Fide Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 By quoting wangs over sommerset, you've lost what little credibility you had. The main reason Wings Over Scotland, to give it it's correct, non-juvenile name, makes frothing Uberbritnats like you so rabidly mad, is that he regularly exposes Unionist lies and pish and backs up what he says. Of course, I'm sure you've read his articles and you're not just jumping on the Anti-WOS bandwagon frequented by SNPbad weirdos. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparky88 Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 The main reason Wings Over Scotland, to give it it's correct, non-juvenile name, makes frothing Uberbritnats like you so rabidly mad, is that he regularly exposes Unionist lies and pish and backs up what he says. Of course, I'm sure you've read his articles and you're not just jumping on the Anti-WOS bandwagon frequented by SNPbad weirdos. Definitely can't accuse you of not reading wings over Somerset, your patters lifted straight from it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Double Jack D Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 By quoting wangs over sommerset, you've lost what little credibility you had. Wings has never once defended Michelle Thomson on this matter. What he has done, and done very well, has broken down the main stream media's ridiculous smear campaign on the SNP and Sturgeon relating to this. Michelle Thomson's actions, if the allegations are true, may be legal but they are not synonymous with being elected on the premise that you believe in social justice. I expect that her political career (within the SNP anyway) is over however I doubt if she'll even be charged with anything let alone prosecuted. However, the main opposition party has focused all it's efforts in the Scottish Parliament for two whole weeks on a matter which they were told after question 1 had no bearing on the parliament. This story has been in the Scottish media headlines for two weeks at a time when far worse policies are being brought in by a Conservative UK government which will penalise poor and vulnerable people. Scottish Labour can't talk about that though because there really is only one way to protect reral vulnerable people in Scotland from the Conservatives. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 Definitely can't accuse you of not reading wings over Somerset, your patters lifted straight from it. Oh, you said the Somerset thing! I'm very much not surprised to see you jumping on the anti-WOS bandwagon. It's what frothing unionists do, simply because they don't like what he says. Here's a challenge, since you seem an expert. Using your own words, and without hauners, can you highlight to me any 3 inaccurate articles from Wings Over Scotland? I kind of get the feeling I won't get a response to this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 The anti WOS bandwagon isn't hard to get on tbf. Close to twisted in it's vile undercurrent. Some good stuff and on occasion, some terrific stuff, but that doesn't change that people mistrust with good reason. It can be horrible. I try and steer clear these days due to the bitter nature of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 The anti WOS bandwagon isn't hard to get on tbf. Close to twisted in it's vile undercurrent. Some good stuff and on occasion, some terrific stuff, but that doesn't change that people mistrust with good reason. It can be horrible. I try and steer clear these days due to the bitter nature of it. I'm sorry, but that's just sensationalist garbage. Sure, the guy is liberal with his language and can't be arsed with the many, many zoomers he gets but to say his stuff is "twisted" and "vile" is ridiculous. His articles are bang on the money and are extremely well researched. I fear you may be a bit too sensitive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 The man is a transphobic and paranoid nutcase. His Vice interview was a great example of that. He might do a lot of research into subjects and may expose a lot of shit that the unionist press shares but it doesn't excuse the fact that he is a dreadful, dreadful arsehole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 The man is a transphobic and paranoid nutcase. His Vice interview was a great example of that. He might do a lot of research into subjects and may expose a lot of shit that the unionist press shares but it doesn't excuse the fact that he is a dreadful, dreadful arsehole. The transphobic point I'll concede to, though I do feel it has been blown up out of all proportion as something Britnats leap onto. His comments on the matter aren't earth shatteringly controversial. I don't agree at all that he's paranoid however. He uncovers a lot of Unionist untruths and is an extremely valuable resource, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 Definitely can't accuse you of not reading wings over Somerset, your patters lifted straight from it. Why would it be an accusation? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 The man is a transphobic and paranoid nutcase. His Vice interview was a great example of that. He might do a lot of research into subjects and may expose a lot of shit that the unionist press shares but it doesn't excuse the fact that he is a dreadful, dreadful arsehole. He's an arsehole alright but he's not transphobic nor paranoid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ICTChris Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 That Peat Worrier blog is good. The following paragraph is important On the facts set out in the Hales decision, it is the mortgage providers who are the potential victims of any alleged fraud -- not the sellers who completed their transactions with Mrs A and her associates. A number of the loans now being investigated were taken out with Birmingham Midshires - a trading name for the Bank of Scotland. I don't know about you, but I struggle to see the bank as a "vulnerable family", however cosy its declared corporate ethos. It may not be a pretty business but buying homes quickly from distressed people isn't a crime. It might not rub well with the SNPs aims and principles but it isn't necessarily a crime. I can see why Labour have gone with the line about Michelle Thomson's business practices being predatory etc but that isn't the story and if they had a bit more about them they'd realise that and look to actually exploit the interesting parts of the story. Incidentally, the SNP have pretty much lobbed Michelle Thomson under the bus. Even if she's cleared I'd imagine she won't be back in the SNP Parliamentary party and it wouldn't be surprising if she resigned. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 It may not be a pretty business but buying homes quickly from distressed people isn't a crime. Additionally, and I can't remember if this has been mentioned, but the Herald and Daily Record, two of the biggest "culprits" for their over the top coverage, have websites littered with adverts for quick house sales and equity release. Seems rather hypocritical to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 He's an arsehole alright but he's not transphobic nor paranoid. "as far as I'm concerned, at least until you've had the operation you're still a bloke in a dress. If you've still got bollocks and a Y-chromosome. There I am, I've just said it on tape. This is why I get in trouble." https://news.vice.com/article/cybernat-campbell-the-blogger-trying-to-break-up-britain lol "not transphobic" okay. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 "as far as I'm concerned, at least until you've had the operation you're still a bloke in a dress. If you've still got bollocks and a Y-chromosome. There I am, I've just said it on tape. This is why I get in trouble." https://news.vice.com/article/cybernat-campbell-the-blogger-trying-to-break-up-britain lol "not transphobic" okay. Look at the title of the article. Jesus christ. If that genuinely offends you, I wouldn't leave the house again if I were you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 "as far as I'm concerned, at least until you've had the operation you're still a bloke in a dress. If you've still got bollocks and a Y-chromosome. There I am, I've just said it on tape. This is why I get in trouble." https://news.vice.com/article/cybernat-campbell-the-blogger-trying-to-break-up-britain lol "not transphobic" okay. Usual shite. When I bring it up, he defends Chelsea Manning's right to live as she chooses, but can't help adding: "as far as I'm concerned, at least until you've had the operation you're still a bloke in a dress. If you've still got bollocks and a Y-chromosome. There I am, I've just said it on tape. This is why I get in trouble." http://logicsrock.blogspot.de/2013/09/wings-waffle-about-lgbt-issues.html Faux outrage is all the unionists have, apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 Off topic I know, but this, posted today, is a perfect example of WoS's near-forensic breakdown of Labour/ media lies: http://wingsoverscotland.com/thicker-than-water/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 Usual shite. When I bring it up, he defends Chelsea Manning's right to live as she chooses, but can't help adding: "as far as I'm concerned, at least until you've had the operation you're still a bloke in a dress. If you've still got bollocks and a Y-chromosome. There I am, I've just said it on tape. This is why I get in trouble." http://logicsrock.blogspot.de/2013/09/wings-waffle-about-lgbt-issues.html Faux outrage is all the unionists have, apparently. It's irrelevant that he says that. What he goes on to say is plainly transphobic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fide Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 It's irrelevant that he says that. What he goes on to say is plainly transphobic. Take your faux-offence elsewhere, Libbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baxter Parp Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 It's irrelevant that he says that. What he goes on to say is plainly transphobic. Just because you say it's so? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NotThePars Posted October 9, 2015 Share Posted October 9, 2015 It's irrelevant that he says that. What he goes on to say is plainly transphobic. Quite. It's also some laugh to have posters that pretend to be interested in social justice attempting to defend WoS over this. Just because you say it's so? If you have even the faintest (honestly, m8, the tiniest sliver) idea of LGBT issues you will understand why what he said is offensive. Do you think it's acceptable to tell someone who identifies as a trans woman that they can't be a woman because they haven't transitioned yet? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.