Wednesday, 7 November 2007


Like Lazarus rising from the dead, a certain Councillor has re appeared to post on the site of a beleaguered blogger. I welcome the “comeback” of Councillor Potts, or “he whose name shall not be spoken”.

Like a big lush worm on the end of a hook, I couldn’t resist a little nibble! Shame on me for having a lack of decorum!

Never mind, here’s the post and comments:

And here’s my reply

Dear Mr Khan

I think you have been too tough and should reconsider your comments on Councillor Potts because he has for once been very busy in ……. the Ward of Boldon Colliery, campaigning for a local school which needs to be saved from the educational scythe which currently lashes through this Borough. (It’s a pity Councillor Potts was not as vocal or attentive when as a governor east Boldon junior school lost a teacher. Remind the public Councillor Potts, how many meetings did you attend before you disappeared from the board’s listings?) However, the main problem is Councillor Potts represents…..Cleadon and East Boldon Ward! Now there’s an irony, never seen in the ward he represents, but all over the ward he has nothing to do with. Dear, dear, what would certain publications make of that!

Then again, to be honest, Councillor Potts and I have a little bit of “previous”, a term not uncommon to the Old Bill. Could that be the “Old Bill” that protects us from terrorism in London, An organisation that has very publicly been lambasted for the shooting dead of a one “John de Menezes”? Councillor Pott’s is very familiar with Mr de Menezes, because in August 2005 he had a letter very publicly printed in the Shields Gazette in reply to the comments of that urban warrior Mr George Waddle;

“Waddle criticises the police for shooting dead the "innocent" Brazilian in London recently”

and more brutally

“The man simply made himself a target”

Contrary to your best wishes David, the Brazilian REALLY was innocent, and according to a court of law, did anything BUT make himself a target.

So what now Councillor Potts, a full retraction of your very ill judged and knee jerk reactionary comments, or are we going to leave this to the “Badger” to hang, dry and quarter you?

Come on David; look at the problems BRENDA caused. This post is entirely FACTUAL, so what is your FACTUAL response?

No comments: