Mystery man

Mystery man

Mystery man

First published in Letters by

IN A letter titled “A proper Yorker” (The Press, August 9), Gordon Cheapcastle gushes praise on the Labour administration and its Local Plan.

Strangely, no full address is given for this staunch supporter of the politburo contrary to normal requirements for the letters page.

Stranger still, no person by that name can be found to exist anywhere in the York area.

Matthew Laverack, Architect of this parish, Lord Mayor’s Walk, York.

Comments (24)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

9:55am Tue 19 Aug 14

julia brica says...

I recently got a spammer sent from a John Baptist from Ghana !
Similar to the one about a month ago from a Chris Redeemer.
I am expecting another soon from Joan Arc or Moses Basket .
Gordon Cheapcastle fits in well don't you think.
I recently got a spammer sent from a John Baptist from Ghana ! Similar to the one about a month ago from a Chris Redeemer. I am expecting another soon from Joan Arc or Moses Basket . Gordon Cheapcastle fits in well don't you think. julia brica
  • Score: -32

10:36am Tue 19 Aug 14

The Great Buda says...

"politburo"

Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.
"politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it. The Great Buda
  • Score: 34

1:37pm Tue 19 Aug 14

who2believe says...

I'm puzzled. It sound appalling and another (score irregularities) threat to the integrity of the York Press; but you then go on to print the picture of a keyboard and pen and title it 'Mystery Man', as though you were reporting about a different publication's error. He's not a 'Mystery Man' to you, you have his original letter; don't you?
So is he from York? He's not an MP I've checked that so what is it about his address that would reveal too much to us readers?
I'm puzzled. It sound appalling and another (score irregularities) threat to the integrity of the York Press; but you then go on to print the picture of a keyboard and pen and title it 'Mystery Man', as though you were reporting about a different publication's error. He's not a 'Mystery Man' to you, you have his original letter; don't you? So is he from York? He's not an MP I've checked that so what is it about his address that would reveal too much to us readers? who2believe
  • Score: -9

1:45pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

Score another for me!
Spotted the author again before seeing the name.
"politburo" is definite Laverack/Cordock rhetoric.
Score another for me! Spotted the author again before seeing the name. "politburo" is definite Laverack/Cordock rhetoric. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 12

1:47pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

To have a letter published Gordon Cheapcastle needs to provide full address and daytime phone number.
To have a letter published Gordon Cheapcastle needs to provide full address and daytime phone number. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 20

2:13pm Tue 19 Aug 14

SpinningJenny says...

Phew, another Laverack letter! After not seeing one for a whole three days I was worried that something terrible had happened! I'm sure I speak for everyone who reads the Press when I say that I find the almost *daily* letters from Mr Laverack a source of great comfort and reassurance.

SpinningJenny, Commenter of this Parish
Phew, another Laverack letter! After not seeing one for a whole three days I was worried that something terrible had happened! I'm sure I speak for everyone who reads the Press when I say that I find the almost *daily* letters from Mr Laverack a source of great comfort and reassurance. SpinningJenny, Commenter of this Parish SpinningJenny
  • Score: 15

2:30pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Badgers Drift says...

Buzzz Light-year wrote:
To have a letter published Gordon Cheapcastle needs to provide full address and daytime phone number.
Yes, and Press didn't show the street address on the letter - why?

Printing this letter shows that they have agreed they've been duped.
[quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: To have a letter published Gordon Cheapcastle needs to provide full address and daytime phone number.[/p][/quote]Yes, and Press didn't show the street address on the letter - why? Printing this letter shows that they have agreed they've been duped. Badgers Drift
  • Score: -31

2:34pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Badgers Drift says...

The Great Buda wrote:
"politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.
Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge.

The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions.

In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty!
[quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.[/p][/quote]Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -36

2:37pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Badgers Drift says...

SpinningJenny wrote:
Phew, another Laverack letter! After not seeing one for a whole three days I was worried that something terrible had happened! I'm sure I speak for everyone who reads the Press when I say that I find the almost *daily* letters from Mr Laverack a source of great comfort and reassurance. SpinningJenny, Commenter of this Parish
Spinning Jenny is a plant, just like Gordon Cheapcastle is a Labour plant... ha,ha,ha!
[quote][p][bold]SpinningJenny[/bold] wrote: Phew, another Laverack letter! After not seeing one for a whole three days I was worried that something terrible had happened! I'm sure I speak for everyone who reads the Press when I say that I find the almost *daily* letters from Mr Laverack a source of great comfort and reassurance. SpinningJenny, Commenter of this Parish[/p][/quote]Spinning Jenny is a plant, just like Gordon Cheapcastle is a Labour plant... ha,ha,ha! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -25

2:40pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Badgers Drift says...

