Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 11:40am Fri 7 Mar 08
Naturally those who partake in the act of vandalism, or graffitti of this kind are not true supporters of the "Save Pollok Park" Campaign, or they would respect the park,
and not abuse it.
This kind of graffitti is just an unfortunate by - product of such high levels of publicity from the media on the campaign against "Go Ape."
It happened in Partick too - when the Stop Tesco Campaign was at its peak - however - those who carried it out had no relation to the S.T.O.P. campaign, and were clearly unable to utilise the political process - and just taking their frustration out in a less than productive way.
The other side of the coin is the more cynical view which could point the finger ( allegedly) at The "Go Ape" Company itself, what better way to discredit the "Save Pollok Park" group, than to place this kind of graffitti in the park.
Whoever did this - the message could not be made clearer - stop vandalising our beautiful and "Dear Green Space!" and start utilising the political, and more democratic means of stopping this development.
Lets hopefully see a lid put on this kind of behaviour. Having met most if not all of the Campaigners --- I find it hard to believe any of them would stoop that low.
I also support the words of Bill Fraser in saying:
[quote]"It's ridiculous. We have already written to the council completely disassociating ourselves from this. It's not part of our campaign. We love Pollok Park too much to condone any vandalism.
"If any of our supporters are involved in this we completely disown them.
"We are urging whoever is doing it to stop."[/quote]
Having participated in the successful demonstration and attendance of the Planning departments hearing on Tuesday morning, we are clearly winning this fight - gradually!
The political process may be far from perfect, but it is all we have - so frustrated or not we need to use our rights - not abuse them.
Naturally those who partake in the act of vandalism, or graffitti of this kind are not true supporters of the "Save Pollok Park" Campaign, or they would respect the park,
and not abuse it.
This kind of graffitti is just an unfortunate by - product of such high levels of publicity from the media on the campaign against "Go Ape."
It happened in Partick too - when the Stop Tesco Campaign was at its peak - however - those who carried it out had no relation to the S.T.O.P. campaign, and were clearly unable to utilise the political process - and just taking their frustration out in a less than productive way.
The other side of the coin is the more cynical view which could point the finger ( allegedly) at The "Go Ape" Company itself, what better way to discredit the "Save Pollok Park" group, than to place this kind of graffitti in the park.
Whoever did this - the message could not be made clearer - stop vandalising our beautiful and "Dear Green Space!" and start utilising the political, and more democratic means of stopping this development.
Lets hopefully see a lid put on this kind of behaviour. Having met most if not all of the Campaigners --- I find it hard to believe any of them would stoop that low.
I also support the words of Bill Fraser in saying:
"It's ridiculous. We have already written to the council completely disassociating ourselves from this. It's not part of our campaign. We love Pollok Park too much to condone any vandalism.
"If any of our supporters are involved in this we completely disown them.
"We are urging whoever is doing it to stop."
Having participated in the successful demonstration and attendance of the Planning departments hearing on Tuesday morning, we are clearly winning this fight - gradually!
The political process may be far from perfect, but it is all we have - so frustrated or not we need to use our rights - not abuse them.
Posted by: Pete, Glasgow on 11:42am Fri 7 Mar 08
I've been on these pages before tpo say that i'm not too bothered about the Go Ape plans, but there can't honestly be any suggestion that the Save Pollok Park people can be involved in this in any way. Although I kind of disagreee with them, they're making their feelings known through proper methods of protests and campaigning.
I've been on these pages before tpo say that i'm not too bothered about the Go Ape plans, but there can't honestly be any suggestion that the Save Pollok Park people can be involved in this in any way. Although I kind of disagreee with them, they're making their feelings known through proper methods of protests and campaigning.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 11:47am Fri 7 Mar 08
Maybe this measure is showing the deep resentment against any kind of plan for this park, who's to say it won't be sabotaged in the dead of night if it was to be built?
I don't approve of this in any way, however throughout the land, people resort to such tactics when politics doesn't listen to the people, whereas in other countries, you normally see bloodshed!
Maybe this measure is showing the deep resentment against any kind of plan for this park, who's to say it won't be sabotaged in the dead of night if it was to be built?
I don't approve of this in any way, however throughout the land, people resort to such tactics when politics doesn't listen to the people, whereas in other countries, you normally see bloodshed!
Posted by: Trish, Pollok on 11:54am Fri 7 Mar 08
It would not surprise me one bit if the councillors organised this themselves to bring negative attention to the campaigners. This would certainly not be a new way of using propoganda to win over the 'swayers'.
It would not surprise me one bit if the councillors organised this themselves to bring negative attention to the campaigners. This would certainly not be a new way of using propoganda to win over the 'swayers'.
Posted by: Pete, Glasgow on 12:08pm Fri 7 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Trish[/bold] wrote:
It would not surprise me one bit if the councillors organised this themselves to bring negative attention to the campaigners. This would certainly not be a new way of using propoganda to win over the 'swayers'.[/quote] Hmm, that's a bit mental isn't it. Probably more likely that some misguided kid thought it was a good idea.
Or maybe it was a double bluff - paint the slogans, claim it was a spoiling tactic by the council and add support to your own cause.
Oh - that would be mental too.
Trish wrote:
It would not surprise me one bit if the councillors organised this themselves to bring negative attention to the campaigners. This would certainly not be a new way of using propoganda to win over the 'swayers'.
Hmm, that's a bit mental isn't it. Probably more likely that some misguided kid thought it was a good idea.
Or maybe it was a double bluff - paint the slogans, claim it was a spoiling tactic by the council and add support to your own cause.
Oh - that would be mental too.
Posted by: Sydney Meriwether, Glasgow on 12:15pm Fri 7 Mar 08
The only certainty in this sorry episode is that [bold][italic]Councillor Simpson has completely lost the plot[/italic][/bold]: not only have we had to endure her hysterical performance at the first SPP meeting (immortalised in YouTube), but now we see that same hysterical attitude unleashed again by associating silly, groundless accusations with the good people of Glasgow, who have had the decency to stand up for what they believe in (something Mr Mayhew applauded after Thorndon Country Park rejected similar Go Ape plans).
My I remind the good councillor that graffiti is endemic in this city, as the sorry example of recent [bold]racist graffiti on the City Chambers[/bold], and the even more recent [bold]gang graffiti on The Cenotaph[/bold] show.
Maybe if the £4M+ 'Clean' Glasgow debacle had been properly managed, then the people of this city would not have to put up with graffiti in Pollok Country Park and everywhere else in this city!
The only certainty in this sorry episode is that
Councillor Simpson has completely lost the plot: not only have we had to endure her hysterical performance at the first SPP meeting (immortalised in YouTube), but now we see that same hysterical attitude unleashed again by associating silly, groundless accusations with the good people of Glasgow, who have had the decency to stand up for what they believe in (something Mr Mayhew applauded after Thorndon Country Park rejected similar Go Ape plans).
My I remind the good councillor that graffiti is endemic in this city, as the sorry example of recent
racist graffiti on the City Chambers, and the even more recent
gang graffiti on The Cenotaph show.
Maybe if the £4M+ 'Clean' Glasgow debacle had been properly managed, then the people of this city would not have to put up with graffiti in Pollok Country Park and everywhere else in this city!
Posted by: gavin48, Glasgow on 12:32pm Fri 7 Mar 08
Its good to note that folk on both sides of this issue condemn this act of mindless vandalism.
Leave the park alone it does not need this sort of behavior.
Its good to note that folk on both sides of this issue condemn this act of mindless vandalism.
Leave the park alone it does not need this sort of behavior.
Posted by: I hear your pain, me,me,me on 12:39pm Fri 7 Mar 08
Looks like we are going to get shafted by the G.C.C as usual , well thats what they think..I dont condone the idiots with the stencil but that is just the tip of a bloody big ice-berg if they think that this is going ahead..
Council officials were repeatedly accused by [bold]park-goers of failing to advertise its plan to site an aerial assault course in the North Wood, next to the Burrell Collection, costing £20-25 to take part.
The council has been derided over its public consultation in October, where a majority of respondents were in favour of the Go Ape proposal, half of whom were pupils from a local secondary school.
But when asked by Nicola Sturgeon if they would pause and reopen public consultation in the light of the "unprecedented" turnout, council chiefs stood firm.
Turning to face the audience, Councillor Ruth Simpson, executive member for land and environment, shouted into her microphone: "We have made a full consultation, and you did not respond."
Robert Booth, director of land services, was bullish in his defence of the council's right to grant planning permission, with or without the consent of the Maxwell family or the National Trust for Scotland, who oversee the estate under the terms of the gift to the citizens of Glasgow.
"They have no right of veto. That is our legal opinion," said Mr Booth. "I am stunned by the attitude of the National Trust."
Mr Booth later indicated that he would "welcome" further discussion with the trust, before the application goes before the council's planning committee.
But when asked again by Ms Sturgeon whether the council would also reopen public consultation, both he, local councillors Stephen Curran and Colin Deans declined to answer.
