Trump International Golf Links

by EmmDee57 Mon 22 Oct 2012, 9:14 am

First topic message reminder :

Very interesting documentary worth watching was on BBC2 last night.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b01nln7g/Youve_Been_Trumped/

After watching it, I have no urge to play there after what that man has done to the local people. Nor did it put the local police in a good light either.

by JAS Tue 20 Nov 2012, 6:24 am

Bob_the_Job wrote:Fofence (Fo-f-nce), verb: to heighten tensions on an internet board by assigning an unrealistic degree of moral outrage and indignation to something most people don't give a toss about. See also "Doing a Mac"

I can see it now as an entry in the Urban Dictionary

A wee reminder for you....please stop fofending!!

by JAS Tue 20 Nov 2012, 9:50 am

...also...Mac, on the basis that no publicity is bad publicity and given that this thread was slipping quietly toward the archives, you've now resurrected it and inadvertently gave it a fresh breath of publicity...well done Wink

What was it Captain Manwairing used to say to Private Pike??

by gaelgowfer Tue 20 Nov 2012, 10:23 am

JAS wrote:
gaelgowfer wrote:
JAS wrote:Ah, I see Gael. I'm not sure, given the suggested routing, that a 2nd course would come close to matching the first one. The article is a bit confusing too suggesting that it will be routed along the coastal line and separated from the existing course by the driving range...eh? The driving range is further inland than the original course, how does that work?

There is no way I will ever play this course.

Well given your home course Gael you're in the fortunate position of having ready access to world class golf anyway

gaelgowfer wrote:
morally indefensible project .

You make it sound like a Jimmy Saville theme park!!

Here's a better link regarding the second course ...

http://www.scotsman.com/news/environment/donald-trump-drives-ahead-with-second-golf-course-amid-environmental-concerns-1-2644042

Johnny Hughes, director of conservation at the Scottish Wildlife Trust, said: “We’re very disappointed for wildlife in the dune system at Menie. We already have a golf course on an SSSI and now they want to build another in an area which is perhaps even more spectacular, with mini wetlands which are bubbling with biodiversity. This is another example of our ever-shrinking wild coastline being developed.”

As I said ... "wellies"!

JAS you need to try and remember that those homeowners are still living in this nightmare created entirely by Trump. How would like it if someone planted fast-growing conifers merely feet from your home blocking not only your view but preventing daylight getting into your home? Unfortunately, under scots law, there doesn't seem to be anything they can do about it ...

Scotland

There is no right to light per se in Scots law. However, provision giving you such a right by preventing your neighbour from growing large trees or plants near the boundary, may be made in your title deeds.

You should not attempt to prune the offending tree or plant yourself. If you do so, you may be prosecuted. The one exception to this is that, if branches are overhanging into your property, then you may prune these, but you must return the cut branches to your neighbour, as they belong to him or her. If the tree is in a conservation area or is the subject of a Tree Preservation Order, it is legally protected and you should not prune it, even if it overhangs your property.

If your neighbour refuses to prune the plant/tree, then professional advice should be sought. Your local authority may also be able to offer assistance.

I also think it's way too early to describe Trump's course a "masterpiece". Not everyone is as bowled over by it as you seem to be ... and not just because it hasn't bedded down either.

Getting back to the second course, I expect wellies won't be required as Trump will do what he did on the first course ... drain it! The wildlife will just have to move on.

Still, given Trump hasn't laid down a single brick combined with his threats not to proceed with the hotel if those wind turbines go ahead, I wonder if planning permission for this second course will be as straightforward as he seems to think it will be. Does outline planning permission mean it's 'a given'?

by JAS Tue 20 Nov 2012, 10:52 am

Very studious research Gael but my first question would be....If it's such a special SSSI, how did anyone get permission to build a house there in the first place??

No I wouldn't be happy if some smarmy wigged prat tried to intimidate me but then again it probably wouldn't get that far because I'd have negotiated a mutually agreeable settlement rather than be pig headed a stubborn about it.

I just can't see the 2nd course coming anywhere near the first given what I remember of the terrain and I would tend to agree that those wetlands should be left alone.

Your view of whether the course is a masterpiece or not does'nt really carry much weight if its only ever based on looking at pictures and listening to hearsay. I readily admit I was bowled over by the routing, the variety and the challenge of the course if not the conditioning. The conditioning will only improve over time and it will easily take its place near the top end of the UK course rankings.

