My reply was disappointing. He said that he doesn’t think an inquiry would be able to do anything different to what the police/courts would do. I’ve replied but waiting on him getting back.
SNP?My reply was disappointing. He said that he doesn’t think an inquiry would be able to do anything different to what the police/courts would do. I’ve replied but waiting on him getting back.
YeahSNP?
In spite of the active inquiry that excluded sellick and their church?My reply was disappointing. He said that he doesn’t think an inquiry would be able to do anything different to what the police/courts would do. I’ve replied but waiting on him getting back.
That’s no surprise. They know they have a lot of questions to answer on this subject. Especially the justice secretary.Yeah
My reply to him
Thanks for taking the time to reply to me. Surely a full independent inquiry would highlight any wrongdoings at all levels within any organisation. Also, I feel the victims deserve closure , whilst the convictions are welcomed, it’s a question hanging over all bodies as to who knew and what was done to prevent it. This is where the courts and police method, I feel, wouldn’t highlight this.
Kind regards
Well done everyone getting a reply back from their MSP, about an inquiry into historic Paedophile abuse at celtic. However I was taught to be cautious in my dealings, I would recommend it to fellow FF brethren. I have complete faith in the honesty of anyone working on this, so don't feel in need to see the results of their endeavours, we don't want information getting into the hands of enemies. Forewarned is forearmed as they say, give them nothing, even the tiniest bit of information could give them an advantage.
If you reply again mate could you please ask why HIS government is holding an inquiry into historical CSA in scotland?My reply to him
Thanks for taking the time to reply to me. Surely a full independent inquiry would highlight any wrongdoings at all levels within any organisation. Also, I feel the victims deserve closure , whilst the convictions are welcomed, it’s a question hanging over all bodies as to who knew and what was done to prevent it. This is where the courts and police method, I feel, wouldn’t highlight this.
Kind regards
If you reply again mate could you please ask why HIS government is holding an inquiry into historical CSA in scotland?
What was his position on the formation of this inquiry?
Why does he see differences between victims of CSA in the Scottish Government's inquiry and those abused at sellick?
I'd wager that he was in favour of the government inquiry.Just replied with a re hashed version asking him those questions , will see if I get a reply.
That's amazing how did you know?SNP?
Surely MP's opinions and responses should be public knowledge.
If individuals harrass/threaten MP's then they should be dealt with appropriately, but this shouldn't be used as an exuse to 'hide behind' imo.
If these elected officials can't stand up and defend their positions and choices in the public arena then they are truly unfit for the offices they hold. For example, the one who thinks that public enquiries can't achieve anything that the police/courts haven't should surely be asked to explain such a ridiculous stance. Enquiries are designed and exist for exactly that purpose and any MP trying to use that as a pathetic excuse for denying victims truth and justice should be rightly exposed, grilled and ridiculed.
I have no idea why this thread was shut down. I didn't read it before it was locked so missed whatever went on. But if it was anything to do with protecting MP's as suggested then I hate to say it, but something stinks.
My reason for sharing my reply is for other people to see how to best respond. I welcome feedback , would there be a better approach? I get the need to keep control of all this, so would Understand if we didn’t want to go down this route.
It wasn't anything remotely like that mate. Much more to do with relevance and something.Surely MP's opinions and responses should be public knowledge.
If individuals harrass/threaten MP's then they should be dealt with appropriately, but this shouldn't be used as an exuse to 'hide behind' imo.
If these elected officials can't stand up and defend their positions and choices in the public arena then they are truly unfit for the offices they hold. For example, the one who thinks that public enquiries can't achieve anything that the police/courts haven't should surely be asked to explain such a ridiculous stance. Enquiries are designed and exist for exactly that purpose and any MP trying to use that as a pathetic excuse for denying victims truth and justice should be rightly exposed, grilled and ridiculed.
I have no idea why this thread was shut down. I didn't read it before it was locked so missed whatever went on. But if it was anything to do with protecting MP's as suggested then I hate to say it, but something stinks.
I’ve went one further.
No more successful mind you.
I’m now asking why there is no public inquiry.
if celtic have already paid out to a victim why arent the sfa citing them? its in their own rules that they can push onwards with punishments regardless of ongoing court cases so why the delay?
My reply was disappointing. He said that he doesn’t think an inquiry would be able to do anything different to what the police/courts would do.
