reply to: Ground Requirements (Step One, Two etc.) #264164
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    The roundabout was always my favorite ride at Jubilee Park when I was 5. :-)

    in reply to: Peter Tatchell #264151
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Most of the chaos and misery comes from religious bigots trying to harm others for who they are, as we see from Uganda to Afghanistan.

    in reply to: Greta Thunberg #264139
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    The venom people have for her is a bit weird. Bucks would regularly name drop her in a negative fashion when it wasn’t completely relevant.

    in reply to: Peter Tatchell #264138
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    I don’t think it can be claimed that Bill’s religious fundamentalism is a recent trait.

    in reply to: Ground Requirements (Step One, Two etc.) #264137
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Hilton is the one making the claim of abuse; it’s the responsibility of the person making the claim to provide evidence. If he doesn’t provide evidence then such claims can be ignored and not treated as truth. It doesn’t mean it hasn’t happened, but it cannot be verified, so I am not going to condemn anyone for abuse as there is no evidence provided.

    in reply to: Peter Tatchell #264056
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    Always remember the smear campaign against him undertaken by Simon Hughes and the Lib Dems back in 83(?). Will check.

    What I am referring to is mentioned in the article and was from a piece of Tatchell’s own words in 1997.

    His work on gay rights is admirable, but he is a flawed individual. We all are, but it bears in mind not to idolise people.

    in reply to: Peter Tatchell #264045
    SideriteSiderite
    Participant
    Offline
    Registered On: December 12, 2014
    Topics: 100

    He has some good history in standing for gay rights. Unfortunately, he has in the past made sympathetic comments to paedophilia.

    https://unherd.com/thepost/stop-pretending-peter-tatchell-is-a-perfect-man/