One of the giveaways that last months documentary was a one sided affair was that the makers never showed the completed course and got the views/opinions of a sample of the people who've played it.

Like I said to Mac, it's there now, what can be achieved by continually protesting about it?? It's providing much needed employment in the area as well as bringing additional tourist revenue into the area.

by **navyblueshorts** Tue 20 Nov 2012, 11:05 am

JAS wrote:...One of the giveaways that last months documentary was a one sided affair was that the makers never showed the completed course and got the views/opinions of a sample of the people who've played it.

Like I said to Mac, it's there now, what can be achieved by continually protesting about it?? It's providing much needed employment in the area as well as bringing additional tourist revenue into the area.

Not really JAS. Maybe the documentary was finished/had a deadline that meant it couldn't show the finished article?

Re. Conifers etc. What I don't get is why no-one has yet sprayed any of Trump's conifers with paraquat/glyphosate etc? I sure as Hell would if they were deliberately planted on a border of mine as intimidation.

by JAS Tue 20 Nov 2012, 11:31 am

Not sure from the info on Gaels post whether he's allowed to prune the branches that overhang or if he's not allowed because the trees are in a protected area. If he is then he is duty bound to return them to the tree owners property. That could be amusing, tee off only to see a big pile of branches on the first green.

Look, Trump haters, I don't like the man, I've said that consistently, I also detest it when a (metaphorically) big bloke tries to crush a little bloke. I don't think the little guy did much to help himself in this case. You don't take on somebody like Trump head on and expect to win. None of that though alters the fact that the end result from a golf perspective is a stunning course.

by gaelgowfer Tue 20 Nov 2012, 3:32 pm

JAS wrote:Very studious research Gael but my first question would be....If it's such a special SSSI, how did anyone get permission to build a house there in the first place??

No I wouldn't be happy if some smarmy wigged prat tried to intimidate me but then again it probably wouldn't get that far because I'd have negotiated a mutually agreeable settlement rather than be pig headed a stubborn about it.

I just can't see the 2nd course coming anywhere near the first given what I remember of the terrain and I would tend to agree that those wetlands should be left alone.

Your view of whether the course is a masterpiece or not does'nt really carry much weight if its only ever based on looking at pictures and listening to hearsay. I readily admit I was bowled over by the routing, the variety and the challenge of the course if not the conditioning. The conditioning will only improve over time and it will easily take its place near the top end of the UK course rankings.

One of the giveaways that last months documentary was a one sided affair was that the makers never showed the completed course and got the views/opinions of a sample of the people who've played it.

Like I said to Mac, it's there now, what can be achieved by continually protesting about it?? It's providing much needed employment in the area as well as bringing additional tourist revenue into the area.

Not sure from the info on Gaels post whether he's allowed to prune the branches that overhang or if he's not allowed because the trees are in a protected area. If he is then he is duty bound to return them to the tree owners property. That could be amusing, tee off only to see a big pile of branches on the first green.

~~~~~~~~~~~~

Look, Trump haters, I don't like the man, I've said that consistently, I also detest it when a (metaphorically) big bloke tries to crush a little bloke. I don't think the little guy did much to help himself in this case. You don't take on somebody like Trump head on and expect to win. None of that though alters the fact that the end result from a golf perspective is a stunning course.

JAS ... can't imagine these houses would have been built on the dune for what should be obvious reasons. The Milnes' home is built on the site of the old coastguard station, a 1960s flat-roofed, square-ish building made of concrete and glass. When it was decommissioned (or whatever you do with nae mair use coastguard stations), they applied to buy it with the intention of razing it to the ground to build their own house. The aberdeenshire councillors ... in their infinite wisdom Rolling Eyes

... offered to sell it to them but on condition the house was built in sympathy with the design (I use the term advisedly) of the coastguard station which goes quite some way to explain why their house is the shape it is.

I think too the reason the Milnes didn't sell to Trump was because the views this site offered provided some consolation for being unable to have children so you see, for them, selling was never going to be an option.

In so far as "hearsay" is concerned, I've merely drawn impressions from others who have played the course. Why should I accept your account and not theirs? Besides which, my son has played it (yep, not happy about it) and his opinion is that, layout-wise, 9 holes were good and the other 9 very ordinary. As someone else has already very astutely pointed out, a lot of golfers have perhaps formed positive opnions of the course based more on the scenery rather than the quality of the layout.

Incidentally, in so far as bringing additional tourist revenue to the area is concerned, I think the jury is still out on that one. In any event, seems to me that bullying homeowners into selling their homes is way too high a price to pay for what at the end of the day is only a golf course which, in all probability is not the greatest in the world.

In so far as your big guy versus little guy comments and about it being pointless to take on Trump, I rather think a certain New York (I think - can't find the bleedin' link) community would disagree. He tried to throw them off their public park and lost!

by JAS Tue 20 Nov 2012, 4:59 pm

Ok then Gael that just about counters every point I made....well done Smile

NOW WHAT???

Gael the course is still there and its gonna stay there, why continue to get your knickers in a twist over something you have no control over whatsoever??

Incidentally, I'd be genuinely interested to know what 9 your son thought was ordinary. I'm guessing the front 9 as its more or less straight out & back whereas the back 9 has more directional changes.
For me it wasn't just the views (although there were a few wows. There was the strategic challenge, the elevation changes, the deep fairway bunkering, the length, the contouring of the greens. The imposing waist high stuff if you strayed offline. I played it the week after Carnoustie which along with Dornoch I consider to be the finest strategically challenging layouts that I've played. I also played RA the following day which I readily admit I enjoyed more on this occasion. As the course improves it will not be out of place in that sort of company. I don't particularly care whether you think my view of the course is clouded or corrupted in some strange way or not, I've played almost a third of the top 100 courses in the UK now and if I review any course I think I can strike a reasonable balance based on my experience. If you choose not to believe it, fine, no skin off my nose.

Name me a course anywhere in the world that is consistently loved by everyone who's played it.

by super_realist Tue 20 Nov 2012, 5:08 pm

I think it's more of a girdle she gets in a twist Jas.

by gaelgowfer Tue 20 Nov 2012, 5:16 pm

JAS ... you'd be right at home serving on the 'shire council. They don't have any principles either.

by super_realist Tue 20 Nov 2012, 6:11 pm

Oh dear, so it's down to principles or morality.
I'd have a look at where your pension or bank is invested, where all the products you buy are from, where you source your Gas etc before jumping on some sort of moral crusade. I bet even some golf courses you have played have employed dubious methods.

The course is there, it's not going away.

by Doon the Water Tue 20 Nov 2012, 6:49 pm

If we are talking morals here then the course they are playing the R2D on this week would make Trumps look nearly angelic.

by JAS Tue 20 Nov 2012, 8:25 pm

Amusing how both yourself and Mac resort to slurring my moral integrity and principles when you know diddly squat about me.

For me Gael life is way way to short to worry about things you can't control. You go look up more superfluous "facts" about Trump, I'm off down the range...laters

by McLaren Tue 20 Nov 2012, 10:07 pm

The one thing I do know about you JAS is that you feel able to dismiss the evils of trump and his destruction of life's and SSSI's. You have this strange notion that if something bad has happened, and is now irreversible, you may as well benefit from it. I wonder, if you have followed this logic once, how many other times have you been able to overlook something which caused great pain to others for your own personal gain?

by super_realist Tue 20 Nov 2012, 10:16 pm

Mac, when will you get it into your pea sized nodule you call a brain that simply because you think it is an immoral project does not mean everyone else does.
Who made you the arbiter of what defines morality anyway?
After all you are the one who lusts after teenage witches, watches glee one handed and admits that he'd fellate Woods given the chance.

by McLaren Tue 20 Nov 2012, 10:26 pm

Super

Anyone who cant see the project is immoral is wrong. That I am 100% confident of.

by super_realist Tue 20 Nov 2012, 10:30 pm

This isn't communist Cuba Mac, no matter how much you'd like it to be.
I am allowed to think what I like. At least I've had the good grace to visit the site, which is more than you've done by swallowing propaganda and BBC hyperbole.

It's not going to go away so save your breath on asking the bus driver for a return to Braid Hills.

by JAS Tue 20 Nov 2012, 11:38 pm

McLaren wrote:The one thing I do know about you JAS is that you feel able to dismiss the evils of trump and his destruction of life's and SSSI's. You have this strange notion that if something bad has happened, and is now irreversible, you may as well benefit from it. I wonder, if you have followed this logic once, how many other times have you been able to overlook something which caused great pain to others for your own personal gain?

Quite frankly, it's not really a strange notion. The evils of Trump are none of my business and it's rather quaint notion that if I set foot on his course it somehow condones and supports his business practice, what a load of utter tosh....and I don't know where the "personal gain" thing is coming from...what are you suggesting??

I have to overlook something that caused me great pain every day Mac and indulging in golf helps me do that. It's basically golf that's kept me on an even kiel for the past 5 years and who the hell are you to make moral judgements on my behalf. I was always told "Never judge a man until you've walked a mile in his shoes"....hence why I asserted in an earlier post that you (or Gael for that matter) know diddly squat about me.

I cant sort out Milne Vs Trump, their dispute is nothing to do with me, so what is the point in fretting over it.

by McLaren Wed 21 Nov 2012, 2:56 am

I get that trumps behavior has not effected you directly, although I think most normal people would be saddened by the loss of an SSSI. But what would the world be like if everyone were so selfish to ignore how badly others have been treated and use the results of this mistreatment for their own gain?

It is clear that you get a "personal gain" from enjoying a round on trumps creation, at the same time knowing evil nature of its beginnings. What other activities/purchases do you make knowing the terrible effects their creation has had on others?

I have no idea what you have done to cause yourself "great pain" everyday but I doubt it excuses abandoning a little thought for others. I hope indulging in golf can bring some relief but why pick to play somewhere like Trumpton?

by super_realist Wed 21 Nov 2012, 8:02 am

Mac, for the gazzilionth time, it isn't the loss of an SSSi at all, merely the modification of a small part of it. THere are thousands of SSSI's in the UK, many of which do not deserve the term. I understand that this area may well have done and has importance in terms of it's ecology, but seeing as you've never been there, never likely to go it seems you know bugger all about the place and are not qualified to give any account of how it has ruined anything at all. It is a MASSIVE area and of which the golf course only covers a very small part of it, so if you bothered to do anything other than google biased links you'd know that A) it hasn't ruined the SSSI as an entity at all, and B) is extremely sympathetic to the existing dunes.

Stop having a go at Trump for the sake of it. If this was a Nine Chinned Woods design, you'd be all over it like a rash.
I'll bet there are plenty of things to which you are linked which have involved dubious business practices, but it isn't convenient for you to google. People in glass houses (or public transport buses) shouldn't throw stones. Your librarian pension is probably invested in arms trade or something similarly unsavoury if you bothered to find out.

Stop being a pathetic little berk and grow up. Yes you disapprove, but stop trying to judge people on your own (poorly informed) opinion of the project.

by JAS Wed 21 Nov 2012, 9:13 am

McLaren wrote:I get that trumps behavior has not effected you directly, although I think most normal people would be saddened by the loss of an SSSI. But what would the world be like if everyone were so selfish to ignore how badly others have been treated and use the results of this mistreatment for their own gain?

