|
The Media
|
|
Topic Started: 1 Nov 2017, 11:12 PM (581,197 Views)
|
|
Peco
|
9 Nov 2017, 11:35 AM
Post #301
|
- Posts:
- 3,756
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #733
- Joined:
- 6 March 2005
|
- corsica1968
- 9 Nov 2017, 10:06 AM
- Johnnyd60
- 8 Nov 2017, 08:58 PM
- Peco
- 8 Nov 2017, 08:23 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-23587678Corsica 1968’s postThis is what I was responding to; specifically the claim that the threats of a senior BBC manager had made these journalists think twice about making a documentary about the funds going missing. I assume the charity event in question is the same one but I’m sure Corsica1968 can confirm.
I'm waiting on Corsica1968 to respond, cause I'd like to ask him why the bbc would go to such lengths to prevent a documentary being made on the subject yet run the story as a news item? I smell a shampooe smear job.
The BBC simply reported (1) that the charity was under investigation by OSCR and (2) the outcome of that investigation. They did not investigate or report on the detailed facts of what actually happened - investigative journalism if you like. As I have stated, they are in possession of full details including stuff that I cannot put in the public domain without endangering sources and they could/should have exposed it a lot wider than my blog. In that way, the true culprits would have been identified and inevitably punished accordingly. Instead, they merely regurgitated the press releases put out by OSCR thereby failing in their public duty and allowing OSCR to whitewash the situation- no different to Jackson, Williams, etc. All of the details are still available on my blog which I continue to stand by and which has actually been verified by OSCR’s own investigation and flawed/heavily-edited report. That, I think, establishes my credentials. If you don’t want to believe me that’s your look-out, but, given that you evidently know sweet fa about the situation other than what I have posted, I would say you are the one who is doing the shampoo smearing. End of discussion. Can you post a link to your blog? I, for one, would be interested in reading it. As you say, all the BBC did was report out the OSCR press releases.
|
|
|
| |
|
Johnnyd60
|
9 Nov 2017, 11:58 AM
Post #302
|
Getting noticed in the reserves
- Posts:
- 80
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30,259
- Joined:
- 26 January 2012
- Favourite all-time player
- Larsson
|
- corsica1968
- 9 Nov 2017, 10:06 AM
- Johnnyd60
- 8 Nov 2017, 08:58 PM
- Peco
- 8 Nov 2017, 08:23 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-glasgow-west-23587678Corsica 1968’s postThis is what I was responding to; specifically the claim that the threats of a senior BBC manager had made these journalists think twice about making a documentary about the funds going missing. I assume the charity event in question is the same one but I’m sure Corsica1968 can confirm.
I'm waiting on Corsica1968 to respond, cause I'd like to ask him why the bbc would go to such lengths to prevent a documentary being made on the subject yet run the story as a news item? I smell a shampooe smear job.
The BBC simply reported (1) that the charity was under investigation by OSCR and (2) the outcome of that investigation. They did not investigate or report on the detailed facts of what actually happened - investigative journalism if you like. As I have stated, they are in possession of full details including stuff that I cannot put in the public domain without endangering sources and they could/should have exposed it a lot wider than my blog. In that way, the true culprits would have been identified and inevitably punished accordingly. Instead, they merely regurgitated the press releases put out by OSCR thereby failing in their public duty and allowing OSCR to whitewash the situation- no different to Jackson, Williams, etc. All of the details are still available on my blog which I continue to stand by and which has actually been verified by OSCR’s own investigation and flawed/heavily-edited report. That, I think, establishes my credentials. If you don’t want to believe me that’s your look-out, but, given that you evidently know sweet fa about the situation other than what I have posted, I would say you are the one who is doing the shampoo smearing. End of discussion. I don't think that can accurately be described as a 'discussion '. Sounds more like you don't want one.
|
|
|
| |
|
randombloke
|
9 Nov 2017, 12:18 PM
Post #303
|
Off treasure hunting in Holland
- Posts:
- 12,905
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #359
- Joined:
- 16 November 2004
|
- Bhoyball
- 9 Nov 2017, 10:14 AM
- Ned Rise
- 9 Nov 2017, 10:00 AM
- Bhoyball
- 9 Nov 2017, 09:49 AM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
Claiming tax back for example on things that you need to buy in order to work (as opposed to having your employer supply them to you for free) isn't tax avoidance. You're entitled to do it. Shoving your tax affairs through the Bahamas is tax avoidance. You won't find many painters and decorators in the Paradise Papers. Anyway, Dermot Desmond is a mere footnote in all of this so far. Today's names are the likes of Madonna and Justin Timberlake. I'm sure Twitter is in pure meltdown at the affront.