I get that, but it's not FF's place to police that surely? People here are just sharing information and perhaps encouraging others to engage with their representatives which is their right. If anything, the only thing this site can do is remind everyone to do so in the correct and proper manner, which I have seen many times. But ultimately every individual is responsible for their own actions not this forum. And we're certainly not responsible for the amount of people who feel strongly enough about a certain topic to contact said individuals. I'd suggest that it's their own conduct and actions that determine that.There is a fine line to be had between constructively questioning elected members and bombarding them with repetitive insulting messages.
When this is over we can publish a list of shame with details of their responses or lack thereof, in order that the voters can decide if they are worthy of re-election.
That's good to know and I hope you are right. But that still doesn't explain why we now seem to be moderating the opinions of MP's.It wasn't anything remotely like that mate. Much more to do with relevance and something.
Yeah
I get that, but it's not FF's place to police that surely? People here are just sharing information and perhaps encouraging others to engage with their representatives which is their right. If anything, the only thing this site can do is remind everyone to do so in the correct and proper manner, which I have seen many times. But ultimately every individual is responsible for their own actions not this forum. And we're certainly not responsible for the amount of people who feel strongly enough about a certain topic to contact said individuals. I'd suggest that it's their own conduct and actions that determine that.
So the inference on here now about refraining from sharing that information is worrying. It suggests the possibility that outside forces have been putting pressure on the site which would be very disturbing indeed.
That's good to know and I hope you are right. But that still doesn't explain why we now seem to be moderating the opinions of MP's.
Why does he see differences between victims of CSA in the Scottish Government's inquiry and those abused at sellick?
True and admirable, but as evidenced by dozens of responses from politicians shown on here, none of them will commit to a yes or no answer. It's always platitudes with an unimpeachable get-out clause.Perhaps ask if they and their party are categorically against an inquiry before the end of all correspondence? A simple yes or no would suffice, put them on the back foot and get responses on record.
Let everyone know in the fullness of time who were willing to sacrifice justice for votes.
My local MP has now called of two separate meetings with me in the past six months.
There is a fine line to be had between constructively questioning elected members and bombarding them with repetitive insulting messages.
When this is over we can publish a list of shame with details of their responses or lack thereof, in order that the voters can decide if they are worthy of re-election.
True and admirable, but as evidenced by dozens of responses from politicians shown on here, none of them will commit to a yes or no answer. It's always platitudes with an unimpeachable get-out clause.
What party is Ross Thomson Brand ?
I don't think anyone's tried to dilute a response from an MP, if anything they've been highlighted.I get that, but it's not FF's place to police that surely? People here are just sharing information and perhaps encouraging others to engage with their representatives which is their right. If anything, the only thing this site can do is remind everyone to do so in the correct and proper manner, which I have seen many times. But ultimately every individual is responsible for their own actions not this forum. And we're certainly not responsible for the amount of people who feel strongly enough about a certain topic to contact said individuals. I'd suggest that it's their own conduct and actions that determine that.
So the inference on here now about refraining from sharing that information is worrying. It suggests the possibility that outside forces have been putting pressure on the site which would be very disturbing indeed.
That's good to know and I hope you are right. But that still doesn't explain why we now seem to be moderating the opinions of MP's.
This just goes to prove they are a different breed. They have no shame.
For all of you this weekend that were saying sheep shaggers were as bad as Tims.
I have something to say to this guy from the bottom of my heart..... %^*& YOU!
True and admirable, but as evidenced by dozens of responses from politicians shown on here, none of them will commit to a yes or no answer. It's always platitudes with an unimpeachable get-out clause.
can someone PM me with a list of which MP's/MSP's have been positive in calling for a public inquiry ....and those who haven't please?
can someone PM me with a list of which MP's/MSP's have been positive in calling for a public inquiry ....and those who haven't please?
can someone PM me with a list of which MP's/MSP's have been positive in calling for a public inquiry ....and those who haven't please?
I can assure you bluethunder is a very close associate of mine and is trusted. Anyone has any doubt then please feel free to pm me.I think that you will have to be around a little longer before that info will be shared.
I can assure you bluethunder is a very close associate of mine and is trusted. Anyone has any doubt then please feel free to pm me.
I think that you will have to be around a little longer before that info will be shared.
Current and previous MSPs
www.parliament.scot
For anyone contacting all of the MSP's on the list above, can you please leave out the lady below, as she's off atm owing to her son passing away? It's for Clare Haughy SNP MSP. Thank you!
Clare Haughey MSP
Rutherglen Constituency