It is understood that the majority of councillors are in favour of the Go Ape proposal, which the council feels will enhance the range of facilities in the park and provide opportunities for teenagers to take part in physical activity.
[italic]The founder of Go Ape, Tristram Mayhew, explained to the audience that it was the council that had originally approached the company with the idea, citing Pollok Park as its preferred location[/italic]
The leisure firm was also taken by the council to see Dawsholm Park, but felt that a lack of toilet facilities and car parking made it unsuitable for their business model. Mr Mayhew insisted that walkers would not be fenced out of the North Wood, and the only noise that would be heard from the trees above was "the laughter of children and families".
But in his presentation, Bob Marshall, of Save Pollok Park campaign group, showed that the woodland would be dominated by the noise of children on zip slides, one of which would pass directly across "the glade" - a popular picnic area.
He said: "We are not against Go Ape being in Glasgow. But we are passionate about Pollok Park. The park has seen development after development and the North Wood is the last substantial area of quiet woodland we have left. In the light of what we have seen tonight at this meeting, we urge the council to look at other locations and hold a proper assessment."
The meeting concluded with a show of hands, where only seven of the 550 people in the room were in favour of Go Ape's proposal.
But even after the vote, Mr Booth said he remained confident that the course would be proven to be popular.
"We have seen opposition to many developments in the park, such as the mountain bike track, the play area and the Burrell Collection.
"But in the cold light of day, people will see that this proposal, if passed by the planning committee, will enhance Pollok Park."
Looks like we are going to get shafted by the G.C.C as usual , well thats what they think..I dont condone the idiots with the stencil but that is just the tip of a bloody big ice-berg if they think that this is going ahead..
Council officials were repeatedly accused by park-goers of failing to advertise its plan to site an aerial assault course in the North Wood, next to the Burrell Collection, costing £20-25 to take part.
The council has been derided over its public consultation in October, where a majority of respondents were in favour of the Go Ape proposal, half of whom were pupils from a local secondary school.
But when asked by Nicola Sturgeon if they would pause and reopen public consultation in the light of the "unprecedented" turnout, council chiefs stood firm.
Turning to face the audience, Councillor Ruth Simpson, executive member for land and environment, shouted into her microphone: "We have made a full consultation, and you did not respond."
Robert Booth, director of land services, was bullish in his defence of the council's right to grant planning permission, with or without the consent of the Maxwell family or the National Trust for Scotland, who oversee the estate under the terms of the gift to the citizens of Glasgow.
"They have no right of veto. That is our legal opinion," said Mr Booth. "I am stunned by the attitude of the National Trust."
Mr Booth later indicated that he would "welcome" further discussion with the trust, before the application goes before the council's planning committee.
But when asked again by Ms Sturgeon whether the council would also reopen public consultation, both he, local councillors Stephen Curran and Colin Deans declined to answer.
It is understood that the majority of councillors are in favour of the Go Ape proposal, which the council feels will enhance the range of facilities in the park and provide opportunities for teenagers to take part in physical activity.
The founder of Go Ape, Tristram Mayhew, explained to the audience that it was the council that had originally approached the company with the idea, citing Pollok Park as its preferred location
The leisure firm was also taken by the council to see Dawsholm Park, but felt that a lack of toilet facilities and car parking made it unsuitable for their business model. Mr Mayhew insisted that walkers would not be fenced out of the North Wood, and the only noise that would be heard from the trees above was "the laughter of children and families".
But in his presentation, Bob Marshall, of Save Pollok Park campaign group, showed that the woodland would be dominated by the noise of children on zip slides, one of which would pass directly across "the glade" - a popular picnic area.
He said: "We are not against Go Ape being in Glasgow. But we are passionate about Pollok Park. The park has seen development after development and the North Wood is the last substantial area of quiet woodland we have left. In the light of what we have seen tonight at this meeting, we urge the council to look at other locations and hold a proper assessment."
The meeting concluded with a show of hands, where only seven of the 550 people in the room were in favour of Go Ape's proposal.
But even after the vote, Mr Booth said he remained confident that the course would be proven to be popular.
"We have seen opposition to many developments in the park, such as the mountain bike track, the play area and the Burrell Collection.
"But in the cold light of day, people will see that this proposal, if passed by the planning committee, will enhance Pollok Park."
Posted by: Oor_Wullie, ma_bucket on 2:39pm Fri 7 Mar 08
..ah wis wonderin why a famous Scottish fitba reporter (who shall remain anonymous) wis runnin thro Pollok Park naked the other night, wae a balaclava oer his heid and a can o spray paint in each haund. Wudnae ah recognised him mesel either, until he sterted screamin "Ahm Chick Young, an ahm no goin APE!" at the top o his voice..
..ah wis wonderin why a famous Scottish fitba reporter (who shall remain anonymous) wis runnin thro Pollok Park naked the other night, wae a balaclava oer his heid and a can o spray paint in each haund. Wudnae ah recognised him mesel either, until he sterted screamin "Ahm Chick Young, an ahm no goin APE!" at the top o his voice..
Posted by: HOLY WILLIE, GLASGOW on 3:28pm Fri 7 Mar 08
It seems some people are going ape because our servicemen have the audacity to wear their uniforms in public,quite right too as the RAF/ARMY lads should be conforming to present day british tradition and wear a smelly old pair of pyjamas and open sandals to air their unwashed feet
It seems some people are going ape because our servicemen have the audacity to wear their uniforms in public,quite right too as the RAF/ARMY lads should be conforming to present day british tradition and wear a smelly old pair of pyjamas and open sandals to air their unwashed feet
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 4:41pm Fri 7 Mar 08
[quote][bold]The Missing City[/bold] wrote:
Maybe this measure is showing the deep resentment against any kind of plan for this park, who's to say it won't be sabotaged in the dead of night if it was to be built? I don't approve of this in any way, however throughout the land, people resort to such tactics when politics doesn't listen to the people, whereas in other countries, you normally see bloodshed![/quote]
Just thank yourself that this graffitti is all it comes to when there is any kind of pathetic attempt at an outcry or uprise!
Our level of public apathy is such that only when we had the huge support for the anti-war movement and millions accross the UK demonstrating did we see some kind of mass movement.
This pathetic stunt has had far more publicity, and coverage than it deserves.
Surely by publicising the fact that this graffitti has occurred the person/s has/have
has their result of their irrelevant, illegal, & nonsensical behaviour being seen on a far wider scale.
Coverage of such negative stories does little to the far more positive elements and spirit of in this case the "Save Pollok Park" group - who are standing up for what they believe in.
The Missing City wrote:
Maybe this measure is showing the deep resentment against any kind of plan for this park, who's to say it won't be sabotaged in the dead of night if it was to be built? I don't approve of this in any way, however throughout the land, people resort to such tactics when politics doesn't listen to the people, whereas in other countries, you normally see bloodshed!
Just thank yourself that this graffitti is all it comes to when there is any kind of pathetic attempt at an outcry or uprise!
Our level of public apathy is such that only when we had the huge support for the anti-war movement and millions accross the UK demonstrating did we see some kind of mass movement.
This pathetic stunt has had far more publicity, and coverage than it deserves.
Surely by publicising the fact that this graffitti has occurred the person/s has/have
has their result of their irrelevant, illegal, & nonsensical behaviour being seen on a far wider scale.
Coverage of such negative stories does little to the far more positive elements and spirit of in this case the "Save Pollok Park" group - who are standing up for what they believe in.
Posted by: Whatever, Wherever on 4:43pm Fri 7 Mar 08
[quote][bold]HOLY WILLIE[/bold] wrote:
It seems some people are going ape because our servicemen have the audacity to wear their uniforms in public,quite right too as the RAF/ARMY lads should be conforming to present day british tradition and wear a smelly old pair of pyjamas and open sandals to air their unwashed feet [/quote] What on earth are you talking about?
HOLY WILLIE wrote:
It seems some people are going ape because our servicemen have the audacity to wear their uniforms in public,quite right too as the RAF/ARMY lads should be conforming to present day british tradition and wear a smelly old pair of pyjamas and open sandals to air their unwashed feet
What on earth are you talking about?
Posted by: Frank, Glasgow on 4:45pm Fri 7 Mar 08
This was expected from the lowest common denominators involved in this so called "campaign". The Labour Council offered them a chance to voice their views via a legitimate and open consultation process, but no they decide that vandalism is their only option. Well Labour will stand up to these bullies and push on with the plans for the people of Glasgow.
This was expected from the lowest common denominators involved in this so called "campaign". The Labour Council offered them a chance to voice their views via a legitimate and open consultation process, but no they decide that vandalism is their only option. Well Labour will stand up to these bullies and push on with the plans for the people of Glasgow.
