Jump to content

Alex salmond scandal


Fudger

Recommended Posts

Any respect I had for Billy Connolly went when he started wearing “highland dress” and doing the whole Brigadoon experience for the royals. His willingness to give them the native experience was nauseating. 

He’s exactly the kind of Scot holding the country back. Going around claiming people are swallowing bulls**t while wearing an Anglo-romanticised costume to please his betters. 

Ps anyone who bases their politics on braveheart, the football team they support, who their parents voted for or which religious social club they’re affiliated with is a c**t. 

Edited by Zorro
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, Mclean07 said:

Like everyone else I'm a bit tired going round in circles with people who will never agree. So I'm going to try very hard to take a break. I came across this, though, which sums up for me the many zoomers I see on social media and occasionally on here. (You know who I mean) :) 

image.png.efd4bee3b6bbde29238ff83cb2bdfb9b.png

As usual a lot of valid points mixed in with a huge shovel full of over simplification.

Actually BC has spent a load of his time poking fun at the heather and bagpipes image of Scotland the establishment are so keen to promote.

What he seems to be saying here is that the SNP have built a case on emotion and bigotry an as a consequence it aint very strong. I have to say I agree with that part. There is however a stronger case to be made, particularly now as the establishment seems bent on self destruction over their relationship with the EU.

An I also agree with some of the other comments above. It's easy to be an internationalist when you are a multi-millionaire. Less appealing when you live in a tenement in Glasgow with a single parent. You should know Billy. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

As usual a lot of valid points mixed in with a huge shovel full of over simplification.

Actually BC has spent a load of his time poking fun at the heather and bagpipes image of Scotland the establishment are so keen to promote.

What he seems to be saying here is that the SNP have built a case on emotion and bigotry an as a consequence it aint very strong. I have to say I agree with that part. There is however a stronger case to be made, particularly now as the establishment seems bent on self destruction over their relationship with the EU.

An I also agree with some of the other comments above. It's easy to be an internationalist when you are a multi-millionaire. Less appealing when you live in a tenement in Glasgow with a single parent. You should know Billy. 

Anyone who believes the case for independence is built on emotion and bigotry, hasn’t been paying attention. The Yes movement is much more tolerant and inclusive than the unionists. Unionisms is insular, ignorant, intolerant and built on a weak emotional tie to wars and empire building. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They still don't get it... Independence for most has nothing to do with any dislike of England. Westminster has shown Scotland little favour however in my lifetime, and as such, Independence is about pro Scotland!

Unionists like to stay latched on to this 1970's idea that the support for Scottish independence is somehow driven by a hatred of the English (in anything other than a tiny minority of cases, there are idiots in all movements after all) but mostly this is pure piffle old bean.

The idiots and extremists don't define a movement on either side but are used gleefully as examples to beat the other side with, which is pretty damn useless... and pretty damn sad! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Scooter said:

Westminster has shown Scotland little favour however in my lifetime, and as such, Independence is about pro Scotland!

In the 1890's / early 1900s the Conservative and Unionist party pushed through government funding of the West Highland line which they knew would never run at a profit. They did this to unite the kingdom.

In the 1980s Hilda had lost all notion of the Unionist part of her party's name. There are countless examples but one is the way she used Scotland as a laboratory for her new "Poll Tax". Since then none of her airs have seen any need to do anything to repair the damage.

And thus the SNP rose to power. They still don't seem to think anything needs to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, gdevoy said:

What he seems to be saying here is that the SNP have built a case on emotion and bigotry an as a consequence it aint very strong. I have to say I agree with that part.

Tosh.

upi again make the classic mistake of linking the SNP with the independence movement.  They are two different entities who just happen to be aiming for the same prize.

also to say the SNP have built a case on emotion is the most belittling statement for Scots I’ve heard from anyone outside the yoonatic. And not something I’d expect from you.

the SNP case has been built on solid sensible caring government, delivering for Scots and Scotland in the face of horrendous austerity cuts from Westminster and a fully hostile and at sometimes rabid media.

The Yes campaign is inclusive, tolerant and based on a shared desire for better than we get, have got and will ever get from the elite.

connoly is like most unionists, imbibed with a level of self loathing which is unnatural and the product of decades of unionist re-education.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Beaker71 said:

...again make the classic mistake of linking the SNP with the independence movement.  

I have to say I am really struggling to see "the independence movement" as anything more that the Scottish Nationalists. All the other political parties, apart from perhaps the Greens (but who the beep knows what they stand for) are 100% committed to the UK. Any hint of support for independence has been well battered out of Scottish Labour.

Outside of politics business, the churches and every other body I can thing of think of all seem to be committed to the UK.

Nope the only people talking about a 2nd referendum all seem to be paid up party members.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, gdevoy said:

But if the YES campaign think they can advance their cause by it they are not above using it.

Do you mean like with Labour’s immigration mugs, the Tories grass an immigrant vans, UKIPS Nazi inspired advertising, Vote leaves lies about immigrants clogging up the NHS, Better togethers lies about immigrants being ineligible to stay if Scotland became independent, the Brexit vote banning Eu citizens living here from voting...? That kinda bigotry?

I’d love to see evidence of anything comparable from the SNP. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Several of you go on about McLean bad mouthing Scotland but look at most of your posts above, you make this country out to be some wee poverty stricken backwater where we have no say, no money, no prosperity etc. It's not the former Soviet Union or North Korea we live in and you are not oppressed. 

Granted, things could be better but they could be a whole lot worse and have been in the not so distant past. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, Fudger said:

Granted, things could be better but they could be a whole lot worse and have been in the not so distant past. 

The infra structure in Scotland is a total embarrassment compared to the South East / Home Counties. Granted it is equally s**t in parts of England also but that's no reason to let the Westminster elite off the hook.

They are still focused on improving links between London and Birmingham and maybe as an after-though Manchester. We are not even in the plans.

If a no deal Brexit goes ahead London and the South East will be OK because thy are an international financial hub. The rest of the UK will become an even worse backwater than it is already. That is why the Westminster elite are not worried about a no deal Brexit. There is not downside for them.

So things could get a lot worse again in the not too distant future.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

The infra structure in Scotland is a total embarrassment compared to the South East / Home Counties.   

What specifically do you mean by infrastructure? 

I regularly work in London and the Crawley area and if by infrastructure you mean public transport, I would far rather navigate round the central belt of Scotland than the south east of England. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Fudger said:

What specifically do you mean by infrastructure? 

I regularly work in London and the Crawley area and if by infrastructure you mean public transport, I would far rather navigate round the central belt of Scotland than the south east of England. 

Intercontinental  travel connections?  Most in the UK go through London as a hub. Then there's the Glasgow Underground - not extended in over 100 years.  An average 60mph journey time on the 50 odd miles between Scotlands two biggest cities by train, on the improved electric service.  Edinburgh's tram network? lol  How about an Oyster card to pay your way on all like in the South East? haha  There's not even a dual carriage way from Aberdeen to Inverness.  Then there's the non existent links to the Borders from everywhere,  We still have a Victorian, early 20c transport network out-with the limited  'motorway' network in Scotland, mostly 2 lane and almost entirely in the central belt.  Would be unthinkable in other Northern European countries.

Edited by RAG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, gdevoy said:

Nope the only people talking about a 2nd referendum all seem to be paid up party members.

 

Where have you been living?  The ONLY politicians who go on about a 2nd referendum are the unionists.  Willie Rennie mentions it every time he opens his confused gob.  Roof the mooth snarls it through gritted teeth at every speech. 

You also seem somewhat blinkered to the huge variety of groups which make up the yes movement.

English for yes, Labour for Yes are two such groups who are very vocal and very visible on social media and all events.

But if you take all your news from aunty then you won't be aware.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Fudger said:

Several of you go on about McLean bad mouthing Scotland but look at most of your posts above, you make this country out to be some wee poverty stricken backwater where we have no say, no money, no prosperity etc. It's not the former Soviet Union or North Korea we live in and you are not oppressed. 

Granted, things could be better but they could be a whole lot worse and have been in the not so distant past. 

Actually this is a misunderstanding from you on a grand scale.   We speak about the democratic deficit, where the media almost to an outlet is 100% against the Scottish government and the SNP in particular.   A nation where the grand total of democratic power amounts to being able to determine 25% of the levers available.

Do not mistake this for poverty which is an issue being exacerbated by the austerity agenda in WM  and the decades long failure if Labour's local governments.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zorro said:

Hey @gdevoy how you getting on looking for this SNP braveheart stuff? Here’s something to help. 

https://www.google.co.uk/

My English friend's wife made his life a misery after she watched the film. She was not alone, and the SNP were in no hurry to distance themselves from any boost in membership produced by the film's release.

It was a film. It was a fiction, created for entertainment. The actual history of William Wallace is shrouded in the mists of time. And more importantly, just like whether Serena Williams was subjected to sexist attitudes, or not, it is irrelevant. But the SNP are quite happy to hover up as much support as they can get on the back of it.  

