Is this April 1?

[Sweltered]

Wit nae chit an nae nae chatter
whatevers wrang -whits the matter
away fur yer breakfist an dinner tae
wits the problem ye hiv nothin tae say
kin ye no take it -noo theres a thing
plenty tae say in supporting the swing
an electric chair a fireing squad
a lethal jab in the name o god.

Since there is no god, anything I support is entirely my own belief. I noticed you didn't include your treatment by the priest in your (as always) lengthy tale of woe.

Shame about your brother btw. I know a guy who was gumped over the head with a brick, by an 8 yr old, just cause he had a rangers top on. He had personality change too.

[bill]

You are spot on there Sweltered.

My oldest son is a policeman,has been for 12 years.When I hear of some of the cases he comes across that is when I know that the "bleeding heart political correct brigade" have a lot to answer for.
I always knew the police were expected to do their job with one hand tied behind their back.In reality they are expected to do their job with both hands tied behind their back.
Woe betide the officer who laughs at an inappropriate joke,or books a black person for a parking offence and not a white.
I await a long winded reply from the Scottish Humanist among us...

[Bobbie En Tejas]

Ionns.. you're speaking in tongues. In your mind in normal speak, what would be the appropriate action to take to the ones who set the van on fire and who did this to your brother? Let them go in the hopes they will not do this to anyone again? Take them to a place for the protection of citizens? (We call that jail.)

Would they have been arrested? And then what? What if their intent after they burned your vans was to go and bomb the van next door?

(We are going around in circles here.) And you never do really answer questions, but you say a lot of words trying!

[Pete Reek]

You folks are being very sore on poor Ionnsaigh, his head is that far up his ar$e he can't see what he types.

It's also another reason that what he writes is pure $hite.

[ionnsaigh]

Pete Reek a smelly name- wiz it given tae ye- or dae ye tak the blame
tae scribble away in infantile way- never mind son yer time tae come
when ye reach eighteen I will buy you a pint- hoping you learn the civilised way
Does yer dae and mae know yer playin wae the computer
watchin the porn and the fitbaw tae- hoots hoots and hoots naw hoot

[Sweltered]

As always, no answers to questions.


I see you assosciate the consumption of alcohol as being civilised...... Aye that's right , drink cures everything.\

[ionnsaigh]

EMDEE
Ping.

[4th gen Suthen']

Pete Reek a smelly name- wiz it given tae ye- or dae ye tak the blame
tae scribble away in infantile way- never mind son yer time tae come
when ye reach eighteen I will buy you a pint- hoping you learn the civilised way
Does yer dae and mae know yer playin wae the computer
watchin the porn and the fitbaw tae- hoots hoots and hoots naw hoot

Pete Reek is a very well known, well liked and much respected resident of this area also a funny and witty contributor to this forum...... most folk will be thinking you shouldn't really talk at him in such an unpleasant manner....I think that.

And he does so know hoot's hoot and hoot' naw hoot!
Was wishing I had thought of that one.....

[Bobbie En Tejas]

Yeah, what 4th said!

[Pete Reek]

4th Gen and Bobbie, I admire the contribution both of you make to this Forum. You both write regularly whereas owing to circumstances, I am unable to find the time to do so as often as I would like.
That said, I read as much as I can about the issues affecting people both here in Kintyre and beyond.
One thing I find annoying in what I read, is that gentleman (for want of a better description ) that writes an abundance of words but actually says very little of any relevance. In a rush I wrote my opinion which I thought then was appropriate. I still think it is.
If he sees me as a porn watching, beer swilling footie watching teenager that uses a computer without parental permission then he clearly has a wrong impression of me, and he is obviously not quite as smart as he thinks he is.
Teenager. I wish!
If it offended you, which it clearly has otherwise you wouldn't have written in defending the gentleman, I apologise to both of you unreservedly.
However, I stand by what I wrote.

[4th gen Suthen']

No no no no nooooooo

It was YOU I was sticking up for Pete Reek.....Bobbie too I am sure........

We love you Pete Reek, we do, oh Pete Reek we love youooo

[4th gen Suthen']

Och, I am wil' an' vexed that Pete Reek thinks I was not on his side on this one....
Hopefully, when he comes back, he will see MY apology!!

[Sweltered]

No need to appologise, he just mis-read. Not sure how how managed it, but he must have

Come on Peet Reek put 4th Gen out of his misery

[ionnsaigh]

4th gen Suthen
The one and only reason I wrote, what I did, was in a direct reply to his highly offensive post, if he resorts- like others do- As to making crude comments in response to various points of discussion, then it leaves me with little or no choice to respond in a similar fashion. There was nothing funny or witty (attributes that I much admire) in Peet Reek post , check it out. Name a valuable and one contributing feature of the post. To me it seemed childlike in the extreme unwanted and completely unwarranted remarks. Most folk only have to read and judge for themselves who caused the initial offence, or are they biased in terms of who belongs to the area and who is well respected as you seem to be.

Where it is highly commendable to defend, it is not desirable to defend a guilty party that declares innocence.

[ionnsaigh]

Peet Reek
For want of a better description- a gentleman such as yourself, who quite openly states that what I write is in terms of quantity large and in quality little. Being in haste is no type of excuse for what can only be deemed bad behaviour. I mean how appropriate or otherwise do you judge your response to be , when you link what someone says in a discussion to excrement, that is truly unbecoming of a gentleman of your standing.