eFestivals
-
Posts
103,423 -
Joined
-
Last visited
-
Days Won
1
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Blogs
Gallery
Store
Posts posted by eFestivals
-
-
17 minutes ago, LJS said:
Incorrect & I have told you so on more than one occasion. Please stop repeating lies once it has been pointed out to you that they are lies.
It's 100% correct.
Money is given by the UK govt to the SG to support the refugees.
That money or may not cover all of their varying needs, and if it doesn't the 'local' source of funds makes up any shortfall. It's *EXACTLY* the same in England as it is in Scotland.
Scotland has *ONLY* taken refugees via the UK-wide scheme.
It has made no attempt to get any extras on a Scotland-only (and Scotland paying) basis via any means whatsoever - when it could do.
Scotland has *chosen* to do nothing beyond what Westminster has said.
-
21 minutes ago, cornish hick said:
Back on tour and in Europe in June/July with the Glastonbury saturday free.
Would love it if they were there - and really fit the ethos of the festival
I know they've played before, tho I have a feeling it might have been before my time (tho it might not be too).
8 minutes ago, Scruffylovemonster said:They doing a greatest hit set?
Short
The album that's on is great, tho I guess it might sound a little dated today. It got a lot of spins on my system back in the day.
-
I hear Liam has claimed he wrote the songs for his solo album.
I also hear that Johnny Marr laughed - a lot - when he was told Liam had said that.
That is all.
-
22 minutes ago, LJS said:
I'm quite sure Scotland will at least maintain the %GDP of foreign aid that the UK currently sends. I'll certianly be looking for such a commitment from any party that gets my vote.
So you'll hurt Scotland's poor to help others, while supporting indy to help Scotland's poor...?
22 minutes ago, LJS said:(you can reply about the £15Bn deficit & shutting hospitals if you wish - you will however be wasting your time as it has been covered about 15Bn times)
everything's been covered except covering the missing £15Bn.
Yeah, i know.
-
34 minutes ago, LJS said:
Sturgeon has repeatedly stated that Scotland is happy to accept refugees
And so has May.
Quotebut more than just saying it she has played a part in ensuring that we have taken about a third of the refugees that have arrived under the Syrian Resettlement programme
Only because of the rules that apply to that resettlement programme.
Anyone who is resettled isn't allowed to take a house from a local.
Who's got the biggest available housing stock? Scotland!*
FFS!!
(*but not because of anything about Scotland being better, merely because Scotland's population is growing by the least, and in places the population is falling by over 1% a year [and there's fuck all of that happening anywhere in England]!!!)
Quote, as well as a sixth of the Dubs kids that have arrived in the UK. Actions speak louder than words.
The actions of Westminster which set the rules for the UK around spare capacity, of which scotland has the most spare capacity.
Because it's population is static.
NOTHING of that is Sturgeon's doing. NOT A JOT!!!!!
QuoteYou started off by accusing her of doing nothing.
Not true, tiny minded man.
I've said she doing nothing beyond the arrangements the UK has put together for the whole UK.
She's doing nothing EXTRA!!!!
Is that because she's extra-caring above the English, or because she isn't?
FFS.
She's doing nothing extra when she could do extra if she cared more. She's not doing any extra because she doesn't.
QuoteShe is clearly committed to Scotland taking its share of refugees.
Just as the rest of the UK is.
QuoteI have said before that I do not have enough information to know whether she should be doing more. You don't have that information either but you just assume that she is doing nothing because that is what you do.
May controls the resources in England that refugees need. Sturgeon controls the resources in Scotland that refugees need.
May set some UK-wide rules with associated UK funding. Sturgeon has operated to those UK-wide rules and *ONLY* those UK rules.
Scotland hasn't chipped in an extra penny above the common-UK requirement.
Because Scotland wants to do more or because it doesn't?
FFS
-
14 minutes ago, LJS said:
Amazing, A couple of days ago you couldn't find any kids and even if we could they would encourage people traffickers but today you've magicked up 500 and I guess we just don't tell the traffickers? The efforts you go to to try & discredit Sturgeon are remarkable.
Fuck me, you love your diversion techniques, don't you?
You're the one saying there's kids and you're the one saying Sturgeon cares more.
So if there's the kids, she is perfectly able to show that she cares more via a challenge to May in the way I suggested.
Sturgeon hasn't made that challenge. She only said May should do more, not that she's willing to go beyond what May might offer.
FFS.
(all that aside, the limitations around Dubs is fuck all to do with the challenge to May I'm suggesting - because at no point have I said there's no one that can be helped, only that there's a shortage of kids who can meet the Dubs criteria)
-
55 minutes ago, Cieran said:
I did not notice this either! How did this come about, anyone know?
Someone sent me some info, and I've good reason to believe it's right.
-
26 minutes ago, Joshuwarr said:
I doubt they're really still raking it in off a few top 40 singles...
I know a guy who was in much less successful 80s band, who's still living it right up on the royalties - because of films, video games, radio play, TV use, etc, etc, etc.
It's quite possible he's doing better from that than Sleeper might be (and he's one the songwriters too which is extra royalties, which might not apply with all of sleeper's members [I've no idea]), but the idea they're seeing nothing will be wrong.
-
6 minutes ago, CaledonianGonzo said:
I saw him in the Acoustic a few years back, so he could wind up there.
He might, tho having just exchanged mails with him it seems far from certain that he'll try to pursue anything - he says he might, but that also means he might not.
-
Otway is touring. Otway is always touring.
But he didn't do last year and he doesn't think he'll get booked for Cabaret this year.
He might try and chase down another route, tho. Go on, John, it's not the same without you.
-
Just now, LJS said:
She has repeatedly made clear that refugees are welcome.
As has May and Cameron.
To the extent of actually doing something, unlike Sturgeon.
Just now, LJS said:She has committed Scot gov money to support the process.
As has English money been committed for refugees in England.
Just now, LJS said:She does not have the power to do any more. Immigration is a reserved power.
She can hold Westminster to account, by showing that Scotland can do more than Westminster - tho only if Scotland wants to do more than Westminster, of course.
If Sturgeon stood up and said "I can take 500 kids, right now. Let them in Mrs May", May would comply.
May is not going to do the heartless c**t thing that Sturgeon wouldn't do and Cameron wouldn't do. She's a politician, just like they are.
No one gives a shit about the numbers who might come in. What they give a shit about is who is paying and what they lose because of paying - which is *exactly* why Sturgeon isn't offering to pay any more than Westminster is.
-
Hey LJS, in the new wonderful sovereign Scotland - with a £15Bn deficit - how well do you think the 0.7% of GDP that the UK spends on aid is going to hold up, when the choice will be that aid to non-Scots or paying for Scottish pensions, Scottish education and Scottish health services?
Do you reckon Scotland will vote itself worse conditions in order to show how much it cares for those who get the shit end of the stick?
-
20 minutes ago, LJS said:
The truth is that I think Nicola Sturgeon does a pretty good job
but the UK doesn't?
Despite going further than Sturgeon ever has - by making solid firm commitments and following thru on them, to the extent of being the biggest (proportuional) funders for this sort of help in the world?
Sturgeon blows guff, and doesn't follow thru with the more she says she'd like to do. It's as worthless as a Cameron 'promise'.
-
16 minutes ago, LJS said:
I think in a sense this was a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation. If she answers by saying that she would not be prepared to take refugees, I am sure her critics, Neil amongst them, would still be dining out on it. Saying she is happy for ordinary folk to take refugees while she doesn't.
Which, funnily enough, is *EXACTLY* what happened with Cameron.
One geezer stands up and says 3,000 refugee kids would be a great thing. Cameron agrees - because if he didn't he'd look a heartless c**t.
Meanwhile, I keep on pointing out that Sturgeon could do the same with May to get more refugee kids in, by giving an absolute commitment (with Scottish funding) for Scotland to look after them - because May isn't going to put herself in that heartless c**t position either.