What I want to know up front in the first instance is not:
a) whether we could watch Breavheart free every day or
b) whether an Independent Scotland would swing to the left or the right,

but

c)  how well could an independent Scotland survive economically?

This is something the SNP seem loath to discuss other than to do the hard Brexiteer thing calling every independent analysis "Project Fear".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, gdevoy said:

My English friend's wife made his life a misery after she watched the film. She was not alone, and the SNP were in no hurry to distance themselves from any boost in membership produced by the film's release.

It was a film. It was a fiction, created for entertainment. The actual history of William Wallace is shrouded in the mists of time. And more importantly, just like whether Serena Williams was subjected to sexist attitudes, or not, it is irrelevant. But the SNP are quite happy to hover up as much support as they can get on the back of it.  

What I want to know up front in the first instance is not:
a) whether we could watch Breavheart free every day or
b) whether an Independent Scotland would swing to the left or the right,

but

c)  how well could an independent Scotland survive economically?

This is something the SNP seem loath to discuss other than to do the hard Brexiteer thing calling every independent analysis "Project Fear".

 

You’re right it is a film and it is fiction, just like your claim the SNP used Braveheart as a recruiting film. The film came out in 1995, the SNP came to power in 2007. Now I know some films can be slow burners, but 12 years? Then another 7 years before they saw a significant spike in membership. Are you seriously claiming this was down to the Braveheart effect? 

I’ll tell you what I think caused the spike - New Labour. After a generation of Tory rule we were promised a new and brighter future, and what did we get? More of the same. The rich got rich and the poor got poorer. You don’t see me trying to pin that on the film Wall Street though. 

As for your friend, maybe he should’ve chosen his wife more carefully if he felt his life was a misery. However his choice and the actions of his wife aren’t the responsibility of the SNP. Just like the film and Richard Leonard’s grasp on which are devolved and which are reserved powers; separating fact from fiction shouldn’t be that difficult if you’ve of a mind to research the subject. However it’s much easier for the real nationalists, Unionists, to blame the rise in support for independence on nationalism. Braveheart is just a lump of mud they’ve picked up to throw. 

Ps I’d be equally interested to know how the Uk will survive economically. I’m seeing very little evidence it is viable. At least the SNP put forward a plan. A plan “project fear” felt compelled to lie about. Since then there’s been an independent growth commission report on our potential and possibilities.  However, it’s not for the current snp government to set the economic course for an independent Scotland. That right belongs to the first elected government of an independent scotland. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Zorro said:

I’ll tell you what I think caused the spike - New Labour.

The Braveheart thing is actually a bit of a side issue, I am just a bit concerned it reflects the mind-set of the SNP's nutty zealots (every party has got them). Even I felt a bit intimidated crossing the High Street in 2014, in front of a march of several hundred bagpipe playing, drum thumping, flag wavers with "Remember Bannockburn" banners. Heaven knows how it affected anybody born south of the border. The referendum should have been about what "Scotland" meant in 2014, not what was happening in 1314.

I agree, the serious increase in the SNP that propelled it to power was Tonee's attempts to move Labour right of  centre. I can hear Maclean07 fulminating in the background from here. The fact that support has remained with the SNP is a demonstration that contrary to Maclean's claims they are not "further to the right" than Labour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So do we think Cameron was right to lobby Sony to delay releasing Outlander weeks before Indy Ref 1?!?  Do me a favour, that's derogatory hogwash!

As I said earlier, the 'nutty zealots', the idiots, whatever they're called do NOT define a movement but are used to throw dirt and malign it.

If you felt intimidated it says more about you're insecurities than their fancy dress. Jist because we want wur 'FREEDOM' disnae mean we need tae go roon in kilts wae the skirl o' the pipes n drums tae get it, ken? :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gdevoy said:

The fact that support has remained with the SNP is a demonstration that contrary to Maclean's claims they are not "further to the right" than Labour.

The SNP are a far broader church than the unionist parties.  The SNP are 'Social Democrats' just like Labour.  But being a broader church they can have policies of the free market right when they like or things like minimum pricing when they want to get really left wing.  This has created a bit of a problem for Labour in Scotland, who are still in the box of traditional left/right policy making.  Only Labour are obsessed with left and right wing ideologies, in Scotland we're into nationalist or unionist groupthink.  Look at the baby box.  That should be stick on traditional Labour party policy, but was utterly derided by Scottish Labour - in a country where 1/3 of kids are born into poverty?  One small example - but that's why Labour are further to the extreme right.  It's extremely right wing to expect babies to get on their bike and improve their lot.

Edited by RAG
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...