Your being very naive if you think painters and decorators don't actively try and avoid tax. They will be up to every trick in the book. As i said so would i . I'm just statingthat it's in our nature to pay as little tax as possible. From the small man to the billionaires. Big difference between a tradesman doing the occasional job off the books to boost his income or add a little more to his pension pot and somebody who already has more money than he can possibly spend in a lifetime setting up a convoluted series of trust funds and shell companies in order to avoid tax.
Needless to say though, if the tradesman gets caught he will be hammered by HMRC and forced to pay every penny in back taxes plus interest....if the billionaire gets caught out then it's a sweetheart deal where he pays back a tiny fraction of the tax he owes all offset against future tax bills, oh and here, have yourself a knighthood for being a jolly good bloke and treating us to some nice lunches while we were negotiating the settlement.
|
|
|
| |
|
Johnnyd60
|
9 Nov 2017, 12:21 PM
Post #304
|
Getting noticed in the reserves
- Posts:
- 80
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30,259
- Joined:
- 26 January 2012
- Favourite all-time player
- Larsson
|
- Johnnyd60
- 9 Nov 2017, 11:58 AM
- corsica1968
- 9 Nov 2017, 10:06 AM
- Johnnyd60
- 8 Nov 2017, 08:58 PM
The BBC simply reported (1) that the charity was under investigation by OSCR and (2) the outcome of that investigation. They did not investigate or report on the detailed facts of what actually happened - investigative journalism if you like. As I have stated, they are in possession of full details including stuff that I cannot put in the public domain without endangering sources and they could/should have exposed it a lot wider than my blog. In that way, the true culprits would have been identified and inevitably punished accordingly. Instead, they merely regurgitated the press releases put out by OSCR thereby failing in their public duty and allowing OSCR to whitewash the situation- no different to Jackson, Williams, etc. All of the details are still available on my blog which I continue to stand by and which has actually been verified by OSCR’s own investigation and flawed/heavily-edited report. That, I think, establishes my credentials. If you don’t want to believe me that’s your look-out, but, given that you evidently know sweet fa about the situation other than what I have posted, I would say you are the one who is doing the shampoo smearing. End of discussion.
I don't think that can accurately be described as a 'discussion '. Sounds more like you don't want one. One more question; you've implied Mark Daly was involved in this conspiracy at the bbc to kill this story, which I'm not disputing is yet another damning story in a very long list, can you clarify exactly what his role was? I assume it was major as he's the only one you name while protecting the rest of the heavy team.
|
|
|
| |
|
tomtheleedstim
|
9 Nov 2017, 01:30 PM
Post #305
|
- Posts:
- 2,428
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #27,080
- Joined:
- 14 October 2010
|
Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain Following Following @Pmacgiollabhain More I'm hearing that an intrepid investigative reporter was doorstepped at 06.00 am this morning.
|
|
|
| |
|
corsica1968
|
9 Nov 2017, 01:42 PM
Post #306
|
- Posts:
- 415
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #32,465
- Joined:
- 26 April 2013
- Favourite all-time player
- Lennox
|
- PeterthePainter
- 9 Nov 2017, 11:15 AM
- corsica1968
- 9 Nov 2017, 10:06 AM
- Johnnyd60
- 8 Nov 2017, 08:58 PM
The BBC simply reported (1) that the charity was under investigation by OSCR and (2) the outcome of that investigation. They did not investigate or report on the detailed facts of what actually happened - investigative journalism if you like. As I have stated, they are in possession of full details including stuff that I cannot put in the public domain without endangering sources and they could/should have exposed it a lot wider than my blog. In that way, the true culprits would have been identified and inevitably punished accordingly. Instead, they merely regurgitated the press releases put out by OSCR thereby failing in their public duty and allowing OSCR to whitewash the situation- no different to Jackson, Williams, etc. All of the details are still available on my blog which I continue to stand by and which has actually been verified by OSCR’s own investigation and flawed/heavily-edited report. That, I think, establishes my credentials. If you don’t want to believe me that’s your look-out, but, given that you evidently know sweet fa about the situation other than what I have posted, I would say you are the one who is doing the shampoo smearing. End of discussion.
Thats you telt. Dont you dare have an opinion Telling someone they are talking shampoo without being in full awareness of the facts is not offering or having an opinion; it is doing exactly the thing that they are accusing that person of.
By all means, have an opinion. By all means, don't believe me. By all means, post evidence to the contrary. But don't be a hypocrite.