It is clear that you get a "personal gain" from enjoying a round on trumps creation, at the same time knowing evil nature of its beginnings. What other activities/purchases do you make knowing the terrible effects their creation has had on others?

I have no idea what you have done to cause yourself "great pain" everyday but I doubt it excuses abandoning a little thought for others. I hope indulging in golf can bring some relief but why pick to play somewhere like Trumpton?

Mac, I get pleasure from playing a round of golf on a top class course, personal gain is curious terminology but I can see you meant nothing accusatory.

For the Gazillionth time, you don't know me or my circumstances so you have no foundation whatsoever to make moral judgements on my character. One day a major life/death event may kick your personal life in the face. It'll be your choice how you deal with it. Lets hope there's not some morally outraged pipsqueak trying pathetically to ram his misguided judgements down your throat, now give it a rest. Even better still, go get a life!!

by gaelgowfer Wed 21 Nov 2012, 11:40 am

JAS wrote:Gael the course is still there and its gonna stay there, why continue to get your knickers in a twist over something you have no control over whatsoever??

JAS ... the course will only survive if schmucks keeping turning up for what seems to me to be the sole purpose of claiming bragging rights. What other reason could there be for forking out £150/£200 to play a course that can't yet possibly offer a true links experience that such a high green fee ought to command?

Your justification for playing this course is based on it having been completed and open for business. How shallow. No-one forced you to play it. If the scottish golfing community had any backbone at all, then it would have boycotted this course until Trump started to behave like the good neighbour he promised to be right at the beginning of this project. Playing this course, just makes every golfer who's played it complicit in his business practice methods.

It's called ... turning a blind eye ...

by super_realist Wed 21 Nov 2012, 11:44 am

Gael, I don't know of any crappy golf courses which have bit the dust, let alone one which is without question one of the finest courses in Europe.

A course doesn't need to be links to charge 150/200. It just needs to be good, how is Trump not links anyway?. And simply because it's outwith the budget of a ne'er do well like Mac, doesn't mean it will die.

You pay top dollar for Wentworth, Woodhall Spa, Loch Lomond.

by Diggers Wed 21 Nov 2012, 11:47 am

Im a bit of a fence sitter on this one. The truth is its fair neough for Jas to decide what is acceptable for him and its equally correct that other feel that they can make a protest by not playing the course. I dont buy the theory that once something is there everyone should just accept it, though in truth thats usually what comes to happen over a period of time.
I choose not to eat veal or lamb as I dont feel comfortable with the shortness of life these creatures have, and in the case of veal the often quality of life. I do however eat other meat, I dont preach about it, its just what I feel comfortable with even though in the grand scheme of things it really makes no difference. Whatever gets us through the day I guess.

by McLaren Wed 21 Nov 2012, 11:48 am

Jas

I dont know your circumstances, but I cant think of any set of circumstances which would make it acceptable to fund a project where someone has acted as Trump has.

Gail makes some very good points in her last post which I dont see how anyone could disagree with.

by super_realist Wed 21 Nov 2012, 11:52 am

That's because you are a simpering Guardian reader.

by **navyblueshorts** Wed 21 Nov 2012, 12:02 pm

super_realist wrote:That's because you are a simpering Guardian reader.

Oh do give the knee-jerk personal assaults of this ilk a rest why don't you? No-one harps on, ad nauseam, about you being a Mail-reading, environment destroying fascist in the absence of any obvious evidence do they?
I don't read the Guardian and I tend to side on Gael's side of the fence over this. Got some equally insightful comment on my position?

by super_realist Wed 21 Nov 2012, 12:05 pm

Gael has indicated that Trump isn't a true links course or can't provide a links experience and can't justify a high price.

Complete balls from Grotbags as usual.

Not even sure being called a simpering Guardian read is an insult, just a defacto position where people give a predictable response to numerous situations or political issues.

by Diggers Wed 21 Nov 2012, 12:14 pm

Id say that most people who read the Guardian are at least capable of their own thoughts, even though its a rubbish paper.
The same cannot be true of Mail and Express readers, I find it quite scary that people actually purchase and read that kind of right wing blinkered propoganda.

by super_realist Wed 21 Nov 2012, 12:16 pm

I'm not sure there are any papers that I'd bother to buy Diggers.

by Diggers Wed 21 Nov 2012, 12:20 pm

When you have a commute as long as mine a paper in the morning is pretty much a necessity.

by **navyblueshorts** Wed 21 Nov 2012, 12:33 pm

