BBC Blog Network

User Profile

MalcolmW2

Listed below are comments made by MalcolmW2 between Tuesday, 8th September 2009 and Friday, 16th October 2009.

«Newer
Older»

The plebiscite to end all plebiscites 09:56am on 16 Oct 2009 northhighlander #1085:

"If McClure is what he says he is, fine, but looks like an Ultra in disguise to me, especially with the somewhat narrow view he takes, but anyway if he finds Scottish politics more relevant than American hey fine it is a free world, one that Brits have fought hard for over the generations."

IF she is what she says she is, then she is remarkably reticent about answering my question at 1076. You would think that she had views one way or the other on calls for independence by the citizens of the 50th state in her own union, but it seems that she is too preoccupied by supporting calls for independence by a number of citizens in a member nation of our union instead. Strange indeed.
The plebiscite to end all plebiscites 6:55pm on 15 Oct 2009 JRMacClure:

As a declared American citizen who takes such a partial stance on the independence of an integral part of the United Kingdom, may I enquire of you what is your position on the growing and (in my view justified)calls for independence from native Hawaiians? Now Hawaii, unlike Scotland, is a country that really was stolen from its citizens and incorporated into an enforced union with a foreign power. It was a monarchy too! When last there I was surprised how much the passion in the movement for independence had grown. Talk of English aggression sits uncomfortably from an American if they don't recognise the wrong perpetrated by their own nation upon Hawaii.
The plebiscite to end all plebiscites 2:56pm on 15 Oct 2009 JRMacClure # 976:

"Ahhh. So Canada by keeping the queen as titular head is NOT a republic. You might want to mention that to them because I very MUCH suspect they haven't noticed."

------------
I rather suspect that they know only too well that they are NOT a republic. A republic has a president (like the USA), not a monarch (as does Canada). You display a very keen interest in Scottish and British politics, but seem not to understand the basic constitutional definitions. Perhaps it was late on the West Coast when you wrote that . . . . . ;-)
Mr Cameron talks to Gen Dannatt 12:33pm on 07 Oct 2009 Exiledscot52 #4:

"What concerns me is him talking about a position in government. Soldiers should soldier and leave lesser beings to be politicians. "

----------------------

Couldn't disagree with that statement more. If we had a few more politicians who has actually served in the military (and I don't mean in the Education Corps, I mean at the sharp end), then we almost certainly wouldn't be in the mess overseas that we are. Career politicians are the root cause of many of the current problems. As with most things in life, there is no substitute for personal experience.
Paper trail 5:40pm on 01 Oct 2009 Electric Hermit #265 (at 4.30pm)

"For all your claims of reasonableness you just can't help showing your true nature with little slips like this. The referendum is promised, not threatened."

------------------

I used the word "threatened" because it was "promised" by a political party, just as the referendum on the EU Lisbon Treaty was "promised" by one. I don't trust any politician to keep his / her word on such things. That is because of long years of experience, not any bias for or against any particular party. I am sure you will disagree, but I don't trust the SNP any more than Labour, Tory or Liberal parties to keep their word should it suit them not to. I am party neutral. My stance on the union (British not European in this context) is because I need to be convinced that change rather than the status quo is better. So far I am not.

Interesting that JRMaclure # 266 (at 4.35pm) should pick up exactly the same point, and write in such similar terms, as you within 5 minutes of your post (and before it was published). Not psychically related are you?

JRMacClure #266 (at 4.35pm)
Paper trail 2:50pm on 01 Oct 2009 Electric Hermit # 216:

Thank you for the reply. Given that you have not even attempted to offer an answer to my question, but continue to assert that I hold positions that I haven't expressed, I can only assume that you have no answer! Ranting is no substitute for political argument, and given that, despite the impression created by this blog, the majority of Scots still have to be persuaded on the question of full independence, I think I can sleep easily in my bed tonight.

The argument for independence is yours to make, not mine to refute. You may wish to consider that it is also possible for someone to be a British unionist and a supporter of EU membership. They are not mutually exclusive. Responses like yours are in my view the reason why those who do not hold nationalist views are rarer here than hens teeth. It is not because they do not exist in Scotland but because it is so hard to find real debate here, just political diatribe. Should the threatened referendum on Scottish independence ever take place, I predict that many posters on here are in for a very rude awakening.
Paper trail 10:38am on 01 Oct 2009 #60 Electric Hermit:

"Of course it does! The reason being that you see everything through the distorting lens of irrational hatred of the EU. The nonsense about the Lisbon Treaty is evidence enough of that."

------------

A rather intemperate post in reply to mine, which was neither pro nor anti membership of the EU. I was simply highlighting what I see as a dichotomy in the views of many posters here on a political union putting its interests above those of Scotland. That is in the nature of political unions! I simply wonder why an existing union with England, Wales and Northern Ireland is seen as bad when it does this, but one with wider Europe which does the same (and enshrines it in a legally binding treaty)is good? I did not express an opinion either way, and frankly, the speed and venom with which you replied (to an assumed postion that I had not stated) is an all too typical reaction on this blog, and one of the major stumbling blocks that the SNP will face in a referendum on independence. Undecided voters are turned off by the blatant antagonism and will probably vote "no" in response. Current union supporters like me (freely admitted and an honourable political position, even if opposed to your own) are people that you have to convince. Argument rather than abuse is surely the way to go?

PS: I have read the Lisbon Treaty - have you? If so, can you explain which part of my reference to it was "nonsense"?
Paper trail 5:23pm on 30 Sep 2009 #48 U14094468

Online Ed Here:

"Scotland's interests come second to the maintenance of the Union,"

-----------------------------

The thing that many of us find confusing in the extreme is the fact that, whilst your statement above is almost certainly true, (not just for Scotland but every region of the UK), it is also true of the attitude of the EU towards the UK (or in the event of Scottish independence towards Scotland) and every other member state. Indeed that very principle is enshrined within the Lisbon Treaty: The needs of the Union come first, even if those needs conflict with the interests of, and disadvantage, individual member states. Despite this, most if not all Scottish independence-seekers actively support EU membership of the for the UK, and should it ever come about, an independent Scotland, yet they decry the existence of the "British" Union when it behaves in exactly the same way. There may be logic in that position, but it passes me by.
Anti-Glasgow? 1:10pm on 19 Sep 2009 LondonHaris @100:

"So, O.K. we are having to endure a Cut in Glasgow with the lost of the new Air-Port Link, so therefore in return to show a balance of fair lost, then let's have some Cut's in Stratford East London, and cut back on any improvements to London's Transport links prior to the next Olympic Games.

After all, fair is fair isn't it?"

-------------------------

When English folk have appeared on here and complained about the Scots getting free prescriptions, no tuition fees or whatever, when they in England don't have such benefits, they have received short shrift and the same response: Scotland has its own government and will decide its own spending priorities.

You are now seeing the other side of that coin. This cut is a decision of the Scottish government, nothing to do with Londoners or the English, who will see cuts of their own, but which may not be in the same areas. You really can't have it both ways.
Legislative programme 4:05pm on 08 Sep 2009 At 2.05pm post 625 JRMacClure wrote:

"How many generations do you think newcomers have to live here before they have YOUR permission to consider themselves Scots, by the way?"

I have been following JRMacClure's contributions with interest. An American, living in America, with a deep interest and knowledge of Scottish politics and history. But when he/she says "here" in the above quote, does that mean Scotland or America? Or is it a freudian slip?

Just wondering . . . . .

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

MalcolmW2