Posted by: HOLY WILLIE, GLASGOW on 5:07pm Fri 7 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Whatever[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]HOLY WILLIE[/bold] wrote: It seems some people are going ape because our servicemen have the audacity to wear their uniforms in public,quite right too as the RAF/ARMY lads should be conforming to present day british tradition and wear a smelly old pair of pyjamas and open sandals to air their unwashed feet [/quote] What on earth are you talking about?[/quote] read the english news
Whatever wrote:
HOLY WILLIE wrote: It seems some people are going ape because our servicemen have the audacity to wear their uniforms in public,quite right too as the RAF/ARMY lads should be conforming to present day british tradition and wear a smelly old pair of pyjamas and open sandals to air their unwashed feet
What on earth are you talking about?
read the english news
Posted by: max, Glasgow on 5:38pm Fri 7 Mar 08
It's unusual to see vandalism that you actually agree with. While it may not be to everybody's taste these tykes are keeping this important story in the news. I'm a keen walker in the Estate and don't think these signs have done any lasting harm ( I certainly didn't see any trees vandalised as reported - what trees?) The good people of Go Ape might do well to take heed of this. If people are prepared to take matters into their own hands at this stage then Go Ape's little development on our land might not fare too well. It's ironic to have a quote from Go Ape's Mr Mayhew complaining about enviromental damage when he's trying to destroy the last piece of wilderness the people of Glasgow have left to them...
It's unusual to see vandalism that you actually agree with. While it may not be to everybody's taste these tykes are keeping this important story in the news. I'm a keen walker in the Estate and don't think these signs have done any lasting harm ( I certainly didn't see any trees vandalised as reported - what trees?) The good people of Go Ape might do well to take heed of this. If people are prepared to take matters into their own hands at this stage then Go Ape's little development on our land might not fare too well. It's ironic to have a quote from Go Ape's Mr Mayhew complaining about enviromental damage when he's trying to destroy the last piece of wilderness the people of Glasgow have left to them...
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 5:43pm Fri 7 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Frank[/bold] wrote:
This was expected from the lowest common denominators involved in this so called "campaign". The Labour Council offered them a chance to voice their views via a legitimate and open consultation process, but no they decide that vandalism is their only option. Well Labour will stand up to these bullies and push on with the plans for the people of Glasgow.[/quote]
Dear Frank,
Cheap gags are easy to make - but not so easy to be specific about, or substanciate.
As has been stated by Bill Fraser - and proven by the means in which the group have acted - appropriately through the correct channels - blaming it on "Save Pollok Park" ( if that is who you are pointing the finger at!) is a feeble attempt to muddy the water.
Your position of New Labour spokesman is clear - maybe Ruth Simpson or Robert Booth will take pity on you, and give you a job as their courier - to run errands for them!
Until such times, perhaps you should freshen up your thoughts in White Cart Water!
Frank wrote:
This was expected from the lowest common denominators involved in this so called "campaign". The Labour Council offered them a chance to voice their views via a legitimate and open consultation process, but no they decide that vandalism is their only option. Well Labour will stand up to these bullies and push on with the plans for the people of Glasgow.
Dear Frank,
Cheap gags are easy to make - but not so easy to be specific about, or substanciate.
As has been stated by Bill Fraser - and proven by the means in which the group have acted - appropriately through the correct channels - blaming it on "Save Pollok Park" ( if that is who you are pointing the finger at!) is a feeble attempt to muddy the water.
Your position of New Labour spokesman is clear - maybe Ruth Simpson or Robert Booth will take pity on you, and give you a job as their courier - to run errands for them!
Until such times, perhaps you should freshen up your thoughts in White Cart Water!
Posted by: Sydney Meriwether, At home on 8:39pm Fri 7 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Frank[/bold] wrote:
This was expected from the lowest common denominators involved in this so called "campaign". The Labour Council offered them a chance to voice their views via a legitimate and open consultation process, but no they decide that vandalism is their only option. Well Labour will stand up to these bullies and push on with the plans for the people of Glasgow.[/quote] You're a bit earlier than usual today Frankie Boy - did you manage to chew through the ropes or something?
BTW 'lowest common denominator' is singular, like "[italic]nutty as a fruitcake[/italic]" ... there's only ever just one [bold]fruitcake[/bold]!
Frank wrote:
This was expected from the lowest common denominators involved in this so called "campaign". The Labour Council offered them a chance to voice their views via a legitimate and open consultation process, but no they decide that vandalism is their only option. Well Labour will stand up to these bullies and push on with the plans for the people of Glasgow.
You're a bit earlier than usual today Frankie Boy - did you manage to chew through the ropes or something?
BTW 'lowest common denominator' is singular, like "
nutty as a fruitcake" ... there's only ever just one
fruitcake!
Posted by: cee, Glasgow on 12:34am Sat 8 Mar 08
A misguided kid? or Go Ape, or even those who hold public office? Get a grip here and take a reality check - someone went to huge lengths to carefully craft this stencil and go around spray painting in the park...have you seen the price of spray paint lately??? it must be someone that REALLY wanted to cause damage and thought it through in a pre-meditated way...the gall of the SPP to say that they do not condone this type of action - sorry Mr Fraser and all you others on here - what a load of t*sh - you guys have whipped up a stooshy in a well funded professional and organised way - you have on your own website carefully scripted misinformation as well as nutters who have a reputation for taking direct action in other parts of the country - i.e. a certain individual who was very pro-active in fife over recent years in somewhat dodgy protest tactics......whether or not you openly and pro-actively supported or encouraged this, you are responsible through your pathetic rants.....you don't actually care about the park, or the people you claim to represent. When was the last time any of you actually did anything to help local communities that have the lowest socia-economic trends in Europe (right on the other side of the park) - you are NIMBYs - even your own utube video shows your supporters breaking a well signed bye-law i.e. keeping dogs on leads - oh, and at the protest two dogs belonging to protesters broke the silence with a dog fight as they were off leads and left to roam about freely unattended....so, before they show false signs of outrage against such acts of criminal damage, they should look at themselves and how their hysteria has whipped up a situation that they can no longer control.....
A misguided kid? or Go Ape, or even those who hold public office? Get a grip here and take a reality check - someone went to huge lengths to carefully craft this stencil and go around spray painting in the park...have you seen the price of spray paint lately??? it must be someone that REALLY wanted to cause damage and thought it through in a pre-meditated way...the gall of the SPP to say that they do not condone this type of action - sorry Mr Fraser and all you others on here - what a load of t*sh - you guys have whipped up a stooshy in a well funded professional and organised way - you have on your own website carefully scripted misinformation as well as nutters who have a reputation for taking direct action in other parts of the country - i.e. a certain individual who was very pro-active in fife over recent years in somewhat dodgy protest tactics......whether or not you openly and pro-actively supported or encouraged this, you are responsible through your pathetic rants.....you don't actually care about the park, or the people you claim to represent. When was the last time any of you actually did anything to help local communities that have the lowest socia-economic trends in Europe (right on the other side of the park) - you are NIMBYs - even your own utube video shows your supporters breaking a well signed bye-law i.e. keeping dogs on leads - oh, and at the protest two dogs belonging to protesters broke the silence with a dog fight as they were off leads and left to roam about freely unattended....so, before they show false signs of outrage against such acts of criminal damage, they should look at themselves and how their hysteria has whipped up a situation that they can no longer control.....
Posted by: Scott, Glasgow on 1:17am Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote]When was the last time any of you actually did anything to help local communities that have the lowest socia-economic trends in Europe[/quote]
Hi there Cee. I'm Scott. I run the Facebook element of the SPP campaign and have not met, been on the phone to or had any communications with the main campaigners of the Save Pollok Park campaign outside of that available to their emailing list and website. We currently have 887 Facebook users who wish to be known as 'against' the Go Ape! development.
As for helping communities with the lowest socia-economic trends in Europe, well, I can't speak for anyone else but I've certainly put in 50+ hours per week dealing with a wide range of individuals and groups from various communities within the local area that fit this category.
[quote]you guys have whipped up a stooshy in a well funded professional and organised way[/quote]
Please remember that everyone involved within the Save Pollok Park campaign volunteers their time and knowledge to the cause. All funding is from donations and covers things like the cost of flyers, hall bookings (with councillors present) and the general rigmorale that maintaining a campaign like this requires. Well funded is not a term I think most people would use.
City councillors, and their support staff, are paid by the public's taxes. They have legal departments, researchers and administrators et al. who assist in working for the public's interests.
SPP do not have this, and yet are doing a sterling effort of maintaining that degree of professionalism that will win this conflict.
To further support that the 'Council' have been very underhand and sloppy towards their work please see the following article from today's The Herald which reports that there is no evidence as to how and why the 'consultation' came to be.
http://www.theherald
.co.uk/news/news/dis
play.var.2103742.0.N
o_council_record_of_
Go_Ape_consultation.
php
Science dictates that reproducible results must be available for a truth to be proven.
Democracy requires the rule of the people to be shown in the actions of their elected.
Morality is defined by acceptable measures taken within a contemporary society to validate hegemonic beliefs.
Glasgow City Council has failed to produce any indicators that they are doing transparent and just work - and are blaming the electorate for it.