super_realist wrote:Gael has indicated that Trump isn't a true links course or can't provide a links experience and can't justify a high price.

Complete balls from Grotbags as usual.

Not even sure being called a simpering Guardian read is an insult, just a defacto position where people give a predictable response to numerous situations or political issues.

That's one, selected, piece of Gael's overall position....and you know it.
As for the Guardian comment, it's meant as an insult....and you know that too.

by super_realist Wed 21 Nov 2012, 1:06 pm

I was referring to Mac actually, when he said that he couldn't see how anyone else could hold an alternative opinion to Gael in regards the whole project.

Clearly you can object, but doesn't change the fact that Mac inhabits the same political stance as the ninnying liberal who doens't know why he holds that view, just thinks it's the acceptable face of olitical outlooks, only with a bollinger bolshevik outlook to be offended when it suits him, and not when it doesn't.

by JAS Wed 21 Nov 2012, 1:08 pm

gaelgowfer wrote:
JAS wrote:Gael the course is still there and its gonna stay there, why continue to get your knickers in a twist over something you have no control over whatsoever??

JAS ... the course will only survive if schmucks keeping turning up for what seems to me to be the sole purpose of claiming bragging rights. What other reason could there be for forking out £150/£200 to play a course that can't yet possibly offer a true links experience that such a high green fee ought to command?

Your justification for playing this course is based on it having been completed and open for business. How shallow. No-one forced you to play it. If the scottish golfing community had any backbone at all, then it would have boycotted this course until Trump started to behave like the good neighbour he promised to be right at the beginning of this project. Playing this course, just makes every golfer who's played it complicit in his business practice methods.

It's called ... turning a blind eye ...

Oh I'm a schmuck today am I? Yesterday you wanted me on the 'shire council (no idea which one, you didn't specify) Is being a schmuk mutually compatible with being morally bankrupt.

It's becoming increasingly clear that it's impossible to have a reasonable debate with either yourself or Mac on this subject. Right from the start I've stuck to the guiding principle that for me it's about the golf (strange concept for a golf discussion board eh??)

I have also said that I don't particularly think well of Trumps business ethos but not to the point where I would let it affect choices I make for me. We all make choices in life Gael, how do you know the clothes currently on your back or those knickers you keep getting in a twist weren't created by some poor 12 year old kid in a back street slum in South east Asia??

With regard to price...ah out pops the green eyed monster who won't or can't justify forking out £150 for a round of golf. For your info Kingsbarns is £195 (overpriced but fantastic), RA is £120 (bargain). Being placed somewhere in between is about right, perhaps it should be a little lower until it's conditioned properly.
Some people choose to drink their money, smoke their money (lining the pockets of shareholders who profit from human misery and ill health, some people gamble it away, lose control and leave their families destitute so in the grand scheme of things spending money to play golf on a fantastic course albeit conceived and facilitated by a man with dubious business morals is not exactly the heinous crime that you and Mac are making it out to be.
One last thing re the price IF the course and or my treatment on the day had fallen short of what I expected from £150 then I most certainly would have made my feelings very very clear on these boards and beyond.

by super_realist Wed 21 Nov 2012, 1:13 pm

JAS wrote:
gaelgowfer wrote:
JAS wrote:Gael the course is still there and its gonna stay there, why continue to get your knickers in a twist over something you have no control over whatsoever??

JAS ... the course will only survive if schmucks keeping turning up for what seems to me to be the sole purpose of claiming bragging rights. What other reason could there be for forking out £150/£200 to play a course that can't yet possibly offer a true links experience that such a high green fee ought to command?

Your justification for playing this course is based on it having been completed and open for business. How shallow. No-one forced you to play it. If the scottish golfing community had any backbone at all, then it would have boycotted this course until Trump started to behave like the good neighbour he promised to be right at the beginning of this project. Playing this course, just makes every golfer who's played it complicit in his business practice methods.

It's called ... turning a blind eye ...

Oh I'm a schmuck today am I? Yesterday you wanted me on the 'shire council (no idea which one, you didn't specify) Is being a schmuk mutually compatible with being morally bankrupt.

It's becoming increasingly clear that it's impossible to have a reasonable debate with either yourself or Mac on this subject. Right from the start I've stuck to the guiding principle that for me it's about the golf (strange concept for a golf discussion board eh??)

I have also said that I don't particularly think well of Trumps business ethos but not to the point where I would let it affect choices I make for me. We all make choices in life Gael, how do you know the clothes currently on your back or those knickers you keep getting in a twist weren't created by some poor 12 year old kid in a back street slum in South east Asia??

With regard to price...ah out pops the green eyed monster who won't or can't justify forking out £150 for a round of golf. For your info Kingsbarns is £195 (overpriced but fantastic), RA is £120 (bargain). Being placed somewhere in between is about right, perhaps it should be a little lower until it's conditioned properly.
Some people choose to drink their money, smoke their money (lining the pockets of shareholders who profit from human misery and ill health, some people gamble it away, lose control and leave their families destitute so in the grand scheme of things spending money to play golf on a fantastic course albeit conceived and facilitated by a man with dubious business morals is not exactly the heinous crime that you and Mac are making it out to be.
One last thing re the price IF the course and or my treatment on the day had fallen short of what I expected from £150 then I most certainly would have made my feelings very very clear on these boards and beyond.

by JAS Wed 21 Nov 2012, 1:27 pm

Mods, can you explain why Super gets pulled up on a relatively innocuous phrase whilst our would be moral guardians get away with repeated inaccurate attempts at personal character assassination.

Yes I can take it but given the low tolerance threshold of others on here I don't see why I should be continually subjected to it for standing my ground in this debate (make no mistake i know that's exactly why I'm getting the pelters, because my views are not in tune with others moral crusade).

by gaelgowfer Wed 21 Nov 2012, 1:45 pm

super_realist wrote:Gael has indicated that Trump isn't a true links course or can't provide a links experience and can't justify a high price.

Not for the first time super, your comprehension skills let you down.

JAS ... I'll deal with you later. Wink

by **navyblueshorts** Wed 21 Nov 2012, 8:43 pm

JAS wrote:Mods, can you explain why Super gets pulled up on a relatively innocuous phrase whilst our would be moral guardians get away with repeated inaccurate attempts at personal character assassination.

Yes I can take it but given the low tolerance threshold of others on here I don't see why I should be continually subjected to it for standing my ground in this debate (make no mistake i know that's exactly why I'm getting the pelters, because my views are not in tune with others moral crusade).

Sorry JAS, I must have missed the moderation of S_R. You referring to my comment? If so, that was my personal view w/o a mod hat on.

by Skydriver Fri 07 Dec 2012, 11:50 am

Possibly a bad idea to bump this thread (please step away from your keyboard if you are in any way sensing red mist rising again), but I think this story is amusing:

Donald Trump has reacted with anger at the announcement that Glenfiddich have named Michael Forbes as 'Top Scot' in their annual Spirit of Scotland Awards. Michael Forbes has reportedly refused to sell his land to Trump which was needed for the development or the Trump International Course in Aberdeen

The course was built despite Forbes opposition and opened earlier this year. Trump is reported to have said:

"Glenfiddich's choice of Michael Forbes, as Top Scot, will go down as one of the great jokes ever played on the Scottish people and is a terrible embarrassment to Scotland."

He went on to say:

"Michael Forbes totally lost his battle, in that he tried to stop the Trump Organization and its many supporters from building what is now recognized as one of the greatest golf courses in the world.

He also took to Twitter to make his point:

@realDonaldTrump
Donald J. Trump Glenfiddich is a joke—should have chosen Andy Murray—U.S. Open & Olympic gold winner—as Top Scot instead of a total loser!
Dec 05 via web Favorite Retweet Reply

The Scotsman also has also reported that Trump has accused Glenfiddich of awarding Forbes as result of Trump releasing his own brand of Whiskey

“Glenfiddich is upset that we created our own single malt whisky using another distillery, which offers far greater products..."

Trump has also vowed the no Glenfiddich or William Grant & Sons products will be sold on his business premises:

"I make a pledge that no Trump property will ever do business with Glenfiddich or William Grant and Sons."

by SpacemanSpiff Fri 07 Dec 2012, 12:19 pm

Skydriver wrote:Possibly a bad idea to bump this thread (please step away from your keyboard if you are in any way sensing red mist rising again), but I think this story is amusing:

Donald Trump has reacted with anger at the announcement that Glenfiddich have named Michael Forbes as 'Top Scot' in their annual Spirit of Scotland Awards. Michael Forbes has reportedly refused to sell his land to Trump which was needed for the development or the Trump International Course in Aberdeen

The course was built despite Forbes opposition and opened earlier this year. Trump is reported to have said:

"Glenfiddich's choice of Michael Forbes, as Top Scot, will go down as one of the great jokes ever played on the Scottish people and is a terrible embarrassment to Scotland."

He went on to say:

"Michael Forbes totally lost his battle, in that he tried to stop the Trump Organization and its many supporters from building what is now recognized as one of the greatest golf courses in the world.

He also took to Twitter to make his point:

@realDonaldTrump
Donald J. Trump Glenfiddich is a joke—should have chosen Andy Murray—U.S. Open & Olympic gold winner—as Top Scot instead of a total loser!
Dec 05 via web Favorite Retweet Reply

The Scotsman also has also reported that Trump has accused Glenfiddich of awarding Forbes as result of Trump releasing his own brand of Whiskey

“Glenfiddich is upset that we created our own single malt whisky using another distillery, which offers far greater products..."

Trump has also vowed the no Glenfiddich or William Grant & Sons products will be sold on his business premises:

"I make a pledge that no Trump property will ever do business with Glenfiddich or William Grant and Sons."

How embarassing that I live in a country that would vote for that pikey.
I know he fought for his 'home' but he came across almost as bad as Trump did.

by JAS Fri 07 Dec 2012, 1:34 pm

Got to say that it is a tad embarrassing for our nation that Murray's great sporting achievements are passed over to make a petty political point....
Mac/Gael...any of you 2 work for Glenfiddich or Grant & sons??

I've always said though...Livet whisky is better than Fiddich whisky Wink

by gaelgowfer Fri 07 Dec 2012, 1:40 pm

How embarassing that I live in a country that would vote for that pikey.
I know he fought for his 'home' but he came across almost as bad as Trump did.

Spaceman ... I think you do Michael Forbes a great disservice. He may come across as a bit of a rough diamond but anytime I've watched him being interviewed, he's always managed to retain his dignity which I suspect is why he was given this award and not just because he refused to sell his home to Trump.

Speaking of whom: looks as if the scottish government is in the process of forcing neighbours to reduce the height of trees, hedges etc. Trump has blocked the views of two (I think) homeowners he's in dispute with. Might not return their views but at least they'll get a bit more light into their homes.

by SpacemanSpiff Fri 07 Dec 2012, 1:40 pm

JAS wrote:Got to say that it is a tad embarrassing for our nation that Murray's great sporting achievements are passed over to make a petty political point....
Mac/Gael...any of you 2 work for Glenfiddich or Grant & sons??

I've always said though...Livet whisky is better than Fiddich whisky

Yes, its either been rigged or hi-jacked by some 'hilarious' internet campaign. Probably cost them a bit of money somewhere down the line.

by **navyblueshorts** Fri 07 Dec 2012, 3:01 pm

I'm sure Glenfiddich are heartbroken to hear that His Flatulentness won't be serving their whisky in any of his business premises. What a pillock.
He should know about whether someone is an embarrassment as his contribution to the U.S. election was cringeworthy in the extreme.

by McLaren Sat 08 Dec 2012, 5:33 am

I know I have posted this before but whenever Trump pipes up with another idiotic comment I like to have a little laugh it his expense again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9mzJhvC-8E

I can only hope I would behave in the same manner as Forbes should a similar situation arise in my life. He acted in a way which we should all respect greatly.

by super_realist Sat 08 Dec 2012, 9:00 am

I've no respect for Trump or Forbes.

by princedracula Sat 08 Dec 2012, 9:12 pm

This must be a Donald Trump fan club thread...?

Came across this tweet:

Donald J. Trump‏@realDonaldTrump
I just retained Sir Nick Faldo to be the architect of the Red Course at Doral--he will do a tremendous job! @NickFaldo006

by JAS Sat 08 Dec 2012, 10:18 pm

McLaren wrote:I know I have posted this before but whenever Trump pipes up with another idiotic comment I like to have a little laugh it his expense again.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n9mzJhvC-8E

I can only hope I would behave in the same manner as Forbes should a similar situation arise in my life. He acted in a way which we should all respect greatly.

Actually I think Seth Meyers did a better job on him...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0Km4R377s4M

You can tell Meyers got much more under Trumps skin than Obama did when you hear Trumps response on another clip...quite amusing....like I've consistently said right from the start of this thread, I don't like the the guy or the way he operates.

by super_realist Sun 09 Dec 2012, 10:06 am

No golf today, so might go for a walk over the Trump masterpiece. I'll take some dog dirt to throw at Mr Forbes sh!thole.

by McLaren Sun 09 Dec 2012, 12:54 pm

Jas

Thanks for the link to seth meyers video, he was pretty funny. You could tell trump was seriously pi55ed off.

Mods - whats with pi55ed off being filtered. Are 5 year olds the new target audience? The old insert mark up into the middle of a filtered word also seems to be failing at the moment. Get it sorted, we all need the minor swear now and again.

by Sponsored content