The Offensive Behaviour at Football & Threatening Communications (Scotland) Bill

It may have been posted in the other thread, but it obviously wasn't limited to posts only in that thread. I assumed that much was clear.

Hold on, so you don't think that singing about our heritage is Sectarian, yet if it "crosses that line" they deserve all that comes their way?

What do you mean by "crossing that line"?

 

Well if you post something in a thread i would assume it would be relevant to that thread seem's a fair assumption to me anyway. Although obviously I am stupid and was unable to follow what you thought.

Yes again not complicated IF someone wants to sign about murdering Protestants or Catholics or any other religion they get what they deserve no sympathy from me nor I assume/hope any sane minded person.

 

You still going on about that? Lol

that was ONE person who APPARENTLY said that.

 

Absolutely, I am still going on about it. And as long as the scandalous legislation exists, and people try to defend the indefensible, I'll continue to go on about it.

This 'ONE person' is the THE person who actually drafted the legislation! A person who has been accused of being an anti-Catholic and anti-Irish bigot by her own colleagues no less! And yet despite this, the SNP (a party itself which had historically faced accusations of being anti-Catholic and anti-Irish) and Alex Salmond put this person in charge of drafting the legislation, and have stood by while this Act has been criticised from Celtic supporters to criminal court judges and human rights watchdogs.

There's also no 'APPARENTLY' about it. The architect of the Act is on record as stating it, there's even a video of it in fact! :smiley-laughing002: This is of course before you even look at her subsequent comments, and that of her SNP colleagues since then!

 

If it's on record show me...

 

It's even on video! You should have a look at the record/video of the Justice Committee which took place on the 13th September 2011.

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-uJxdoS1ATE

Not listening to all of that. Tell me where to skip to.

 

:smiley-laughing002:

Well that really does sum you up. You expect someone to take what your saying seriously and to think you know what you're talking about, when firstly you didn't even know this happened, and secondly you can't even bother your * finding out about it!

 

I don't have the time for a 16m video, at the moment. I asked you to tell me where it was so I could skip to it.

It doesn't sum me up. I merely questioned your accusing of a whole political party being anti catholic because one woman allegedly made a poor comment. A comment I had never seen but only read about her former assistant claiming that she had said it.

You could have saved this pishy argument and just been a decent chap and told me where to skip to. Try not to be so arsey.

 

Wait a minute. You can't even be arsed watching the meeting of the Justice Committee discussing this legislation, let alone a 16 minute snippet of it? And yet you think you're in a position to belittle people for 'going on about it'? What position are you in to even discuss the topic, when's it clear you don't even understand what's going on?

As for the rest of your post, it really does illustrate that you've not got a clue. The 'evening up' comments were not allegations (as you quite wrongly put it), but were stated by the convener of the Justice Committee. They're not alleged comments, they were said in the Scottish Parliament! On record (and video)! :smiley-laughing002:

Not only that, but you're completely misunderstanding all the issues that are being discussed here! The 'evening up' comments were not alleged by one of the convener's colleagues (as again you wrongly put it), but rather they accused her of being an anti-Catholic and anti-Irish bigot throughout her political career.

Furthermore, the SNP has historically faced accusations of being anti-Catholic and anti-Irish, anyone with even a basic grasp of the party's history could tell you that.

 

I know about the party's history, thanks. But that is as you say
.. history.

I asked you for the time when the comment was made because I had no time myself to watch the full video. Yes, I didn't have 16 minutes.

You just wanted an argument, clearly. You could have pointed me to the comment and we could have discussed it like adults. I haven't followed that woman's career, so you'll forgive me for not being fully aware of all the claims towards her. She might be a *, she might not.

When I have time today, I'll watch the video. Whatever the outcome, it won't change my opinion of the party today.

 

I'm sure you do. You just must have forgotten about it when you were typing your earlier posts. And similarly must have forgot, that even today, the party and some of its members face the same accusations.

But that's the thing, you think you're in a position to belittle people and discuss this topic when you don't even know what you're talking about. And yet you think watching a 15 minute video will solve that. The evidence given to the Justice Committee on this issue lasted hours.

You don't necessarily need to follow her career. Just try and grasp the basic information before trying to belittle someone for 'going on about it', and trying to kid on to others that you somehow know what you're talking about.

 

Eh hold on a moment, it was you that resurrected this thread for some unknown reason. The last post until you brought it back up was made on 15-11-2013 at 06:05 PM, so clearly it is you who is looking for an argument.

 

No, this discussion was shifted over by staff from the independence thread to stop it going off-topic.

All discussion of the bill should be done here.

 

Stand corrected!

Unfortunately, rightly or wrongly, this bill will influence some voters who will see a Yes vote as a vote for the SNP and therefore it is entirely relevant to any debate about voting intentions on 18 September.

 

As I said, if anyone wants to discuss the bill it can be done here. It dragged the thread off-topic previously resulting in a few complaints.

 

lol

What an over reaction ffs. We could have been discussing the issue if you didn't spit your dummy and just told me where to skip to in that video. And no, the video wouldn't solve the whole issue for me. But, to start with I would have been happy to see her saying the bill was to 'even things up', then maybe our conversation could have got a bit deeper.

 

Well this is yet another basic point you're failing to grasp.

Originally you obviously felt you were in a position to belittle people for 'going on' about an issue that you believed you knew what you were talking about. Your subsequent posts, which have been a mishmash of misunderstandings and confusions, has illustrated that you're actually rather clueless about the issue. Now, if that's not bad enough, you then can't be arsed finding out about this topic, let alone watch a 15 minute video, and yet you expect someone else to spoon-feed you this information. As I said before, all that pretty much sums you up.

 

Sums me up? Wow! You've got me down in only a few posts lol

I never had time to watch the video. You could have helpfully informed me instead of dragging this nonsense out.

And yes am belittling you, Mr condescending. lol

 

A wee sideline to the discussion. Bumped into Mr Mackenzie(gimp involved with nail bombs to Neil Lennon) the other day on my way to football training.