To paraphrase you:
[quote]they should look at themselves and how their hysteria has whipped up a situation that they can no longer control.....[/quote]
Quite so.
-Scott
When was the last time any of you actually did anything to help local communities that have the lowest socia-economic trends in Europe
Hi there Cee. I'm Scott. I run the Facebook element of the SPP campaign and have not met, been on the phone to or had any communications with the main campaigners of the Save Pollok Park campaign outside of that available to their emailing list and website. We currently have 887 Facebook users who wish to be known as 'against' the Go Ape! development.
As for helping communities with the lowest socia-economic trends in Europe, well, I can't speak for anyone else but I've certainly put in 50+ hours per week dealing with a wide range of individuals and groups from various communities within the local area that fit this category.
you guys have whipped up a stooshy in a well funded professional and organised way
Please remember that everyone involved within the Save Pollok Park campaign volunteers their time and knowledge to the cause. All funding is from donations and covers things like the cost of flyers, hall bookings (with councillors present) and the general rigmorale that maintaining a campaign like this requires. Well funded is not a term I think most people would use.
City councillors, and their support staff, are paid by the public's taxes. They have legal departments, researchers and administrators et al. who assist in working for the public's interests.
SPP do not have this, and yet are doing a sterling effort of maintaining that degree of professionalism that will win this conflict.
To further support that the 'Council' have been very underhand and sloppy towards their work please see the following article from today's The Herald which reports that there is no evidence as to how and why the 'consultation' came to be.
http://www.theherald
.co.uk/news/news/dis
play.var.2103742.0.N
o_council_record_of_
Go_Ape_consultation.
php
Science dictates that reproducible results must be available for a truth to be proven.
Democracy requires the rule of the people to be shown in the actions of their elected.
Morality is defined by acceptable measures taken within a contemporary society to validate hegemonic beliefs.
Glasgow City Council has failed to produce any indicators that they are doing transparent and just work - and are blaming the electorate for it.
To paraphrase you:
they should look at themselves and how their hysteria has whipped up a situation that they can no longer control.....
Quite so.
-Scott
Posted by: Edward Margerum, Salem, Massachusetts on 7:18am Sat 8 Mar 08
I'm not one to deface things myself, but is popular vandalism any more despicable than "Go Ape's" corporate vandalism. Pollock Park is a lovely public place and it should remain so. If "Go Ape" wants a playground for the elite, let them rehabilitate some brown lands. That would be a civic service.
I'm not one to deface things myself, but is popular vandalism any more despicable than "Go Ape's" corporate vandalism. Pollock Park is a lovely public place and it should remain so. If "Go Ape" wants a playground for the elite, let them rehabilitate some brown lands. That would be a civic service.
Posted by: leesome, Glasgow on 11:09am Sat 8 Mar 08
Who are these mindless selfish morons that think painting slogans without permission could ever further a cause. The SSP were known to promote these vandals & even took part directly. You only have had to see their fly posters and spray paint to realise they are self interested in destruction, not community building. No doubt the vandal(s) will be smoking a cannabis cigarette, staying silent and thinking how much god they done. Find another planet, cause even monkeys can paint...
Who are these mindless selfish morons that think painting slogans without permission could ever further a cause. The SSP were known to promote these vandals & even took part directly. You only have had to see their fly posters and spray paint to realise they are self interested in destruction, not community building. No doubt the vandal(s) will be smoking a cannabis cigarette, staying silent and thinking how much god they done. Find another planet, cause even monkeys can paint...
Posted by: I hear your pain, me,me,me on 11:32am Sat 8 Mar 08
you are responsible through your pathetic rants.....you don't actually care about the park, or the people you claim to represent. When was the last time any of you actually did anything to help local communities that have the lowest socia-economic trends in Europe (right on the other side of the park) - you are NIMBYs
Cee,.how can you jump to conclusions regarding the people protesting about this proposed development..
I am on a low wage,i use the park on a regular basis & i dont want the **** thing built in a park that was gifted to the people of Glasgow..As for helping those with the lowest socia-economic trends in Europe , what the F*** does that have to do with the protest..
They wouldnt have have the lowest whatever if they got off their dole-head butts & got a job..God i hate do-gooder,bleeding heart liberal lefties...
Oh & by the way, i live over 35 miles from the park & use it three times a week so i am hardly a NIMBY
you are responsible through your pathetic rants.....you don't actually care about the park, or the people you claim to represent. When was the last time any of you actually did anything to help local communities that have the lowest socia-economic trends in Europe (right on the other side of the park) - you are NIMBYs
Cee,.how can you jump to conclusions regarding the people protesting about this proposed development..
I am on a low wage,i use the park on a regular basis & i dont want the **** thing built in a park that was gifted to the people of Glasgow..As for helping those with the lowest socia-economic trends in Europe , what the F*** does that have to do with the protest..
They wouldnt have have the lowest whatever if they got off their dole-head butts & got a job..God i hate do-gooder,bleeding heart liberal lefties...
Oh & by the way, i live over 35 miles from the park & use it three times a week so i am hardly a NIMBY
Posted by: cee, Glasgow on 12:45pm Sat 8 Mar 08
Ref Scott, Glasgow....
So, tell me this, why is that you totally ignored the voices and openly shunned us people from Shawlands and other places who genuinely want the facility to go ahead?
[italic][bold]I've certainly put in 50+ hours per week dealing with a wide range of individuals and groups from various communities within the local area that fit this category.[/bold][/italic]
You choose your words carefully - 'dealing' does that include bullyboy tactics and personal remarks about individuals on this and other sites? Oh, and taking direct action or at least encouraging it to the detriment of the environment?
As for the Herald article.......I wasn't aware that the 4th Estate was part of the democratic process....maybe you know something the rest of us don't....
Ref Scott, Glasgow....
So, tell me this, why is that you totally ignored the voices and openly shunned us people from Shawlands and other places who genuinely want the facility to go ahead?
I've certainly put in 50+ hours per week dealing with a wide range of individuals and groups from various communities within the local area that fit this category.
You choose your words carefully - 'dealing' does that include bullyboy tactics and personal remarks about individuals on this and other sites? Oh, and taking direct action or at least encouraging it to the detriment of the environment?
As for the Herald article.......I wasn't aware that the 4th Estate was part of the democratic process....maybe you know something the rest of us don't....
Posted by: cee, Glasgow on 1:35pm Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Oor_Wullie[/bold] wrote:
..ah wis wonderin why a famous Scottish fitba reporter (who shall remain anonymous) wis runnin thro Pollok Park naked the other night, wae a balaclava oer his heid and a can o spray paint in each haund. Wudnae ah recognised him mesel either, until he sterted screamin "Ahm Chick Young, an ahm no goin APE!" at the top o his voice..[/quote] Would that be the same 'fitba reporter'that totally abused his position at the BBC in this campaign - to the extent that in letters to the press he used the BBCs address for publication?...mmmmm
Was his dog on a lead in the park?
Oor_Wullie wrote:
..ah wis wonderin why a famous Scottish fitba reporter (who shall remain anonymous) wis runnin thro Pollok Park naked the other night, wae a balaclava oer his heid and a can o spray paint in each haund. Wudnae ah recognised him mesel either, until he sterted screamin "Ahm Chick Young, an ahm no goin APE!" at the top o his voice..
Would that be the same 'fitba reporter'that totally abused his position at the BBC in this campaign - to the extent that in letters to the press he used the BBCs address for publication?...mmmmm
Was his dog on a lead in the park?
Posted by: Bob Downie, Glasgow on 1:45pm Sat 8 Mar 08
Given that Go Ape have recently employed new PR agents its just as likely that they were responsible for the graffiti, as a form of black propaganda, as any Save Pollok Park supporter.
Frankly no-one knows who did it so an apology is requested from Mr Mayhew.
Given that Go Ape have recently employed new PR agents its just as likely that they were responsible for the graffiti, as a form of black propaganda, as any Save Pollok Park supporter.
Frankly no-one knows who did it so an apology is requested from Mr Mayhew.
Posted by: Sydney Meriwether, Glasgow on 2:58pm Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Bob Downie[/bold] wrote:
Given that Go Ape have recently employed new PR agents its just as
likely that they were responsible for the graffiti, as a form of black
propaganda, as any Save Pollok Park supporter.
Frankly no-one knows who did it so an apology is requested from Mr
Mayhew.[/quote] I thoroughly agree Bob, Mr Mayhew has overstepped the bounds here with his petty accusations, remember he was the one who congratulated the successful Thornwood protesters for doing "[bold]something they believe in[/bold]". [italic]What's changed now???[/italic] Is he getting ever so slightly desperate now?
Now let's deal with the silly, monotonous rant by 'cee'... funny how these 'one-issue' posters abound in discussions about Pollok Park/Go Ape. Could it be anything to do with the fact that Go Ape have a number of PR agencies acting on their behalf, or could it be that GCC are now so worried at losing in this high-profile issue that they've got any and every Labour toady to come and join the ET and spread their propaganda? Either way, I don't care, I just love reading their silly, predictable rants as it is proof-positive that they are running scared... scared enough to fabricate graffiti by protesters? Only time will tell...
Bob Downie wrote:
Given that Go Ape have recently employed new PR agents its just as
likely that they were responsible for the graffiti, as a form of black
propaganda, as any Save Pollok Park supporter.
Frankly no-one knows who did it so an apology is requested from Mr
Mayhew.
I thoroughly agree Bob, Mr Mayhew has overstepped the bounds here with his petty accusations, remember he was the one who congratulated the successful Thornwood protesters for doing "
something they believe in".
What's changed now??? Is he getting ever so slightly desperate now?
Now let's deal with the silly, monotonous rant by 'cee'... funny how these 'one-issue' posters abound in discussions about Pollok Park/Go Ape. Could it be anything to do with the fact that Go Ape have a number of PR agencies acting on their behalf, or could it be that GCC are now so worried at losing in this high-profile issue that they've got any and every Labour toady to come and join the ET and spread their propaganda? Either way, I don't care, I just love reading their silly, predictable rants as it is proof-positive that they are running scared... scared enough to fabricate graffiti by protesters? Only time will tell...
Posted by: Sydney Meriwether, At home on 3:38pm Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote]...congratulated the successful Thornwood protesters...[/quote]
...and they were successful at [bold]Thorndon[/bold] also! ;-)
...congratulated the successful Thornwood protesters...
...and they were successful at
Thorndon also! ;-)
Posted by: I hear your pain, me,me,me on 4:35pm Sat 8 Mar 08
Cee, in a democracy the majority prevails or that is the way it should be & at the meeting the majority voted NO..Now the meeting was open to all so why if there is such a large support for this proposal did you & your "like-minded friends"not make your voices heard..
As for Ref Scott encouraging direct action to the detriment of the environment,when??..
This is our park, the GO-APE trash will not happen matey..Thatcher rocks
Cee, in a democracy the majority prevails or that is the way it should be & at the meeting the majority voted NO..Now the meeting was open to all so why if there is such a large support for this proposal did you & your "like-minded friends"not make your voices heard..
As for Ref Scott encouraging direct action to the detriment of the environment,when??..
This is our park, the GO-APE trash will not happen matey..Thatcher rocks
Posted by: Scott, Glasgow on 4:46pm Sat 8 Mar 08
Cee, I'm not aware of when or how I personalised this debate. However I'll happily put you correct about me on this one occasion. Your post states:
[italic]"why is that you totally ignored the voices and openly shunned us people from Shawlands and other places who genuinely want the facility to go ahead?"[/italic]
Are you suggesting that [bold]I[/bold] have ignored and shunned people? I live in Shawlands myself and have only ever asked for the will of the people to be respected by reopening the consultation process and having it done correctly. I am an active community member, you may have even met me, we may even have shared common goals on other topics.
[italic]"You choose your words carefully - 'dealing' does that include bullyboy tactics and personal remarks about individuals on this and other sites? Oh, and taking direct action or at least encouraging it to the detriment of the environment?"[/italic]
Thank you, I do consider myself as something of a wordsmith. 'Dealing' in this case means that I adhere to Transformational Practise with individuals and groups that ask for the services I supply. Services that are funded and audited by the state, EU and United Nations and follow evaluation strategies such as the LEAP and ABC models to ensure quality and transparency throughout. Dealings that have seen improvements to many aspects of some peoples lives through their own 'Critical thinking', not least proven by the workload I currently manage. Data protection, quiet rightly, stops me from further detailing who these individuals and groups are.
It does [bold]not[/bold] mean bullyboy tactics and personal remarks on this and other sites. If you are looking to find these you have no further to look than your own posts- hence why I am explaining myself to you on this occasion.
Would I encourage Direct Action - certainly! There are occasions when all else fails and there is no other alternative. I'd suggest looking up the Boston Tea Party, the Suffragettes, Trade unions or Rosa Parks for further reading on the subject. You exist [bold]because of[/bold] Direct Action taken by others [italic]on your behalf[/italic] in the past.
However throughout the SPP campaign I have not suggested, hinted towards, encouraged or been made aware of any actions that could be described as Direct Action to, or from, any campaigners. There are plenty of options still available for processing prior to my thinking that Direct Action should be called upon. And any action that I would promote would be passive, non-violent and perfectly legal.
[italic]"maybe you know something the rest of us don't...."[/italic]
I would hope that each of us do, but in the case of this "[italic]4th Estate[/italic]" I imagine that you must have copied and pasted incorrectly. The article I linked to reports that Glasgow City Council have no records of how the Go Ape! at Pollok Park consultation came to be. Add this to the one small poster placed near Pollokshaws West train station to advertise the consultation and that Honey PR, Go Ape!'s PR company at the time, openly asking Go Ape! users from other facilities in the UK to show their support for Go Ape! by emailing and sending letters to Glasgow City Council and you have your 'bullyboy tactics' and personal remarks stated earlier.
Cee if you do feel the obligation to continue to provoke reactions, not least from individuals on these boards, I would suggest that you [bold]back-it-up[/bold] with links, names and places as oppose to the inane squabbling of opinion that you have currently posted.
My advise to you would be to bookmark this page and come back to it in 5 or 10 years time. Read your posts then. Are you proud of them? Would you consider this argument of yours reasonable and requiring someone to counter it?
Or would the you of then agree with the me of now and consider them childish and irreverent of the campaigners plight?
I'm happy you take an interest in your local area and the communities within it. And given time hope that you will be someone who will win their battles when required whilst encouraging others to do so through your exemplary practise.
Join me in asking that Glasgow City Council reopens the consultation process and adheres to transparent and open best practise with it's electorate.
If the process reopens and Go Ape! are granted the North woods through an honest and democratic process then I'll be happy.
It's that lack of honesty and democracy that finds me replying to you here - something that I'm taking as now indicative of Glasgow City Council behaves and something I'll be looking into after SPP has won this battle.
-Scott
Cee, I'm not aware of when or how I personalised this debate. However I'll happily put you correct about me on this one occasion. Your post states:
"why is that you totally ignored the voices and openly shunned us people from Shawlands and other places who genuinely want the facility to go ahead?"
Are you suggesting that
I have ignored and shunned people? I live in Shawlands myself and have only ever asked for the will of the people to be respected by reopening the consultation process and having it done correctly. I am an active community member, you may have even met me, we may even have shared common goals on other topics.
"You choose your words carefully - 'dealing' does that include bullyboy tactics and personal remarks about individuals on this and other sites? Oh, and taking direct action or at least encouraging it to the detriment of the environment?"
Thank you, I do consider myself as something of a wordsmith. 'Dealing' in this case means that I adhere to Transformational Practise with individuals and groups that ask for the services I supply. Services that are funded and audited by the state, EU and United Nations and follow evaluation strategies such as the LEAP and ABC models to ensure quality and transparency throughout. Dealings that have seen improvements to many aspects of some peoples lives through their own 'Critical thinking', not least proven by the workload I currently manage. Data protection, quiet rightly, stops me from further detailing who these individuals and groups are.
It does
not mean bullyboy tactics and personal remarks on this and other sites. If you are looking to find these you have no further to look than your own posts- hence why I am explaining myself to you on this occasion.
Would I encourage Direct Action - certainly! There are occasions when all else fails and there is no other alternative. I'd suggest looking up the Boston Tea Party, the Suffragettes, Trade unions or Rosa Parks for further reading on the subject. You exist
because of Direct Action taken by others
on your behalf in the past.
However throughout the SPP campaign I have not suggested, hinted towards, encouraged or been made aware of any actions that could be described as Direct Action to, or from, any campaigners. There are plenty of options still available for processing prior to my thinking that Direct Action should be called upon. And any action that I would promote would be passive, non-violent and perfectly legal.
"maybe you know something the rest of us don't...."
I would hope that each of us do, but in the case of this "
4th Estate" I imagine that you must have copied and pasted incorrectly. The article I linked to reports that Glasgow City Council have no records of how the Go Ape! at Pollok Park consultation came to be. Add this to the one small poster placed near Pollokshaws West train station to advertise the consultation and that Honey PR, Go Ape!'s PR company at the time, openly asking Go Ape! users from other facilities in the UK to show their support for Go Ape! by emailing and sending letters to Glasgow City Council and you have your 'bullyboy tactics' and personal remarks stated earlier.
Cee if you do feel the obligation to continue to provoke reactions, not least from individuals on these boards, I would suggest that you
back-it-up with links, names and places as oppose to the inane squabbling of opinion that you have currently posted.
My advise to you would be to bookmark this page and come back to it in 5 or 10 years time. Read your posts then. Are you proud of them? Would you consider this argument of yours reasonable and requiring someone to counter it?
Or would the you of then agree with the me of now and consider them childish and irreverent of the campaigners plight?
