BBC Blog Network

User Profile

ScaraBraeSingleMalt

Listed below are comments made by ScaraBraeSingleMalt between Tuesday, 26th May 2009 and Monday, 24th August 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Where next on Megrahi? 9:33pm on 24 Aug 2009 I watched the show and thought (Vicar) MaCasKill did better that I thought he would have. I felt compelled to make a wee complaint though to the BBC too as I felt that they have again faired towards the side of "against" in whatever has been happening in Scotland and reminded them that people like to see the whole picture. I felt that the al-Megrahi situation is an excellent example of blatant bias. Fair enough, people are unionists but when there is a large support for Kenny MaCaskill, then that support should be aired.

Malcolm Chisolm (was that who supported MaCaskill towards the end) should be commended. His statement was admirable and I know that if I had not witnessed it, then I would not have believed it happened nor seen it on the news. It gave Labour some credence in the end. Again, Labour have tried to twist their argument. If MaCaskill had said no, Labour would have went for the "yes" vote.

If a no confidence vote is won, I trully hope the SNP gain an extra couple of years by winning another 4!

I commend those who broke rank and felt that those who stood up to their parties leaders in support have vindicated Kenny MaCaskill. Sorry if you do not agree with my views but if the US wants to support a boycott of our goods, they are simply displaying their ignorance to facts and reality. I read on the boycott scotland web site that the author had linked Megrahi to 9/11. I felt I had to email them to say that Lockerbie has been linked to Libya, Iran and Palestine. 9/11 was due to the fact the Bush clans friends, the bin Ladens, did not like American feet on Saudi soil prior to the firt Gulf War. the bin Ladens, if I understand correctly, wanted to free Kuwait without American help. 9/11 and Lockerbie, from my point of view, are not linked!

And to the fool who states categorically that al-Megrahi is innocent, the problem with most of the evidence was circumstantial, anecdotal evidence, from what I recall. However, you cannot remove the fact that the man had influence and knew Malta very well. A fact that led the investigators to Megrahi when they traced certain and specific material back to Malts and Libya! Never forget that!
Devolution poll 2:22pm on 29 Jun 2009 #9
I would like to cite the Isle of Man as a response. They have full control over their own laws, speed limits and tax varying powers. They have an agreement with the crown to pay VAT and the aweful TV tax licence. They side with the UK government abroad and are defended by the UK army. I cannot recall, I must admit, what the change was to the Manx government in terms of foreign policy in recent months but I am sure it is still the same. Ask someone from the Isle of Man are you British and they say "No, I am Manx."
There is no reason to not be fully autonimous and maitain the status quo in regards to defense.
However, the last time I mentioned the army on this blog someone blubbered on about the British army saving Britain from Germany. I must remind those who would mention WW2 to also mention the dreadful defeat of the British army by the Japanese. I shall not mention Dunkirk, except in naming the place.

(This is not directed at #9 but to any who would be so kind as to read this.)
I see no reason to control our own matters. Once oil runs out, what will the UK have then? Will the countries of the UK decide "we should go our own way" when the time comes? I think that an oil deprived UK would be a hostile place for all concerned, especially with money being tight and no revenue with which to utilise or lay claim. I think it highly probable that there would be many arguments about who gets what and how much money goes where in the UK will become the precedence unless things are altered.
Greater co-operation is better than no co-operation!
Nuclear weapons will also not save us from a nuclear attack. I believe it is estimated that even a small nuke exploding some miles above the surface of the Earth creates enough heat to be upto 50 times hotter than the surface of the sun and would be enough to wipe out Glasgow and a vast region beyond. Think how hot the sun can feel even on a cool day and then try to imagine the sun much closer to you. Having a high factor sun cream is no defence. The only deterent to nuclear weapons is the sanity of those who have them. It is the insanity we must deter and I believe this can be done through co-operation, not proliferation. If I may also say, money speant on waging someone elses war would be better put too use in patrolling our seas against drug infiltration.
Turning up the heat 09:26am on 25 Jun 2009 I have tence pence in my pocket, so I have 5 times my 2p worth!

Nuclear power is a far worse sourec of energy to the environment than our current source. I cannot be bothered citing references but here is one such good page, it si old but is alright:
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/04/world/europe/04iht-sweden.2392237.html

There are lots of problems with nuclear that really do not exist with coal or oil:
- stability and security: nuclear power stations can never run at 100% due to the very high risk of melt-down (read the latter parts of this page http://www.iaea.org/Publications/Magazines/Bulletin/Bull492/49202796668.html)

- long lived and highly volatile contaminants: nuclear waste, after a 10 year life cycle, must be processed and put into a barrel. The barrel is then taken to an underground chamber, approx 3 miles under the sea bed of the Morray Firth, and stored indefinitely (250 000 years before the nuclear wast is safe to MANAGE - not shouting, just highlighting)

- everything that enters a nuclear power plant is regarded as waste. To the best of my knowledge, even human waste and uneaten food cannot be discarded into the publice domain. If you search for "cleaning Hunterston", you'll get the cost and what has to be cleaned

- people living near a power plant do have an increased risk of problems, some of which include lukemia (http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcgi?artid=1892120)

Forget the cost to building them or the fact that, yes, highly professional jobs are created but the overall cost to the environment is alarming. The Ukrain, for example, cannot utilise over half their land for agriculture yet the EU states the land is safe to use.

I am going to stop and say that Uranium reactors are useless. Possibly a more viable form of nuclear power would be Throium reactors as the waste is not as long lived (around 2000 years) and certainly not as volatile. So why not utilise Thorium? Simple. Thorium does not produce weapon grade material, I believe. Simple as that. Where there are nuclear reactors, there are nuclear bombs.

CO2, by the way, does not adsorb heat and store it. Notice the word ADSORB and not ABSORB. CO2 in effect can reflect heat and stop heat from leaving the atmosphere. Today there are many issues affecting our world:

- heavily depleted ozone layer resulting in an increase in skin cancer
- high levels of ground pollution and acids
- quickly changing weather patterns due to melting ice and shifting winds - though shifting poles can also be attributed to these problems.
- an increasing absence of water and increasing droubts during hotter than normal summers.

Oops, best get back to work. Oh and I completely disagree with freezing CO2 and storing it. This creates porblems:
- large volumes of free oxygen molecules will be removed from the atmosphere (plants do not create O2, it is a by product from the catalysed process of photosynthesis)
- dissolving ice will create acidified water and create high concentrations of carbonates
- there is no scientific data to state that the local environment (local to frozen CO2) is not affected

Freezing and storing CO2 sounds like a good idea but if you think on a global scale and with the majority of countries freezing CO2, which contains a once free O2 molecule, and storing CO2 ice either by dumping in the sea or in underground chambers, the total volume of O2 lost and CO2 pollution being created for another generation of life on earth becomes a more realistic issue.

All in all, the methods to remove pollution remove it for us but create the problem for someone else. Hmm, here's the boss. What, get back to work? Not until 9:55.
A delicate quadrille 2:56pm on 23 Jun 2009 #4
I whole heartedly agree with your comment but await the unionists telling you that without Westminster, Scotland would be nothing and when oil runs out ... I would say that England would quickly become nothing at the point of drying up.

I think that it is high time Scotland takes the initiative and realises that sponging will soon come to nothing once the Brent Oilfiled finally gives up the ghost (if it hasn't already done so) and its last barrel along with all the other oil fields in Scottish water. Yep, once the pride of the world and giving the world the liquid gold standard, even Westminster will have to succumb to the fact that even they will have no oil.

Unionists, please don't bleat on about the army saving Scotland, read about Japan destroying the British army - just referring to a previous discussion. And don't tell me about Brown saving the world. He just did what everyone expected would happen in a sorry situation.

I also often think politics acts out very much like a wrestling match; often pre-written with pre-planned moves, questions and discussions and all too often predictable argument from various people.

I think the SNP, however, must share the blame with the LibLabs over the debacle of the teaching situation. Adopting LibLab standards and taking on more teachers when the system has passed satuaration point such the only people being employed are the inductees into the profession, each year. Teachers now have to work abroad. This sounds nice until the reality of moving away takes hold. A bit like this union,I suppose. The thought of breaking up or moving apart is a bit scary but once done, it is exciting and fresh and the completely much needed new start. I wonder what bill and ben the labour men of Scotland and England would say (take your pick as to whom is which of the other?
"Flubba dubba blubba bub?"
"Wubba wubba flubba dub!"
"Dub!"
"Dub dub!"
A political career shelved 9:01pm on 17 Jun 2009 It has fascinated me how non-elected people can become members of parliament, do so much for themselves yet so little for their paying members. A union stops giving Labour money and half the population gasps in horror. I see unions as a legal arm for the individual worker but when they pretend to argue for the mass, then I have to scowl and disagree.
Unisons news does immediately signal a major policy shift for Labour, as has happened in Scotland already. Rather than give the people a voice, Labour will take it away and tell the people what they will get and how to live the individual life as a member of the masses.
A political career shelved 8:29pm on 17 Jun 2009 #45 Do you consider it fraud to dupe the electorate?.

I would say yes but that PFI is not defrauding anyone, on a legal basis, as there is never any security written into a PFI contract. The reason they are not used down south. PFI is a blank cheque for the boys to do as they will. However, this is nothing new. The building trade has taken advantage of government at every opportunity. It appears that Labour do not realise, or concede, this fact. The reality of PPP/PFI is that a builder can charge at excess costs. Added to the quango of managers who actually control the PFI building while it is being rented out over a 25 year contract, and costs and bitterness spiral, often out of control. A contract, however, is a contract once signed and the total cost to the tax payer for PFI year on year is rediculous. No matter how PFI is wrapped up, the lax contractual control is a litigators dream. Charging at over £100 ph, a litigator will take upto 2 years to sift through the contract, pouring over every contradiction. The quangos in charge of said non-public buildings often have a sore head running the place and are often bitter minded individuals. School teachers scorned for putting school work on walls is not a thing of the past, I will add!

As to the Scottish judicial system, just like everything else in Scotland, it has been dumbed down to appease the narrow minded, and often autistic, individuals who cannot reason the error. I think, as rediculous and draconian as it sounds, that some people utterly deserve the birch. I think maybe their mums should smack their hin' en'.
A political career shelved 5:19pm on 17 Jun 2009 I thought Brian was about to jump into the Decleration of Arbroath for a bit when he wrote "It is, in truth" but then this article is about a fraudster. For all you who have no incling, the line in the Decleration of Arboroath reads something like "It is, in truth, not for riches or glory" etc etc.

Brian, for all his pomp and great use of his vocabulary sure can create a veritable feast. It is no wonder the vast majority of people who only bother to respond are Nationalists who either are the only ones who want to respond or have too much time sifting through Brian's words to get the message and then respond. Come on Brian, where is it in the BBC's remit to not knock Labour? What with the Calman commission regurgitating things as they already stand and then giving the people a "voice" to vote in the commissions findings - as if they were not already tainted or biased - to the bare faced theft of public money. I shall stop myself saying the word fraud as the police may investigate this issue at the behest of Devine himself, or so the story goes. Does that mean if he digs a great big hole for himself, he can go to prison? Maybe not, after all, he is an honorable man, "in truth".
Letter from Texas 11:19am on 26 May 2009 Derekbarker, your arguments, although interesting and valid from your point of view, illustrate the arguments that many people are actually putting forward here. Scotland, as a single country and self governing entity, can work with other countries when required. Yes, Scotland did play its part against fascism and tyrany - go back in our history and you find plenty of evidence regarding such a struggle. Yes, Nicola Strugeon has worked with others to try and contain what could still become an epidemic. Yes, the SNP are trying to work with Labour regarding a review of teh collapse and destruction of the Scottish financial system and yes, Scotland could certainly continue to work with others to enable Scotland to become and other countries to become stronger. Without trying to sound as though I am seeking to insult your point of view, I think that the point you make in regard to Scotland being more than able to work with England is an excellent point. I do, however, disagree with your point about saving the banks.

The FSA were slow and unable to save the banks but quick enough to sell them off to the first bank in the sight of the FSA. Darling himself is quited as saying it would cost between £60m and £100m to save the Dunfermline. Yet he gave, I believe, in the region between £1.2b to £1.6b (acording to press reports, sorry, I don't have the time to substantiate this claim as I need to colect my other half) for another bank to buy the Dunfermline and for the government to take on the toxic debt of the bank. Any self respecting person must be able to admit that Brown was very wrong to deregulate the financial system in his control and which he so vehemenently praises.
Letter from Texas 01:01am on 26 May 2009 #169
Can I also just point out that the Met Police has no bearing in Scotland, neither does NHS England, the Social Services (although shared, these are seperate systems, I believe, please correct me if wrong), running of local authority and central powers, role of the monarchy, fire and safety, education ... I am out of things at the moment. You see, it is very possible to share things as a kingdom of united countries - which include the autonomous Isle of Man: self-rule but crown dependency none the less, though don't tell my girl-friend, she thinks her country is completely independent. I love it when she gets a bit flustered when I tell her. Actually, she was told she has no right to vote here by a Scottish Socialist Labour candidate. I described him as the feeling you get when a the point of a needle gives your finger a little prick.

Come on people, we should start an ad like the black fizzy drink ad and spread a message of hope and joy, not for us, but for the generations of youngsters who will come after us. And if they say, we want to be in the union, well, I had best not say what I think of that!
Letter from Texas 00:40am on 26 May 2009 #169
There is no point in discussing a volatile world when you are talking about independence as though the union would have saved Scotland or any other country. Does the Common Wealth save any other country or help any other country? I do not think it does. If Scotland had greater fiscal autonomy, I would like to think that true Scots would have hauled both the RBS and BoS over hot coals and asked why they are taking on so much debt and risk. The FSA did not do so, being in the union did not help there. There is so much that Scotland can gain from autonomy that is far removed at the moment. Scotland consistantly must go either bowl in hand or with a request for permission to change or alter what is otherwise the terms of the contract. What was beneficial to both parties in 1707 is not a standing contract today. Sure, the English trade routes were bolstered by Scotland and Scotland quickly became a rich country as we were allowed to trade freely but that was then. Today, Scotland can be a prosperous country. Do not be fooled into believing that England has all the jobs either. Most of the North of England is a haven for unemployment, hence the lower than here rates to try and get business into these utterly deprived areas. I can recall watching Kinock when I was a kid and how no-one faught for Scottish values. Now that people are arguing for Scotlands needs, it seems the Scottish people are more keen to argue back on Englands behalf.

Are Scottish people so afronted that we wish to have more control over our own affairs that we must apologise to England and to the monarchy?

«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

ScaraBraeSingleMalt