Buzzz Light-year wrote:
Score another for me! Spotted the author again before seeing the name. "politburo" is definite Laverack/Cordock rhetoric.
Loads of people are using it, as they wake up to what York Council is run like - a totalitarian regime!
[quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: Score another for me! Spotted the author again before seeing the name. "politburo" is definite Laverack/Cordock rhetoric.[/p][/quote]Loads of people are using it, as they wake up to what York Council is run like - a totalitarian regime! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -27

2:45pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Jonothon says...

Matthew
Why get so hot under the collar? The tradition of using a nom de plume is as old as literature itself.
For example what would be wrong with you calling yourself Badgers Drift, or Julia Brica, or both?
Matthew Why get so hot under the collar? The tradition of using a nom de plume is as old as literature itself. For example what would be wrong with you calling yourself Badgers Drift, or Julia Brica, or both? Jonothon
  • Score: 37

2:49pm Tue 19 Aug 14

The Great Buda says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
The Great Buda wrote:
"politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.
Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge.

The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions.

In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty!
Oh look, the servent comes running to his masters aid yet again.

Dance puppet, dance.
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.[/p][/quote]Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty![/p][/quote]Oh look, the servent comes running to his masters aid yet again. Dance puppet, dance. The Great Buda
  • Score: 12

4:02pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Badgers Drift says...

Jonothon wrote:
Matthew Why get so hot under the collar? The tradition of using a nom de plume is as old as literature itself. For example what would be wrong with you calling yourself Badgers Drift, or Julia Brica, or both?
It would be wrong because neither are Matthew, as most who don't have an agenda know full well!

Is that the same 'jonthan' who gives his address as Gray Street?

Unlike Gordon Cheapcastle, the person exists, but not at that address?!!!
[quote][p][bold]Jonothon[/bold] wrote: Matthew Why get so hot under the collar? The tradition of using a nom de plume is as old as literature itself. For example what would be wrong with you calling yourself Badgers Drift, or Julia Brica, or both?[/p][/quote]It would be wrong because neither are Matthew, as most who don't have an agenda know full well! Is that the same 'jonthan' who gives his address as Gray Street? Unlike Gordon Cheapcastle, the person exists, but not at that address?!!! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -35

4:08pm Tue 19 Aug 14

Badgers Drift says...

The Great Buda wrote:
Badgers Drift wrote:
The Great Buda wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.
Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty!
Oh look, the servent comes running to his masters aid yet again. Dance puppet, dance.
You've got too hung up on the 'control' obsession - confusing me with Labour puppets in York who are lapdogs to their masters.

Lost the argument again with cheap shots.

Bye bye, Labour losers....
[quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.[/p][/quote]Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty![/p][/quote]Oh look, the servent comes running to his masters aid yet again. Dance puppet, dance.[/p][/quote]You've got too hung up on the 'control' obsession - confusing me with Labour puppets in York who are lapdogs to their masters. Lost the argument again with cheap shots. Bye bye, Labour losers.... Badgers Drift
  • Score: -42

4:58pm Tue 19 Aug 14

A.P.Feeders says...

If there is another letter about how wonderful labour are and it's from a hugh Janus we know it's from the man himself JA
If there is another letter about how wonderful labour are and it's from a hugh Janus we know it's from the man himself JA A.P.Feeders
  • Score: -27

5:57pm Tue 19 Aug 14

julia brica says...

I am honoured I am being mistaken for Matthew Laverack.
That's got to be worth a load of down marks from the idiot who corrupts the scores.
I am honoured I am being mistaken for Matthew Laverack. That's got to be worth a load of down marks from the idiot who corrupts the scores. julia brica
  • Score: -38

6:42pm Tue 19 Aug 14

non pedalling pete says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
The Great Buda wrote:
Badgers Drift wrote:
The Great Buda wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.
Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty!
Oh look, the servent comes running to his masters aid yet again. Dance puppet, dance.
You've got too hung up on the 'control' obsession - confusing me with Labour puppets in York who are lapdogs to their masters.

Lost the argument again with cheap shots.

Bye bye, Labour losers....
Dont forget that Mathew wiped the floor and the letters page with councillor Sandy Fraiser some time ago.Councillor Fraiser shot himself in the foot with his criticism of Mr Laverack published in the letters page.
He is not standing for re election next year.GOOD RIDDANCE.
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.[/p][/quote]Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty![/p][/quote]Oh look, the servent comes running to his masters aid yet again. Dance puppet, dance.[/p][/quote]You've got too hung up on the 'control' obsession - confusing me with Labour puppets in York who are lapdogs to their masters. Lost the argument again with cheap shots. Bye bye, Labour losers....[/p][/quote]Dont forget that Mathew wiped the floor and the letters page with councillor Sandy Fraiser some time ago.Councillor Fraiser shot himself in the foot with his criticism of Mr Laverack published in the letters page. He is not standing for re election next year.GOOD RIDDANCE. non pedalling pete
  • Score: -43

