Tories are lying *******s (warning may contain traces of Tory)

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 04-05-2019 09:45 PM

Originally Posted by cabbageandribs1875

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

i do agree, they were getting something back i just thought it was quite cheeky getting wee laddies to do their job for them, it won't be long before political parties start paying the post office to do all their leafleting

Age concern, aye RIGHT, they ****s are gonna batter pensioners pockets in the near future, they've been desperate to get shot of the pensioners triple lock for a while now, and nearly 70% of scottish pensioners voted No in 2014, that's going to come back and bite them on their er*es, i wonder how many of them actually now know they are paid one of the lowest pensions in Europe, tories and 'age concern' my e*se.

You've got it all wrong. They're not concerned about pensioners. They're concerned that they are pensioners.

***Jack Hackett*** · 05-05-2019 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by Mr Grieves

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

https://twitter.com/RCunninghamSNP/s...50473611509760

Mundell lying here

Trump has given liars everywhere proof that they can say wtf they like with little consequence

***Future17*** · 05-05-2019 10:50 AM

Originally Posted by Just Alf

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

For me it's more the scouts that are wrong to a degree, I've always understood them to be non political.

It may be they've done similar for other parties previously/elsewhere, and if that's the case then there's no issue at all, the other parties missed a trick as there would have been nothing stopping them doing the same thing.

Mind you, if the above hasn't been the case and the Scout leader is a Tory then the whole argument opens up again.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

It sounded like a good deal for all parties but you're right the Scouts are non-political, which is why the leader and his assistants has quit. I think that outcome is a real shame though.

***Just Alf*** · 05-05-2019 10:56 AM

Originally Posted by Future17

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It sounded like a good deal for all parties but you're right the Scouts are non-political, which is why the leader and his assistants has quit. I think that outcome is a real shame though.

Not seen that, and yes it is a real shame... these folks have given up their time to help kids after all. What would have been better would be to have offered to do the same for the other parties in the upcoming EU elections (if they happen) then to draw a line under it as a charitable money making exercise that backfired.

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 05-05-2019 01:04 PM

Yep, need to teach those kids early that it's all about money over principle. Let's teach them rules, then break those rules whenever money is involved. What better way to set them up in life?

***Future17*** · 05-05-2019 02:52 PM

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yep, need to teach those kids early that it's all about money over principle. Let's teach them rules, then break those rules whenever money is involved. What better way to set them up in life?

You've lost me?

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 06-05-2019 01:10 AM

Originally Posted by Future17

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You've lost me?

The rules clearly state that they're "non political". They shouldn't be involved with any political parties full stop. They should draw the line under it right now, rather than trying to even things up by now doing it for all of the other parties. Even if they do lose out on charitable donations.

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 06-05-2019 05:20 PM

***Jack Hackett*** · 06-05-2019 05:59 PM

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm not holding my breath, but my fingers will be crossed that at the very least, political lying will get wider exposure than it currently gets

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top...nson-1-6034496

***lapsedhibee*** · 06-05-2019 06:36 PM

Originally Posted by Jack Hackett

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm not holding my breath, but my fingers will be crossed that at the very least, political lying will get wider exposure than it currently gets

https://www.theneweuropean.co.uk/top...nson-1-6034496

At least Boris, unlike Nige, takes his job super-seriously. Only person out of 9 million Londoners who made the effort to turn up and cast a vote in local elections last week. What a guy!

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 06-05-2019 06:42 PM

Originally Posted by lapsedhibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

At least Boris, unlike Nige, takes his job super-seriously. Only person out of 9 million Londoners who made the effort to turn up and cast a vote in local elections last week. What a guy!

Yep and also the only person out of 1 who managed to turn up and cast his vote without even turning up to do so.

***Future17*** · 07-05-2019 01:07 PM

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Yep, need to teach those kids early that it's all about money over principle. Let's teach them rules, then break those rules whenever money is involved. What better way to set them up in life?

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The rules clearly state that they're "non political". They shouldn't be involved with any political parties full stop. They should draw the line under it right now, rather than trying to even things up by now doing it for all of the other parties. Even if they do lose out on charitable donations.

The story was that the Scout leader had agreed to have Scouts deliver elections leaflets in return for a one-year lease on an allotment. The allotment was to be used by the Scout group to learn about growing their own produce which was, in turn, to be used in the running of a community soup kitchen.

I'm staggered that anyone would characterise that as teaching kids "that it's all about money over principle". I strongly suspect that, had it been representatives of your own preferred party involved in this story, you would have a much more sympathetic view. It's also worth noting that the Tories involved in this story have not broken any rules for their part.

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 07-05-2019 01:24 PM

Originally Posted by Future17

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

The story was that the Scout leader had agreed to have Scouts deliver elections leaflets in return for a one-year lease on an allotment. The allotment was to be used by the Scout group to learn about growing their own produce which was, in turn, to be used in the running of a community soup kitchen.

I'm staggered that anyone would characterise that as teaching kids "that it's all about money over principle". I strongly suspect that, had it been representatives of your own preferred party involved in this story, you would have a much more sympathetic view. It's also worth noting that the Tories involved in this story have not broken any rules for their part.

Then your suspicion would be wrong. Scouts should not be ordered to deliver election leaflets for ANY party as i've already stated. They are a non-political organization. What a party offers them in return is completely irrelevant. Of course the irony of helping out this particular party is that their ideology contributes greatly to the increased use of community soup kitchens.

***Future17*** · 07-05-2019 03:18 PM

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Then your suspicion would be wrong. Scouts should not be ordered to deliver election leaflets for ANY party as i've already stated. They are a non-political organization. What a party offers them in return is completely irrelevant. Of course the irony of helping out this particular party is that their ideology contributes greatly to the increased use of community soup kitchens.

I don't think what is on offer in return is irrelevant in circumstances where you've stated the kids were being taught money is more important than principles, which is the sort of sensationalist hyperbole which will either spread "fake news", or reduce the likelihood of people trusting any statements you make in other posts.

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 07-05-2019 05:52 PM

Originally Posted by Future17

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I don't think what is on offer in return is irrelevant in circumstances where you've stated the kids were being taught money is more important than principles, which is the sort of sensationalist hyperbole which will either spread "fake news", or reduce the likelihood of people trusting any statements you make in other posts.

How is it "fake news" to say that a non-political organization involving children should not hand out leaflets for a political party on principle?

Your argument seems to be that it's ok, as long as they're getting something back in return. I disagree with that.

***Moulin Yarns*** · 07-05-2019 09:18 PM

Here's a thought, the local tory party could donate the money to the scouts, and expect nothing in return, that would be a first.

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 07-05-2019 09:32 PM

Originally Posted by Moulin Yarns

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Here's a thought, the local tory party could donate the money to the scouts, and expect nothing in return, that would be a first.

Or the party could put an end to their ideological austeity policies, then the scouts wouldn't need to worry about helping out as many charities.

***Future17*** · 08-05-2019 01:48 PM

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

How is it "fake news" to say that a non-political organization involving children should not hand out leaflets for a political party on principle?

Your argument seems to be that it's ok, as long as they're getting something back in return. I disagree with that.

You described a story about a Scout troop delivering election leaflets in exchange for an allotment, which was to be used for educating those Scouts and running a community soup kitchen, as teaching kids "that it's all about money over principle". You've put a spin on the story which is unsupported by the facts, hence "fake news".

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 08-05-2019 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by Future17

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

You described a story about a Scout troop delivering election leaflets in exchange for an allotment, which was to be used for educating those Scouts and running a community soup kitchen, as teaching kids "that it's all about money over principle". You've put a spin on the story which is unsupported by the facts, hence "fake news".

A community soup kitchen that may not have needed to exist without the austerity policies of the party that they are delivering leaflets for. It's easy to call anything you don't like out as "fake news". Doesn't make it so though.

***Jack Hackett*** · 08-05-2019 04:54 PM

Something I haven't heard asked in connection with this scout thingy is... 'Where was this allotment coming from, as the majority of allotment land is owned by local authorities?'

https://www.allotment-garden.org/all...tment-history/

The average yearly rent btw is between £20-40... so, nice bit of cheap labour then eh

It wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if what they'd have got was a bit of a tip, which would take a year to get suitable for use.

No flies on a tory

***Future17*** · 10-05-2019 01:28 PM

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

A community soup kitchen that may not have needed to exist without the austerity policies of the party that they are delivering leaflets for. It's easy to call anything you don't like out as "fake news". Doesn't make it so though.

I'm not disagreeing with your first sentence. What I'm saying, again, is that you stated the actions of those involved in the relevant story was teaching kids "that it's all about money over principle"; that is quite simply untrue and your posting it on a public forum makes it fake news.

That I suspect you know this basic point is untrue, yet are attempting to obfuscate your actions by refocusing on other aspects of what you posted, seems cowardly to me, but that's another matter to the main point.

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 10-05-2019 09:34 PM

Originally Posted by Future17

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm not disagreeing with your first sentence. What I'm saying, again, is that you stated the actions of those involved in the relevant story was teaching kids "that it's all about money over principle"; that is quite simply untrue and your posting it on a public forum makes it fake news.

That I suspect you know this basic point is untrue, yet are attempting to obfuscate your actions by refocusing on other aspects of what you posted, seems cowardly to me, but that's another matter to the main point.

It may not be intentional. But that is ultimately the lesson they would learn from this situation. Children don't learn from what is said, they learn from action and those actions put money before principle. It's not even disputable.

***Future17*** · 10-05-2019 10:43 PM

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

It may not be intentional. But that is ultimately the lesson they would learn from this situation. Children don't learn from what is said, they learn from action and those actions put money before principle. It's not even disputable.

I accept it's subjective, to an extent, what "lesson" would be learned, but what is not subjective is that there was no "money" involved.

If you think I'm wrong, please tell me where the "money" is in this scenario?

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 11-05-2019 01:35 PM

Originally Posted by Future17

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I accept it's subjective, to an extent, what "lesson" would be learned, but what is not subjective is that there was no "money" involved.

If you think I'm wrong, please tell me where the "money" is in this scenario?

Are you suggesting that money wouldn't have been involved here? A political party offers a one-year lease. A lease that would presumably have cost money?

It was a bribe. It doesn't matter how it gets dressed up. They were offering to spend money on a "non political" organization in order to get them to participate in something political.

***Jack Hackett*** · 11-05-2019 01:51 PM

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Are you suggesting that money wouldn't have been involved here? A political party offers a one-year lease. A lease that would presumably have cost money?

It was a bribe. It doesn't matter how it gets dressed up. They were offering to spend money on a "non political" organization in order to get them to participate in something political.

Regardless of how much money was involved, there are waiting lists for allotments pretty much everywhere. Someone on the waiting list would have been bumped to provide one for the scouts

***Future17*** · 11-05-2019 10:11 PM

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

Are you suggesting that money wouldn't have been involved here? A political party offers a one-year lease. A lease that would presumably have cost money?

It was a bribe. It doesn't matter how it gets dressed up. They were offering to spend money on a "non political" organization in order to get them to participate in something political.

I would have thought it was obvious that what I was suggesting, given that I explicitly stated that in my last post, but you've lost me again with your 2+2 = 5 approach to the news...do you know more about this story than has been reported?

In any event, you've now escalated to "bribe"...given that all of this was reportable to the Electoral Commission, in what way was it dishonest? I am no fan of the Tories but, in this instance, they were up-front with the Scouts about what the deal was and did not attempt to hide it from anybody.

**~~Fife-Hibee~~** · 12-05-2019 02:53 AM

Originally Posted by Future17

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I would have thought it was obvious that what I was suggesting, given that I explicitly stated that in my last post, but you've lost me again with your 2+2 = 5 approach to the news...do you know more about this story than has been reported?

In any event, you've now escalated to "bribe"...given that all of this was reportable to the Electoral Commission, in what way was it dishonest? I am no fan of the Tories but, in this instance, they were up-front with the Scouts about what the deal was and did not attempt to hide it from anybody.

I'm calling it a bribe. Where did I say they were being "dishonest"?

An honest bribe is still a bribe. The fact the scout leaders knew what this was and still went through with it makes it even worse, which is why many have now resigned their positions.

***Future17*** · 13-05-2019 12:41 PM

Originally Posted by Fife-Hibee

This quote is hidden because you are ignoring this member. Show Quote

I'm calling it a bribe. Where did I say they were being "dishonest"?

An honest bribe is still a bribe. The fact the scout leaders knew what this was and still went through with it makes it even worse, which is why many have now resigned their positions.

"An honest bribe"? You're either trolling, or you don't know the definition of the word "bribe".