Free pass for Sturgeon, damnation for Cameron (and May).
-
16 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:
I disagree, I have regularly heard labour and Tory supporters criticising the leadership. A lot of the Tory grassroots hated Cameron.
just occasionally LJS will criticise the SNP - but as gently as possible, never with the same venom he'd use for the tories or Labour doing the same thing
Which is pretty much how it goes for supporters of any parties.
The difference with SNP supporters is they won't actually engage with the facts around things in trying to justify a policy or formulate a position - because the facts are too inconvenient to allow them to do that. It's with that part of things that the SNP are devoid of criticisms by their supporters.
-
2 minutes ago, pink_triangle said:
An observation I would make is that SNP supporters seem very reluctant to ever criticise SNP politicians compared to supporters of other parties.
To be fair, that's much the same for all supporters of all parties.
But what it isn't is the fair and balanced that LJS wants to believe he's being.
-
Just now, pink_triangle said:
What she said was either a bit of a balls up, or an example of someone playing politics and it then backfiring on them.
which is exactly what Cameron did with seemingly agreeing to 3,000 under dubs - it was never an explicit promise.
Tho it wasn't Cameron who backed out of his promise (that was done by May), while it was Sturgeon who backed out of hers.
Free pass for Sturgeon, five day rant about Cameron/tories.
-
-
17 minutes ago, FuzzyDunlop said:
Mariah Carey is playing?
if she is, don't blame it on the sunshine, don't blame it on the moonlight, don't blame it on the good times, blame it on the bookers.
-
7 hours ago, musky said:
Whilst I completely agree with you about the absurd copyright laws, rest assured that nobody from Sleeper has been living off their royalty cheques for the last 20 years
what you mean, I guess, is that none of them have been solely living off that 5 minutes work from 20+ years ago.
-
7 hours ago, Muppetmark said:
Why havent they gone up on the rumour page
because I don't know if they're playing.
"just call my name and I'll be there....".
-
9 hours ago, LJS said:
No Neil the really embarrassing stuff is on another thread
where you were wrong about the eligibility Duns amendment always having eligibility guidelines
then why weren't *all* kids from Calais taken in via Dubs, and instead just 80 of them?
Oh dear.
9 hours ago, LJS said:Where you were wrong about the Dubs amendment kids being additional to our regulation commitments.
Then why couldn't the UK govt go to Calais for years and years?
Oh dear.
9 hours ago, LJS said:Where you were wrong about the timing of the Home Office massively restricting the eligibility guidelines 5 months after the act was passed.
You're wrong thinking I've even posted anything about this.
Oh dear.
9 hours ago, LJS said:But apparently I should be embarrassed for not holding Nicola sturgeon to account for something you yourself have admitted wasn't a promise.
same as you've posted Cameron's word that show that wasn't a promise, either.
Which you've gone on a 5 day rant about.
While Sturgeon gets a free pass.
-
12 hours ago, mr gumby said:
I know a lot of the info in this article is already known, but Emily saying 'We've made a couple of bookings tonight' caught my eye. If the NME is to be believed (I know!), who was at the awards that she might be referring to?
if they really made some bookings it's likely to have been sorted with agents and not bands.
-
On 2/16/2017 at 1:04 AM, defrio29 said:
So the Legend Slot would be either one of Diana Ross or Barry Gibb?
No idea.
I have had new info overnight about Gibb tho, with someone else (with a proven history, tho not a big history) telling me he's definitely booked.
That new info has convinced me that it's correct that he's playing.
The Dirty Independence Question
in Discussions
Posted
and the Home Office has made funds available to England beyond the given funding by the UK govt.
Spot the difference? There is none.
I apologise for a poor choice of words.
Scotland hasn't gone beyond the obligations that the UK govt has put on all parts of the UK.
Better?
Scotland has done nothing *extra* for refugees, when it could do.
But even if it was how you said and they chucked them a few extra quid beyond the SG's obligations, it doesn't actually help any *extra* refugees.
Sturgeon is saying more refugees should be helped, while not trying to help more refugees.