In my mind, if you do not post evidence to the contrary, you are no different to a truth-denying sevconian or trumpista.
|
|
|
| |
|
Smiley
|
9 Nov 2017, 01:43 PM
Post #307
|
Off treasure hunting in Holland
- Posts:
- 14,803
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #33,119
- Joined:
- 9 December 2013
|
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:30 PM
Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain Following Following @Pmacgiollabhain More I'm hearing that an intrepid investigative reporter was doorstepped at 06.00 am this morning. By who? Is there any need for him to be so vague?
|
|
|
| |
|
fatboab
|
9 Nov 2017, 01:45 PM
Post #308
|
Just before the Dawn
- Posts:
- 56,818
- Group:
- Admin
- Member
- #23
- Joined:
- 31 August 2004
|
- Smiley
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:43 PM
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:30 PM
Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain Following Following @Pmacgiollabhain More I'm hearing that an intrepid investigative reporter was doorstepped at 06.00 am this morning.
By who? Is there any need for him to be so vague? sounds like it was his milkman.
|
|
|
| |
|
Fly Pelican
|
9 Nov 2017, 01:47 PM
Post #309
|
- Posts:
- 17,825
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #19,705
- Joined:
- 30 May 2008
- Favourite all-time player
- Sony Walkman
|
- Smiley
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:43 PM
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:30 PM
Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain Following Following @Pmacgiollabhain More I'm hearing that an intrepid investigative reporter was doorstepped at 06.00 am this morning.
By who? Is there any need for him to be so vague? Shane Ritchie. I thought that was obvious.
|
|
|
| |
|
tomtheleedstim
|
9 Nov 2017, 01:51 PM
Post #310
|
- Posts:
- 2,428
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #27,080
- Joined:
- 14 October 2010
|
- Smiley
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:43 PM
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:30 PM
Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain Following Following @Pmacgiollabhain More I'm hearing that an intrepid investigative reporter was doorstepped at 06.00 am this morning.
By who? Is there any need for him to be so vague? I'd imagine it's so people visit his website when he inevitably expands on the tweet. If he don't get the hits, he don't get the bucks.
|
|
|
| |
|
corsica1968
|
9 Nov 2017, 01:54 PM
Post #311
|
- Posts:
- 415
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #32,465
- Joined:
- 26 April 2013
- Favourite all-time player
- Lennox
|
- Peco
- 9 Nov 2017, 11:35 AM
- corsica1968
- 9 Nov 2017, 10:06 AM
- Johnnyd60
- 8 Nov 2017, 08:58 PM
The BBC simply reported (1) that the charity was under investigation by OSCR and (2) the outcome of that investigation. They did not investigate or report on the detailed facts of what actually happened - investigative journalism if you like. As I have stated, they are in possession of full details including stuff that I cannot put in the public domain without endangering sources and they could/should have exposed it a lot wider than my blog. In that way, the true culprits would have been identified and inevitably punished accordingly. Instead, they merely regurgitated the press releases put out by OSCR thereby failing in their public duty and allowing OSCR to whitewash the situation- no different to Jackson, Williams, etc. All of the details are still available on my blog which I continue to stand by and which has actually been verified by OSCR’s own investigation and flawed/heavily-edited report. That, I think, establishes my credentials. If you don’t want to believe me that’s your look-out, but, given that you evidently know sweet fa about the situation other than what I have posted, I would say you are the one who is doing the shampoo smearing. End of discussion.
Can you post a link to your blog? I, for one, would be interested in reading it. As you say, all the BBC did was report out the OSCR press releases. alzipratu.wordpress.com
|
|
|
| |
|
Dubz
|
9 Nov 2017, 01:56 PM
Post #312
|
- Posts:
- 4,757
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #27,189
- Joined:
- 7 November 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Daniel Fergus McGrain
|
- fatboab
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:45 PM
- Smiley
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:43 PM
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:30 PM
Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain Following Following @Pmacgiollabhain More I'm hearing that an intrepid investigative reporter was doorstepped at 06.00 am this morning.
By who? Is there any need for him to be so vague?
sounds like it was his milkman. The Daly Postie with a wee 'sign for' lawyers letter.
|
|
|
| |
|
Asgardstreasure
|
9 Nov 2017, 02:00 PM
Post #313
|
Retired and now a BT Sports pundit
- Posts:
- 9,534
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #27,238
- Joined:
- 13 November 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Billy McNeil
|
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:51 PM
- Smiley
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:43 PM
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:30 PM
Phil MacGiollaBhainþ @Pmacgiollabhain Following Following @Pmacgiollabhain More I'm hearing that an intrepid investigative reporter was doorstepped at 06.00 am this morning.
By who? Is there any need for him to be so vague?
I'd imagine it's so people visit his website when he inevitably expands on the tweet. If he don't get the hits, he don't get the bucks. That's true of every blog and indeed could describe the predicament of every commercial enterprise neatly summed up in the words 'bums on seats'.
|
|
|
| |
|
Smiley
|
9 Nov 2017, 02:00 PM
Post #314
|
Off treasure hunting in Holland
- Posts:
- 14,803
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #33,119
- Joined:
- 9 December 2013
|
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:51 PM
- Smiley
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:43 PM
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:30 PM
Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain Following Following @Pmacgiollabhain More I'm hearing that an intrepid investigative reporter was doorstepped at 06.00 am this morning.