I'm happy you take an interest in your local area and the communities within it. And given time hope that you will be someone who will win their battles when required whilst encouraging others to do so through your exemplary practise.
Join me in asking that Glasgow City Council reopens the consultation process and adheres to transparent and open best practise with it's electorate.
If the process reopens and Go Ape! are granted the North woods through an honest and democratic process then I'll be happy.
It's that lack of honesty and democracy that finds me replying to you here - something that I'm taking as now indicative of Glasgow City Council behaves and something I'll be looking into after SPP has won this battle.
-Scott
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 6:44pm Sat 8 Mar 08
Scott,
I fully support yourself and Bob Downie's stances - in that nobody has the right here to point or wave the finger disaprovingly unless they have evidence to prove either way who carried out this act of vandalism!
Lets not see this act of vandalism take over the real issue here - as seems to be happening.
Despite its taking place, and despite the facts revealed today that G.C.C.
See: http://www.theherald
.co.uk/news/news/dis
play.var.2103742.0.N
o_council_record_of_
Go_Ape_consultation.
php
Scott,
I fully support yourself and Bob Downie's stances - in that nobody has the right here to point or wave the finger disaprovingly unless they have evidence to prove either way who carried out this act of vandalism!
Lets not see this act of vandalism take over the real issue here - as seems to be happening.
Despite its taking place, and despite the facts revealed today that G.C.C.
See: http://www.theherald
.co.uk/news/news/dis
play.var.2103742.0.N
o_council_record_of_
Go_Ape_consultation.
php
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 7:01pm Sat 8 Mar 08
OOPS - IGNORE PREVIOUS POST - TAKE 2!
Scott,
I fully support yourself and Bob Downie's stances - in that nobody has the right here to point or wave the finger disaprovingly either way, unless they have evidence to prove who carried out this act of vandalism!
However, lets not see this cloud over the real issue here - as seems to be happening.
Whoever did this clearly knew that it could be a smokescreen, and hide the real issues from the public - this cannot be allowed to happen!
Despite the recent illegal graffiti, the facts revealed today (Saturday) gives a far more revealing picture of how G.C.C. operate:
[italic]"The public were invited to respond through an open-ended pro forma questionnaire on the council's website. But only 237 people did so, half of whom were schoolchildren who were given forms as part of an exercise. In all, 199 were in favour and 38 against - a majority which allowed the council to go to the planning stage"[/italic]
As well as the fact that [italic]"The campaigners also used the FOI legislation to request copies of the council's correspondence and minuted meetings with Go Ape since January 2007, but were told this would require a fee of £129.49."[/italic]
See full article: [bold]http://www.theherald
.co.uk/news/news/dis
play.var.2103742.0.N
o_council_record_of_
Go_Ape_consultation.
php[/bold]
So, perhaps people like Frank should see the way our Planning Dept & city council operate is in the most devious, avoidant and secretive way - with far less transparency & openness.
It is for that reason (among so many others) we have seen more New Labour council seats lost - and why our "no hopers" (New Labour) can expect to lose more with such behaviour.
"Save Pollok Park" - like "Save Our Botanics" ; "Save Govanhill Baths" and other groups are all fighting the same rigid planning legislation and farcical F.O.I. system.
But people are seeing straight through the lies, devious ways, spin, rhetoric and to be quite honest verbal diarhoea which some councillors have had a bout of.
Lets keep our focus on what matters here, and stop this distraction - bickering over "whodunnit!"
OOPS - IGNORE PREVIOUS POST - TAKE 2!
Scott,
I fully support yourself and Bob Downie's stances - in that nobody has the right here to point or wave the finger disaprovingly either way, unless they have evidence to prove who carried out this act of vandalism!
However, lets not see this cloud over the real issue here - as seems to be happening.
Whoever did this clearly knew that it could be a smokescreen, and hide the real issues from the public - this cannot be allowed to happen!
Despite the recent illegal graffiti, the facts revealed today (Saturday) gives a far more revealing picture of how G.C.C. operate:
"The public were invited to respond through an open-ended pro forma questionnaire on the council's website. But only 237 people did so, half of whom were schoolchildren who were given forms as part of an exercise. In all, 199 were in favour and 38 against - a majority which allowed the council to go to the planning stage"
As well as the fact that
"The campaigners also used the FOI legislation to request copies of the council's correspondence and minuted meetings with Go Ape since January 2007, but were told this would require a fee of £129.49."
See full article:
http://www.theherald
.co.uk/news/news/dis
play.var.2103742.0.N
o_council_record_of_
Go_Ape_consultation.
php
So, perhaps people like Frank should see the way our Planning Dept & city council operate is in the most devious, avoidant and secretive way - with far less transparency & openness.
It is for that reason (among so many others) we have seen more New Labour council seats lost - and why our "no hopers" (New Labour) can expect to lose more with such behaviour.
"Save Pollok Park" - like "Save Our Botanics" ; "Save Govanhill Baths" and other groups are all fighting the same rigid planning legislation and farcical F.O.I. system.
But people are seeing straight through the lies, devious ways, spin, rhetoric and to be quite honest verbal diarhoea which some councillors have had a bout of.
Lets keep our focus on what matters here, and stop this distraction - bickering over "whodunnit!"
Posted by: Frank, Glasgow on 8:24pm Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote][bold]People Power[/bold] wrote:
OOPS - IGNORE PREVIOUS POST - TAKE 2!
Scott,
I fully support yourself and Bob Downie's stances - in that nobody has the right here to point or wave the finger disaprovingly either way, unless they have evidence to prove who carried out this act of vandalism!
However, lets not see this cloud over the real issue here - as seems to be happening.
Whoever did this clearly knew that it could be a smokescreen, and hide the real issues from the public - this cannot be allowed to happen!
Despite the recent illegal graffiti, the facts revealed today (Saturday) gives a far more revealing picture of how G.C.C. operate:
[italic]"The public were invited to respond through an open-ended pro forma questionnaire on the council's website. But only 237 people did so, half of whom were schoolchildren who were given forms as part of an exercise. In all, 199 were in favour and 38 against - a majority which allowed the council to go to the planning stage"[/italic]
As well as the fact that [italic]"The campaigners also used the FOI legislation to request copies of the council's correspondence and minuted meetings with Go Ape since January 2007, but were told this would require a fee of £129.49."[/italic]
See full article: [bold]http://www.theherald
.co.uk/news/news/dis
play.var.2103742.0.N
o_council_record_of_
Go_Ape_consultation.
php[/bold]
So, perhaps people like Frank should see the way our Planning Dept & city council operate is in the most devious, avoidant and secretive way - with far less transparency & openness.
It is for that reason (among so many others) we have seen more New Labour council seats lost - and why our "no hopers" (New Labour) can expect to lose more with such behaviour.
"Save Pollok Park" - like "Save Our Botanics" ; "Save Govanhill Baths" and other groups are all fighting the same rigid planning legislation and farcical F.O.I. system.
But people are seeing straight through the lies, devious ways, spin, rhetoric and to be quite honest verbal diarhoea which some councillors have had a bout of.
Lets keep our focus on what matters here, and stop this distraction - bickering over "whodunnit!"
[/quote] Labour delivers for the people of Glasgow that is your problem. You don't like progress for the real people of Glasgow who Labour make a point of caring for.
People Power wrote:
OOPS - IGNORE PREVIOUS POST - TAKE 2!
Scott,
I fully support yourself and Bob Downie's stances - in that nobody has the right here to point or wave the finger disaprovingly either way, unless they have evidence to prove who carried out this act of vandalism!
However, lets not see this cloud over the real issue here - as seems to be happening.
Whoever did this clearly knew that it could be a smokescreen, and hide the real issues from the public - this cannot be allowed to happen!
Despite the recent illegal graffiti, the facts revealed today (Saturday) gives a far more revealing picture of how G.C.C. operate:
"The public were invited to respond through an open-ended pro forma questionnaire on the council's website. But only 237 people did so, half of whom were schoolchildren who were given forms as part of an exercise. In all, 199 were in favour and 38 against - a majority which allowed the council to go to the planning stage"
As well as the fact that "The campaigners also used the FOI legislation to request copies of the council's correspondence and minuted meetings with Go Ape since January 2007, but were told this would require a fee of £129.49."
See full article: http://www.theherald
.co.uk/news/news/dis
play.var.2103742.0.N
o_council_record_of_
Go_Ape_consultation.
php
So, perhaps people like Frank should see the way our Planning Dept & city council operate is in the most devious, avoidant and secretive way - with far less transparency & openness.
It is for that reason (among so many others) we have seen more New Labour council seats lost - and why our "no hopers" (New Labour) can expect to lose more with such behaviour.
"Save Pollok Park" - like "Save Our Botanics" ; "Save Govanhill Baths" and other groups are all fighting the same rigid planning legislation and farcical F.O.I. system.
But people are seeing straight through the lies, devious ways, spin, rhetoric and to be quite honest verbal diarhoea which some councillors have had a bout of.