11:32pm Tue 19 Aug 14

who2believe says...

who2believe wrote:
I'm puzzled. It sound appalling and another (score irregularities) threat to the integrity of the York Press; but you then go on to print the picture of a keyboard and pen and title it 'Mystery Man', as though you were reporting about a different publication's error. He's not a 'Mystery Man' to you, you have his original letter; don't you?
So is he from York? He's not an MP I've checked that so what is it about his address that would reveal too much to us readers?
Here we go again. My post was a complaint to the York Press that a letter writer was being published but also granted anonymity in that his address was not stated. The letter writer implied that he was from York or he enjoyed cricketing metaphors, ('A Proper Yorker'). I made no comment on the content of his letter.
Can someone explain why then the score went from plus 10 to minus 16. That means that an astounding 26 people minimum, disagreed with what?
It was a statement of fact, what is there to disagree with?
People either agree he should not have had his address hidden or they don't care, no one would want secrecy would they? So who the h clicked to disagree? Come on York Press; there is a claque out there corrupting yours and our scores and if they are rewarded in any way it's illegal. Ask Levison.
[quote][p][bold]who2believe[/bold] wrote: I'm puzzled. It sound appalling and another (score irregularities) threat to the integrity of the York Press; but you then go on to print the picture of a keyboard and pen and title it 'Mystery Man', as though you were reporting about a different publication's error. He's not a 'Mystery Man' to you, you have his original letter; don't you? So is he from York? He's not an MP I've checked that so what is it about his address that would reveal too much to us readers?[/p][/quote]Here we go again. My post was a complaint to the York Press that a letter writer was being published but also granted anonymity in that his address was not stated. The letter writer implied that he was from York or he enjoyed cricketing metaphors, ('A Proper Yorker'). I made no comment on the content of his letter. Can someone explain why then the score went from plus 10 to minus 16. That means that an astounding 26 people minimum, disagreed with what? It was a statement of fact, what is there to disagree with? People either agree he should not have had his address hidden or they don't care, no one would want secrecy would they? So who the h clicked to disagree? Come on York Press; there is a claque out there corrupting yours and our scores and if they are rewarded in any way it's illegal. Ask Levison. who2believe
  • Score: -34

1:24pm Wed 20 Aug 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
The Great Buda wrote:
"politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.
Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge.

The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions.

In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty!
LOL!
Paul, if you either genuinely believe that Matthew " trounced" anyone or you are trying to lead others to believe it then you are just as guilty as those councillors you accuse of media manipulation, spin and creating falsehoods to further agendas.

The website is searchable. We've all read the letters.
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.[/p][/quote]Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty![/p][/quote]LOL! Paul, if you either genuinely believe that Matthew " trounced" anyone or you are trying to lead others to believe it then you are just as guilty as those councillors you accuse of media manipulation, spin and creating falsehoods to further agendas. The website is searchable. We've all read the letters. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 10

1:29pm Wed 20 Aug 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

non pedalling pete wrote:
Badgers Drift wrote:
The Great Buda wrote:
Badgers Drift wrote:
The Great Buda wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.
Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty!
Oh look, the servent comes running to his masters aid yet again. Dance puppet, dance.
You've got too hung up on the 'control' obsession - confusing me with Labour puppets in York who are lapdogs to their masters.

Lost the argument again with cheap shots.

Bye bye, Labour losers....
Dont forget that Mathew wiped the floor and the letters page with councillor Sandy Fraiser some time ago.Councillor Fraiser shot himself in the foot with his criticism of Mr Laverack published in the letters page.
He is not standing for re election next year.GOOD RIDDANCE.
Here's another one.
Matthew didn't "wipe the floor" with anyone. That person shot themself in the foot, scored an own goal, dropped a b(u)llock.
[quote][p][bold]non pedalling pete[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.[/p][/quote]Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty![/p][/quote]Oh look, the servent comes running to his masters aid yet again. Dance puppet, dance.[/p][/quote]You've got too hung up on the 'control' obsession - confusing me with Labour puppets in York who are lapdogs to their masters. Lost the argument again with cheap shots. Bye bye, Labour losers....[/p][/quote]Dont forget that Mathew wiped the floor and the letters page with councillor Sandy Fraiser some time ago.Councillor Fraiser shot himself in the foot with his criticism of Mr Laverack published in the letters page. He is not standing for re election next year.GOOD RIDDANCE.[/p][/quote]Here's another one. Matthew didn't "wipe the floor" with anyone. That person shot themself in the foot, scored an own goal, dropped a b(u)llock. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 10

1:33pm Wed 20 Aug 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
Buzzz Light-year wrote:
To have a letter published Gordon Cheapcastle needs to provide full address and daytime phone number.
Yes, and Press didn't show the street address on the letter - why?