By who? Is there any need for him to be so vague?
I'd imagine it's so people visit his website when he inevitably expands on the tweet. If he don't get the hits, he don't get the bucks. I'll gladly put money towards a patreon or something if he'd stop writing like that, it's very annoying.
|
|
|
| |
|
tomtheleedstim
|
9 Nov 2017, 02:08 PM
Post #315
|
- Posts:
- 2,428
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #27,080
- Joined:
- 14 October 2010
|
- Asgardstreasure
- 9 Nov 2017, 02:00 PM
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:51 PM
- Smiley
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:43 PM
Quoting limited to 3 levels deep
I'd imagine it's so people visit his website when he inevitably expands on the tweet. If he don't get the hits, he don't get the bucks.
That's true of every blog and indeed could describe the predicament of every commercial enterprise neatly summed up in the words 'bums on seats'.
|
|
|
| |
|
Kingslim
|
9 Nov 2017, 02:15 PM
Post #316
|
- Posts:
- 17,986
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #33,465
- Joined:
- 1 May 2014
- Favourite all-time player
- Paul McStay
|
- fatboab
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:45 PM
- Smiley
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:43 PM
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:30 PM
Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain Following Following @Pmacgiollabhain More I'm hearing that an intrepid investigative reporter was doorstepped at 06.00 am this morning.
By who? Is there any need for him to be so vague?
sounds like it was his milkman. Wouldn’t be the postman, they bastards don’t turn up until the afternoon
|
|
|
| |
|
dazabhoy67
|
9 Nov 2017, 02:36 PM
Post #317
|
Off treasure hunting in Holland
- Posts:
- 18,315
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #26,754
- Joined:
- 17 August 2010
- Favourite all-time player
- Henrik Larsson
|
Suttons article in the Record today is bang on.
Digs at Joey Barton and Cascerano
|
|
|
| |
|
prestonpans1745
|
9 Nov 2017, 02:39 PM
Post #318
|
- Posts:
- 4,252
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #3,382
- Joined:
- 17 March 2006
- Favourite all-time player
- Cesar
|
- Smiley
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:43 PM
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:30 PM
Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain Following Following @Pmacgiollabhain More I'm hearing that an intrepid investigative reporter was doorstepped at 06.00 am this morning.
By who? Is there any need for him to be so vague? Pat Mustard.
|
|
|
| |
|
Smiley
|
9 Nov 2017, 02:43 PM
Post #319
|
Off treasure hunting in Holland
- Posts:
- 14,803
- Group:
- Snr. Member
- Member
- #33,119
- Joined:
- 9 December 2013
|
- prestonpans1745
- 9 Nov 2017, 02:39 PM
- Smiley
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:43 PM
- tomtheleedstim
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:30 PM
Phil MacGiollaBhain @Pmacgiollabhain Following Following @Pmacgiollabhain More I'm hearing that an intrepid investigative reporter was doorstepped at 06.00 am this morning.
By who? Is there any need for him to be so vague?
Pat Mustard. I dunno who that is.
|
|
|
| |
|
Johnnyd60
|
9 Nov 2017, 03:20 PM
Post #320
|
Getting noticed in the reserves
- Posts:
- 80
- Group:
- Members
- Member
- #30,259
- Joined:
- 26 January 2012
- Favourite all-time player
- Larsson
|
- corsica1968
- 9 Nov 2017, 01:42 PM
- PeterthePainter
- 9 Nov 2017, 11:15 AM
- corsica1968
- 9 Nov 2017, 10:06 AM
Thats you telt. Dont you dare have an opinion
Telling someone they are talking shampoo without being in full awareness of the facts is not offering or having an opinion; it is doing exactly the thing that they are accusing that person of. By all means, have an opinion. By all means, don't believe me. By all means, post evidence to the contrary. But don't be a hypocrite. In my mind, if you do not post evidence to the contrary, you are no different to a truth-denying sevconian or trumpista. I think you're confusing what I'm interested in here. I don't question your diligent and impressive research that's gone into uncovering one piece of the financial shenanigans at ibrox. I'm sure you'll agree Mark Daly also uncovered various (large) pieces too. What I'm interested in is the strong implication in your post that he was somehow instrumental in preventing you getting to do your own documentary which involved intimidating and underhand tactics. Since you name only him in the scenario you've painted - which, by the way, is your word and your word only, ie where's your 'evidence' - he must have had some involvement in the matter. If you cant show me some evidence or at least provide credible details regarding Mark Daly's actions, I can only therefore conclude, you're at it Pal.
|
|
|
| |
| 3 users reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous)
|