Lets keep our focus on what matters here, and stop this distraction - bickering over "whodunnit!"
Labour delivers for the people of Glasgow that is your problem. You don't like progress for the real people of Glasgow who Labour make a point of caring for.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 9:31pm Sat 8 Mar 08
Thanks Frank - LOL - Thats the funniest thing I've heard in ages! Sure you're not an act in the comedy festival as that joke would go down a storm!
The Labour party dont know their ar*se from their elbow nor their left hand from their right!
Their right wing, capitalistic dictatorship has done little for the low and average waged people in society, and everything for the more wealthy, the entrepreneurs and tycoons of this world!
Yet - the idea of taxing the rich and wealthy more never seems to cross their right winged minds.
Capitalism needs a far better balance with socialism; we need to see an economic system based on social need and environmental protection rather than private profit and ecological destruction.
Something which New Labour will never achieve.
Selling off our "Dear Green Spaces" innevitably comes at a price - that will be the future of New Labour keeping any remaining credibility or seats in the next G.C.C. election.
Thanks Frank - LOL - Thats the funniest thing I've heard in ages! Sure you're not an act in the comedy festival as that joke would go down a storm!
The Labour party dont know their ar*se from their elbow nor their left hand from their right!
Their right wing, capitalistic dictatorship has done little for the low and average waged people in society, and everything for the more wealthy, the entrepreneurs and tycoons of this world!
Yet - the idea of taxing the rich and wealthy more never seems to cross their right winged minds.
Capitalism needs a far better balance with socialism; we need to see an economic system based on social need and environmental protection rather than private profit and ecological destruction.
Something which New Labour will never achieve.
Selling off our "Dear Green Spaces" innevitably comes at a price - that will be the future of New Labour keeping any remaining credibility or seats in the next G.C.C. election.
Posted by: Frank, Glasgow on 11:14pm Sat 8 Mar 08
[quote][bold]People Power[/bold] wrote:
Thanks Frank - LOL - Thats the funniest thing I've heard in ages! Sure you're not an act in the comedy festival as that joke would go down a storm!
The Labour party dont know their ar*se from their elbow nor their left hand from their right!
Their right wing, capitalistic dictatorship has done little for the low and average waged people in society, and everything for the more wealthy, the entrepreneurs and tycoons of this world!
Yet - the idea of taxing the rich and wealthy more never seems to cross their right winged minds.
Capitalism needs a far better balance with socialism; we need to see an economic system based on social need and environmental protection rather than private profit and ecological destruction.
Something which New Labour will never achieve.
Selling off our "Dear Green Spaces" innevitably comes at a price - that will be the future of New Labour keeping any remaining credibility or seats in the next G.C.C. election.
[/quote] Labour will always run Glasgow. The people vote on their record of achievement and progress.
People Power wrote:
Thanks Frank - LOL - Thats the funniest thing I've heard in ages! Sure you're not an act in the comedy festival as that joke would go down a storm!
The Labour party dont know their ar*se from their elbow nor their left hand from their right!
Their right wing, capitalistic dictatorship has done little for the low and average waged people in society, and everything for the more wealthy, the entrepreneurs and tycoons of this world!
Yet - the idea of taxing the rich and wealthy more never seems to cross their right winged minds.
Capitalism needs a far better balance with socialism; we need to see an economic system based on social need and environmental protection rather than private profit and ecological destruction.
Something which New Labour will never achieve.
Selling off our "Dear Green Spaces" innevitably comes at a price - that will be the future of New Labour keeping any remaining credibility or seats in the next G.C.C. election.
Labour will always run Glasgow. The people vote on their record of achievement and progress.
Posted by: People Power on 12:29am Sun 9 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Frank[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]People Power[/bold] wrote: Thanks Frank - LOL - Thats the funniest thing I've heard in ages! Sure you're not an act in the comedy festival as that joke would go down a storm! The Labour party dont know their ar*se from their elbow nor their left hand from their right! Their right wing, capitalistic dictatorship has done little for the low and average waged people in society, and everything for the more wealthy, the entrepreneurs and tycoons of this world! Yet - the idea of taxing the rich and wealthy more never seems to cross their right winged minds. Capitalism needs a far better balance with socialism; we need to see an economic system based on social need and environmental protection rather than private profit and ecological destruction. Something which New Labour will never achieve. Selling off our "Dear Green Spaces" innevitably comes at a price - that will be the future of New Labour keeping any remaining credibility or seats in the next G.C.C. election. [/quote] Labour will always run Glasgow. The people vote on their record of achievement and progress.[/quote]
Aye, into a black hole in the ground!
As for "Achievement & Progress" - try "Failures" and "Lies"
Now, away and bile your heid, ya troll..... & stop yer nonsense!
Frank wrote:
People Power wrote: Thanks Frank - LOL - Thats the funniest thing I've heard in ages! Sure you're not an act in the comedy festival as that joke would go down a storm! The Labour party dont know their ar*se from their elbow nor their left hand from their right! Their right wing, capitalistic dictatorship has done little for the low and average waged people in society, and everything for the more wealthy, the entrepreneurs and tycoons of this world! Yet - the idea of taxing the rich and wealthy more never seems to cross their right winged minds. Capitalism needs a far better balance with socialism; we need to see an economic system based on social need and environmental protection rather than private profit and ecological destruction. Something which New Labour will never achieve. Selling off our "Dear Green Spaces" innevitably comes at a price - that will be the future of New Labour keeping any remaining credibility or seats in the next G.C.C. election.
Labour will always run Glasgow. The people vote on their record of achievement and progress.
Aye, into a black hole in the ground!
As for "Achievement & Progress" - try "Failures" and "Lies"
Now, away and bile your heid, ya troll..... & stop yer nonsense!
Posted by: I hear your pain, me,me,me on 9:46am Sun 9 Mar 08
"Labour will always run Glasgow. The people vote on their record of achievement and progress".
Frank are you deluded or at the wind-up?, how can you defend a party that has let down the people so many times?..
You really must see life through rose tinted specs..
Go take a lay down mate & by the way, enjoy the last time that labour will be in power because they are going,going gone very soon..Bye,bye Purcell yah waste of breath
"Labour will always run Glasgow. The people vote on their record of achievement and progress".
Frank are you deluded or at the wind-up?, how can you defend a party that has let down the people so many times?..
You really must see life through rose tinted specs..
Go take a lay down mate & by the way, enjoy the last time that labour will be in power because they are going,going gone very soon..Bye,bye Purcell yah waste of breath
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 11:45am Sun 9 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Frank[/bold] wrote:
This was expected from the lowest common denominators involved in this so called "campaign". The Labour Council offered them a chance to voice their views via a legitimate and open consultation process, but no they decide that vandalism is their only option. Well Labour will stand up to these bullies and push on with the plans for the people of Glasgow.[/quote]
Frank,
Clearly you have never had to protest in your life about anything then - if life is so rosy under Labout - Get a grip! Our democratic rights are being stripped away layer by layer from right underneath our noses, and if you cant see that you need to go back to the optician.
I shall remind you of the quote Bill Fraser used:
Bill Fraser, chairman of Pollokshields Community Council and a member of Save Pollok Park, said: "It's ridiculous. We have already written to the council completely disassociating ourselves from this. It's not part of our campaign. We love Pollok Park too much to condone any vandalism.
"If any of our supporters are involved in this we completely disown them.
"We are urging whoever is doing it to stop."
Campaigners can and do have a positive impact on ensuring the public who feel strongly can have their objections lodged, and be heard by the media - public.
We're not all couch potatoes like some apathetic Labourites!
Frank wrote:
This was expected from the lowest common denominators involved in this so called "campaign". The Labour Council offered them a chance to voice their views via a legitimate and open consultation process, but no they decide that vandalism is their only option. Well Labour will stand up to these bullies and push on with the plans for the people of Glasgow.
Frank,
Clearly you have never had to protest in your life about anything then - if life is so rosy under Labout - Get a grip! Our democratic rights are being stripped away layer by layer from right underneath our noses, and if you cant see that you need to go back to the optician.
I shall remind you of the quote Bill Fraser used:
Bill Fraser, chairman of Pollokshields Community Council and a member of Save Pollok Park, said: "It's ridiculous. We have already written to the council completely disassociating ourselves from this. It's not part of our campaign. We love Pollok Park too much to condone any vandalism.
"If any of our supporters are involved in this we completely disown them.
"We are urging whoever is doing it to stop."
Campaigners can and do have a positive impact on ensuring the public who feel strongly can have their objections lodged, and be heard by the media - public.
We're not all couch potatoes like some apathetic Labourites!
Posted by: gavin48, Glasgow on 5:44pm Sun 9 Mar 08
[italic]Frank wrote:
This was expected from the lowest common denominators involved in this so called "campaign". The Labour Council offered them a chance to voice their views via a legitimate and open consultation process, but no they decide that vandalism is their only option. Well Labour will stand up to these bullies and push on with the plans for the people of Glasgow.[/italic]
Aye Frank the consultation was so good and so full they dont even have a record of who the consulted, see Saturdays article in the Herald, then come back and repeat that line
Frank wrote:
This was expected from the lowest common denominators involved in this so called "campaign". The Labour Council offered them a chance to voice their views via a legitimate and open consultation process, but no they decide that vandalism is their only option. Well Labour will stand up to these bullies and push on with the plans for the people of Glasgow.
Aye Frank the consultation was so good and so full they dont even have a record of who the consulted, see Saturdays article in the Herald, then come back and repeat that line
Posted by: musemonkey, uk on 6:33pm Sun 9 Mar 08
Scott you're the only one who personalises debate, in your posts on these ET articles and on the SPP site you always insinuate that anyone with a different opinion to yours to be in a poor mental state. You seem to always ask if they've been wearing their "tin foil hat". Sometimes you construct fairly good arguments then when you are unable to you just get personal.
Scott you're the only one who personalises debate, in your posts on these ET articles and on the SPP site you always insinuate that anyone with a different opinion to yours to be in a poor mental state. You seem to always ask if they've been wearing their "tin foil hat". Sometimes you construct fairly good arguments then when you are unable to you just get personal.
Posted by: Scott, Glasgow on 7:37pm Sun 9 Mar 08
Hey Musemonkey (like the name by the way),
I have indeed used the tin foil hat theory, and plenty others - after all I'm human, not on the clock whilst posting, and get annoyed when people feel happy to criticise something without any substantial argument.
The only occasion I've ever suggested someone was in a poor mental state, was indeed the on the same occasion that I suggested the tin foil hat theory. It went something along the lines of..."Someone needs a hug, maybe from a straitjacket". There are no other occasions, but feel free to [bold]prove[/bold] me wrong.
It can be found here:
http://www.eveningti
mes.co.uk/news/displ
ay.var.2083449.0.0.p
hp
And follows the ideology I've mentioned of someone not backing up their opinions and yet are still happy to clamber over other peoples. Again, read it yourself and see if there was any repetition of 'conspiracy' mentioned by the poster I was replying to, one to attack the SPP and one to suggest SNP alliances amongst them.
Cognitive dissonance mixed with paranoiac delusions would have many specialists start to pigeon-hole the poster that I was replying to almost immediately. Something that some 'humour' may help highlight and draw attention to rectifying.
If Go Ape! get the North woods then fine! Let's just go about it in a proper, lawful and democratic fashion - that's all I'm asking.
I don't push any other agenda - no Labour love, nor other parties. No class, age, weight, gender, ethnicity, sexual preference or economic status preferences either.
Just get those who extract a vast amount of my wages and are voted in to represent my interests follow the procedures set down [bold]by law[/bold] and be held accountable when they are not.
Otherwise we may as well have criminals, or better yet commercial entities, run our [italic]democratic[/italic] society.
So in short, if you are for or against the topic at hand and wish to disagree on particular points with someone else - [bold]back it up.[/bold]
Hey Musemonkey (like the name by the way),
I have indeed used the tin foil hat theory, and plenty others - after all I'm human, not on the clock whilst posting, and get annoyed when people feel happy to criticise something without any substantial argument.
The only occasion I've ever suggested someone was in a poor mental state, was indeed the on the same occasion that I suggested the tin foil hat theory. It went something along the lines of..."Someone needs a hug, maybe from a straitjacket". There are no other occasions, but feel free to
prove me wrong.
It can be found here:
http://www.eveningti
mes.co.uk/news/displ
ay.var.2083449.0.0.p
hp
And follows the ideology I've mentioned of someone not backing up their opinions and yet are still happy to clamber over other peoples. Again, read it yourself and see if there was any repetition of 'conspiracy' mentioned by the poster I was replying to, one to attack the SPP and one to suggest SNP alliances amongst them.
Cognitive dissonance mixed with paranoiac delusions would have many specialists start to pigeon-hole the poster that I was replying to almost immediately. Something that some 'humour' may help highlight and draw attention to rectifying.
If Go Ape! get the North woods then fine! Let's just go about it in a proper, lawful and democratic fashion - that's all I'm asking.
I don't push any other agenda - no Labour love, nor other parties. No class, age, weight, gender, ethnicity, sexual preference or economic status preferences either.
Just get those who extract a vast amount of my wages and are voted in to represent my interests follow the procedures set down
by law and be held accountable when they are not.
Otherwise we may as well have criminals, or better yet commercial entities, run our
democratic society.
So in short, if you are for or against the topic at hand and wish to disagree on particular points with someone else -
back it up.
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 7:54pm Sun 9 Mar 08
Thats it Scott you tell him!
As for Frank - does anyone agree with his suked up ways with our labour numbskulls - or is he ( as has previously been suggested) actually a labour councillor in disguise ?
Thats it Scott you tell him!
As for Frank - does anyone agree with his suked up ways with our labour numbskulls - or is he ( as has previously been suggested) actually a labour councillor in disguise ?
Posted by: I hear your pain, me,me,me on 8:06pm Sun 9 Mar 08
[quote][bold]People Power[/bold] wrote:
Thats it Scott you tell him!
As for Frank - does anyone agree with his suked up ways with our labour numbskulls - or is he ( as has previously been suggested) actually a labour councillor in disguise ?
[/quote] I think that its that man Purcell again posing as feckless Frank:.)
People Power wrote:
Thats it Scott you tell him!
As for Frank - does anyone agree with his suked up ways with our labour numbskulls - or is he ( as has previously been suggested) actually a labour councillor in disguise ?
I think that its that man Purcell again posing as feckless Frank:.)
Posted by: People Power, Glasgow on 8:23pm Sun 9 Mar 08
Aye well - scarilly you might be right!
Perish the thought! certainly somebody who's determined to paint their version of events and how Labour perform - compared to the reality which we all know and love - NOT!
Aye well - scarilly you might be right!
Perish the thought! certainly somebody who's determined to paint their version of events and how Labour perform - compared to the reality which we all know and love - NOT!
Posted by: Mo Daniels, Mount Florida on 1:40pm Mon 10 Mar 08
This act is entirely consistent with the mob rule attitude displayed at the meeting in the Burgh Hall. Let’s hope the Council stick to their guns and do not listen to he who shouts the loudest, or the criminals who have committed these acts.
This act is entirely consistent with the mob rule attitude displayed at the meeting in the Burgh Hall. Let’s hope the Council stick to their guns and do not listen to he who shouts the loudest, or the criminals who have committed these acts.
Posted by: tam-m, southside on 1:48pm Mon 10 Mar 08
i saw chick young at the weekend and he was wearing gloves.something on his hands he was trying to hide perhaps.PS he was with mr purcell who was carrying a pair of painters overalls under his arm.conspiracy conspiracy conspiracy conspiracy conspiracy
i saw chick young at the weekend and he was wearing gloves.something on his hands he was trying to hide perhaps.PS he was with mr purcell who was carrying a pair of painters overalls under his arm.conspiracy conspiracy conspiracy conspiracy conspiracy
Posted by: trench, possilpark on 4:39pm Mon 10 Mar 08
we were on holiday years ago when we picked up an english newspaper, and there was an advert for homes in the crookston area,it read...beautiful homes near parks, schools, and transport(the residents were fighting the council over the takeover of their park which had been donated to the glasgow residents,) while the confab was going on the builders were already signed on!mmmm i bet there was not too many glasgow builders in that deal, so its obvious the same underhandedness is going on with the 'go ape' programme.whats the old saying? money talks s**t walks.sad.
we were on holiday years ago when we picked up an english newspaper, and there was an advert for homes in the crookston area,it read...beautiful homes near parks, schools, and transport(the residents were fighting the council over the takeover of their park which had been donated to the glasgow residents,) while the confab was going on the builders were already signed on!mmmm i bet there was not too many glasgow builders in that deal, so its obvious the same underhandedness is going on with the 'go ape' programme.whats the old saying? money talks s**t walks.sad.
Posted by: The Missing City, Glasgow on 10:19am Tue 11 Mar 08
[quote][bold]Mo Daniels[/bold] wrote:
This act is entirely consistent with the mob rule attitude displayed at the meeting in the Burgh Hall. Let’s hope the Council stick to their guns and do not listen to he who shouts the loudest, or the criminals who have committed these acts.[/quote] In other words Mo... who gives a 'monkeys' what the public thinks... eh?
Put the parks in private hands and that'll be the end of the matter - the council are privatising everything else - I'm sure this is your stance on the matter!
Mo Daniels wrote:
This act is entirely consistent with the mob rule attitude displayed at the meeting in the Burgh Hall. Let’s hope the Council stick to their guns and do not listen to he who shouts the loudest, or the criminals who have committed these acts.
In other words Mo... who gives a 'monkeys' what the public thinks... eh?
Put the parks in private hands and that'll be the end of the matter - the council are privatising everything else - I'm sure this is your stance on the matter!
Comment | Read Comments (47)