Printing this letter shows that they have agreed they've been duped.
The Press often print letters with just a minimal address.

Like I said, The Famous Gordon Cheapcastle needs to *provide* full address and daytime phone number.
Whether the Press print it or not says nothing at all.
Anything more is just chitlins for addled conspiracy theorists and bitter ex-housebuilders I guess.
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: To have a letter published Gordon Cheapcastle needs to provide full address and daytime phone number.[/p][/quote]Yes, and Press didn't show the street address on the letter - why? Printing this letter shows that they have agreed they've been duped.[/p][/quote]The Press often print letters with just a minimal address. Like I said, The Famous Gordon Cheapcastle needs to *provide* full address and daytime phone number. Whether the Press print it or not says nothing at all. Anything more is just chitlins for addled conspiracy theorists and bitter ex-housebuilders I guess. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 7

1:36pm Wed 20 Aug 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
Buzzz Light-year wrote:
Score another for me! Spotted the author again before seeing the name. "politburo" is definite Laverack/Cordock rhetoric.
Loads of people are using it, as they wake up to what York Council is run like - a totalitarian regime!
Nope.
Just you Paul. And Matthew.
And maybe a few false IDs chucked in if past experience is anything to go by.
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: Score another for me! Spotted the author again before seeing the name. "politburo" is definite Laverack/Cordock rhetoric.[/p][/quote]Loads of people are using it, as they wake up to what York Council is run like - a totalitarian regime![/p][/quote]Nope. Just you Paul. And Matthew. And maybe a few false IDs chucked in if past experience is anything to go by. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 8

1:07am Thu 21 Aug 14

Badgers Drift says...

Buzzz Light-year wrote:
Badgers Drift wrote:
The Great Buda wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.
Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty!
LOL! Paul, if you either genuinely believe that Matthew " trounced" anyone or you are trying to lead others to believe it then you are just as guilty as those councillors you accuse of media manipulation, spin and creating falsehoods to further agendas. The website is searchable. We've all read the letters.
'We've all read...'

Who are you speaking for?

York people, or you and your few Labour mates?

You're a minority of one!
[quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.[/p][/quote]Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty![/p][/quote]LOL! Paul, if you either genuinely believe that Matthew " trounced" anyone or you are trying to lead others to believe it then you are just as guilty as those councillors you accuse of media manipulation, spin and creating falsehoods to further agendas. The website is searchable. We've all read the letters.[/p][/quote]'We've all read...' Who are you speaking for? York people, or you and your few Labour mates? You're a minority of one! Badgers Drift
  • Score: -24

1:20pm Thu 21 Aug 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

Badgers Drift wrote:
Buzzz Light-year wrote:
Badgers Drift wrote:
The Great Buda wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.
Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty!
LOL! Paul, if you either genuinely believe that Matthew " trounced" anyone or you are trying to lead others to believe it then you are just as guilty as those councillors you accuse of media manipulation, spin and creating falsehoods to further agendas. The website is searchable. We've all read the letters.
'We've all read...'

Who are you speaking for?

York people, or you and your few Labour mates?

You're a minority of one!
I'm speaking for no-one, at least not in the "words in other people's mouths" way that you mean.
Everyone who reads these pages or the printed version can see for themselves.
That is, anyone who can read plain English without the hindrance of dogma, agenda and your blind devotion Paul.

I'm saying we have all read the letters.

"Me and my Labour mates" ...The usual McCartyite nonsense from you Paul. Poor.
[quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Badgers Drift[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The Great Buda[/bold] wrote: "politburo" Just because you've ran away from one (losing) fight, does not mean you can crank up the hyperbole to cover for it.[/p][/quote]Matthew hasn't run away or lost any fight. He trounced Richard Bridge. The Cheapcastle stunt by Labour is proof that they have lost the fight, and Matthew, as usual, is exposing another of their deceptions. In May 2015, Labour will lose York, that's a certainty![/p][/quote]LOL! Paul, if you either genuinely believe that Matthew " trounced" anyone or you are trying to lead others to believe it then you are just as guilty as those councillors you accuse of media manipulation, spin and creating falsehoods to further agendas. The website is searchable. We've all read the letters.[/p][/quote]'We've all read...' Who are you speaking for? York people, or you and your few Labour mates? You're a minority of one![/p][/quote]I'm speaking for no-one, at least not in the "words in other people's mouths" way that you mean. Everyone who reads these pages or the printed version can see for themselves. That is, anyone who can read plain English without the hindrance of dogma, agenda and your blind devotion Paul. I'm saying we have all read the letters. "Me and my Labour mates" ...The usual McCartyite nonsense from you Paul. Poor. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 3

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree