Letter from Texas
Distractions everywhere as I write this in Dallas Fort Worth airport.
Firstly, the racket from the coffee shop next door: trad jazz music mingling with a genteel customer/server dispute over prices.
Then there is the utterly depressing news from home that United have, once more, failed to secure a European place.
To lose out is bad. To lose out on goal difference is doubly grim. No excuses, though. It's hard to thrive when you get thumped 3-0 in successive weeks.
But why Dallas? Why was I not suffering at Tannadice along with my fellow Arabs?
All part of the prolonged preparation of a documentary to mark 10 years of devolution.
It's due to go out on Sunday June 28 - which leaves me many more plugging days.
'National identity'
We were keen to exemplify the constitutional choice that confronts Scotland: which is to continue expressing our national identity within a wider state or to conclude that that identity can only be properly secured by independence.
Norway offered our example of the latter: a nation which took the independence route after being governed, to varying degrees, from Denmark and then Sweden.
I have alluded to that already on these pages.
Texas provided the alternative scenario. Herewith a quotation: "Texas is a state of mind. Texas is an obsession. Above all, Texas is a nation in every sense of the word."
That's John Steinbeck, writing in Travels with Charley, Charley being his large, enthusiastic dog.
But the nation that is Texas has chosen since 1845 to share sovereignty with the United States of America.
Everyone I met stressed, ever so politely, the element of choice.
Deliberate tease
Texas was not subservient. Texas was not subsumed. Texas could choose to secede from the US. Texas chooses not to do so.
Texans cheerfully confess that their assertion of a distinct identity frequently exasperates their fellow US citizens from less fiercely defined states.
It is, they insist, part of their charm - and, frequently, a deliberate tease.
As one put it to me, Texans like to poke their fellow Americans in the ribs from time to time, if only to stress that the States may be United but they are far from uniform.
PS: Welcome your comments as ever. Would remind you, gently, that it is one of the house rules that responses should not stray from the particular topic on offer.
This is designed to ensure that, in the interests of all readers, there can be focused, substantive debate.
Over a prolonged period, it means that the broadest possible range of topics can be aired.
I'm 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~01~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Any country that's sitting on an ocean of oil can poke it's neighbours in the ribs anytime it likes. Sadly Scotland is not in that category, the little their was is nearly all gone to prop up a dying Labour government in London.
Complain about this comment
Interesting Brian, but to equate the Texas identity with that of Scotland would be misleading. Texans only first set out their distinctiveness in the uprising of 1835 to my knowledge ... Scotland had by then been "submerged" within the UK for just short of 130 years, we are now 174 later, still a distinctive Scottish identity survives.
Texans are, as a "nation", ridiculous young when one compares them to Scotland, or indeed most other European countries, regions etc ...
Besides, the form of federalism that works in the U.S. could never be applied to the U.K. as the electorate will simply not allow England to be broken up in to lesser units and as a monolith it is some 85% of the UK. It is bad enough in Canada with the Ontario-Quebec duopoly ... never mind a supposed federal solution in the UK!
Clearly the status-quo is inherently unstable and cannot last; I cannot see an enduring unionist solution to this puzzle ... and we must all recognise it is as much grounded in the interests as the identities of the constituent nations.
Complain about this comment
Sorry to interrupt your little love-fest with Texas, Brian, but I just thought I'd mention that people here in the Glorious Labour Party's Administrative Sector of North Britain are talking about the imminent collapse of the UK government. Nothing to say about that?
Complain about this comment
An interesting subplot you put in there Brian....
The People of Scotland have never had that choice. Scotland cannot, yet, leave the UK. To do so requires a referendum, and despite the People duly electing the SNP to be the Government, thanks to party politics by the English parties, we still cannot have our referendum, the first chance since 1707 for the good people of Scotland (and even the not so good; apparently MP's will still get a vote) that someone bothers to actually ask the people "Do you want to be run by the English-led parliament in London (and I say that given that of the 624 MP's, over 500 are from England), or do you wish to be an independent nation with the right to govern her own borders, decide on immigration, foreign policy, EU membership, the single currency, fisheries rights and all other sovereign duties without the interests of South-East England coming first?"
Granted I think the English parties may well have some trouble with the wording I've laid out there....
Can't think why though....
Complain about this comment
Brian
I hope you remember to point out the big, big difference in the ammount of Federal interference in the lives of Texans as compared to the pages of reserved matters where Westminster interferes in our lives right down to the level of which books we borrow. No-one complained much about the Union when it was just war and the representation of the people, it was only when Westminster got a taste of bossing us around in the 14-18 War and decided to carry on after the War was over that you got the first stirrings for independence. Now you've got CCTV on every lamp-post, ID cards, benefit snoops and Westminster acting like the Soviet nomenclatura, it's no wonder that the Nats are up to 40%. Unless CMD really gets round to dismantling the "public service" in very short order, we'll have the baliff's men in and Scotland will be out of the Union completely. Devolution max will be still-born, even if it manages to be conceived.
Complain about this comment
brian is the wee trip to texas at the expenses of the bbc? Anyway brian cant wait to watch that documentary. hmmn independence or federation interesting that no one nowadays says that the status quo is an option. Its not what was said in the first days of snp government by the labour party the discussion has definetely moved on. I have noticed a distinct difference between the westminster and scottish parliaments since devolution happened. The westminster parliament seems to make laws that are reactive while the scottish parliament is a pro active legislature. Look at how many of the policies of the scottish parliament have been followed by westminster.
Complain about this comment
"Texas was not subservient. Texas was not subsumed. Texas could choose to secede from the US. Texas chooses not to do so."
So what?
I wonder if the Texans would so readily embrace their situation if they were consumed by a neighbour ten times their size and were repeatedly informed by their own media and politicians that they (Texans) were little more than recipients of their 'generous' neighbour's largesse.
When Scots are finally asked the question then we too can make a choice. Until then, we will simply have to keep highlighting the facts and hope that the electorate will begin to treat most that passes for news in Scotland with a pinch of salt.
As pointed out by another poster, whilst you are travelling the globe looking for examples of 'nations' that are happy to form part of a larger entity, here in the UK the seat of government continues to be consumed by the cancer of corruption.
Complain about this comment
Like the sign Brian at least you've been given a choice in which way to go.
Texas and Scotland no similarities by any stretch of the imagination vastly different cultures with equally different views on how they see and fit into the wider world.
Complain about this comment
Just remind me, Brian, wasn't Texas part of Mexico until Travers won its independence - hence the Lone Star State. Only after a referendum of all the people did Texas then join the Union. So nominally Texas never has been a nation state in its own right.
Now we compare that with Scotland which was a unified nation state by 800 AD when England was still a squabbling mewing infant of Angles and Saxons. Prior to Norman and his conquests the slightly more unified Angles and Saxons were squabbling with the Vikings and it was from such a battle that Harald rushed south to take on the Normans (ironic eh, yet another bunch of Vikings).
Apart from Edward the First's attempts to incorporate Scotland ( the thrity years of the War of Independence) Scotland has been a sovereign nation since the coming together of the Scots and the Picts.
That was until the Scot's Lairds had their pockets mightily hit by the Darien fiasco and rather than sell their lands or hand them over to the Edinburgh middle class they were mortgaged with were given a bail out when the Tories reversed their political stance and decided that an independent Scotland could decide to reject their Hanoverian choice to succeed Queen Anne. Instead of paying the Jacobite Lords not to support the 'Old Pretender'(as the Whigs had been doing) they would use the same cash to buy the support of the Laird's Estaite in the Edinburgh Parliament for the Union Treaty.
So it came to pass that in 1707, the People of Scotland were sold down the river to feather the nests of the professional politicians of the day, even though the people wanted nothing to do with it then and have suffered ever since from being on the hind teat. No referendum, no plebiscite, no nothing - very different to Texas - just dae as your telt, we knaw better, cos were Lairds.
So, are we really that surprised when we discover the political successors to the Lairds are still at it after all they are only following 300 years of tradition?
The question is what has changed in 300 years
Complain about this comment
"We were keen to exemplify the constitutional choice that confronts Scotland: which is to continue expressing our national identity within a wider state or to conclude that that identity can only be properly secured by independence."
Two questions:
1. Why does national identity matter?
2. Why is it any of the business of the state?
Complain about this comment
I'm not sure that a Texas/Scotland comparison is really valid.
Texas was once part of northern Mexico and the Mexicans encouraged settlers from the US into Texas to take care of their Native American "problem" in Texas.
The influx of settlers from the US then decided to throw off Mexican Rule and become and independent state. The fighting started in 1835 and they declared independence in 1836.
There were two factions among the Texans. One faction wanted to stay independent and expand west to form a southern rival to the US and the other faction wanted to be part of the US for safety against the Mexicans.
Negotiations by the safety faction with the US had already started by 1837 and Texas was incorporated as State of the US by 1845. Depending if you count Texas as an independent state from the start of the fighting or from their declaration of independence they were independent for all of 10 or 9 years.
Scotland by comparison is one of the oldest nations in Europe with two indigenous Scottish languages as well as English and is not an ephemeral state as Texas was created by settlement and conquest from the eventual annexing neighbour.
Also unlike Texas, Scotland didn't apply to become part of a pre-existing multi-state country. The Treaty of Union was a treaty between two and only two countries, Scotland and England, which resulted in the abolition of both and the creation of the UK. Wales was not involved as it was already an incorporated province of England and Ireland was not included in the Union till 1801.
Comparing Texas and Scotland in the article makes me uneasy. An often used argument by unionists is to try to assert that Scottishness is not different enough from Englishness to warrant a separate country and the comparison between the Texas and Scotland in the article follows that same template.
Texas was not subservient. Texas was not subsumed. Texas could choose to secede from the US. Texas chooses not to do so.
The Texans you spoke to must have short memories Brian. Texas tried to secede in 1861 along with a lot of other southern states and got militarily crushed and forcibly re-incorporated into the US.
Complain about this comment
Brian
In your documentary, I hope you are going to deal with the constitutional stance of Texas in 1861.
While slavery wasn't the only (one could argue not even the main) reason for secession, the Texas Ordinance of Secession specifically said
"We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable."
Any suggestion that the Scottish Independence Movement is racist and not an inclusive civic nationalism would be "unfortunate".
Complain about this comment
Good god Brian.... Scotland & Texas??
Can't wait to see your documentary!
Brian, are you promoting Scotland's Homecoming?
Complain about this comment
The question of identity in Texas is an interesting one. For reasons that needn't detain us I know the place quite well and once posed the question of some friends; which date did they celebrate as more important, the 4th of July (US Independence) or 2nd March (Texas Independence).
The answer was the 4th of July. Some Texans with a sense of history do celebrate March 2, but there's no general rejoicing. It was commented in fact that the Latin American holiday Cinco de Mayo (May 5) gets a lot more attention as the Hispanic population continues to rise, seemingly exponentially. Certainly San Antonio feels a lot like an English-speaking part of Mexico and as a result the non-Hispanic population there seems a lot more aggressively Texan than further east in Houston.
All in all, get behind the rhetoric and you find most (white) Texans think of themselves as Americans. If anybody's going to be shouting for independence its the Hispanics, reclaiming what was once Mexican soil.
Complain about this comment
Just realised Brian, don't know how your expense claim form is going to look but Dallas.
Complain about this comment
#458 (from previous thread which now seems to be closed to new posts) cynicalHighlander
Curds and whey may well be the appropriate treatment for a minor brain haemorrhage. These old treatments may be appropriate for this particular condition.
Complain about this comment
I look forward to seeing the program I'm sure it will live up to your usual standards.
I too struggle comparing Texas to Scotland. Culturally and linguistically it shares much with its neighboring states (unlike Quebec and Canada) therefore the argument for independence surely becomes a geographical one.
Norway is more of a challenge 3 languages and relatively young. I'm sure in your program you discuss the ongoing debate in Norway about the EU. The Norwegian argument against integration is that it would not gain, it is too rich to benefit.
I'm sure you'll make this all clear in your program.
On a slightly different topic - I tend agree with post 10.
The nation state is surely an outdated concept and really only becomes relevant when you consider the quality of governance and the relevance and effectiveness of policy decisions.
I cannot understand why, those who argue (in the language of new labour) that there are no Scottish only solutions will without shame or confusion in the same breath argue against European integration the time isn't right......??? Surely these two topics are welded together.
Clearly while Scotland isn't important enough to have its own 'solutions' the UK is?
The clear exception is the recession which clearly is a global problem....
This is just spin where are their jobs (or their gravy train) based?
The logical conclusion is that democracy should be federalist and brought closer to its electors ideally in populations which share a common bond and are not too large to create a feeling of isolation amongst significant numbers of voters.
In my mind (this isn't scientific) states of 5-15 million tend to integrate and achieve better governance than large old empires.
Maybe Texas would benefit after all - if it isn't already too big.
Complain about this comment
#17 - could be wrong, but I believe the population of Texas is currently around 25 million.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#16.oldnat
Docks still work for nettle stings.
I won't go into sucking but the mods are showing that they are such.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#16 oldnat
Probably a delayed reaction to being beaten unconscious during a mugging. But well worth a sympathy vote when your expenses are about to be scrutinised.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#16.oldnat
They are still accepting posts and it is going to get nasty as more and more revelations are forthcoming as to to the total incompetency in Brown and his cohorts.
Complain about this comment
#25 handclapping
My thoughts exactly.
"Sorry" and "Regret" are really good when they are genuine feelings.
Why do so few of us believe those coming from MPs mouths?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I take it the old one will phrase things very carefully know, giving his new found "green card credentials" no more flying (what will he do with all those free air miles he's collected) and no more support for the oil
companies (lordly! he has given up on the north sea?)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#31
Bighullabaloo, I thought logic was out the window?.
Complain about this comment
That will be the John Steinbeck from Salinas California.
I sincerely hope your documentary provides something with a bit more substance than a comparison with Texas.
As the man from Missouri said; "the hat don't make the boy a cowboy".
Complain about this comment
"We were keen to exemplify the constitutional choice that confronts Scotland: which is to continue expressing our national identity within a wider state or to conclude that that identity can only be properly secured by independence."
Hmm, is this the new line to be pushed by the BBC in Scotland?
If they can frame the nature of the independence debate to narrow definitions of identity then they can exclude much of the positive independence supporting argument.
It will also serve to foster and cultivate an entirely contrived environment within which the more rabid and distastefull Unionist claims can then be 'properly' aired and addressed.
Complain about this comment
Bighullabaloo, I think the big logical question you should be asking yourself is! Can Scotland have a kind of fiscal control like Texas and still remain within the wider state of the UK.
Complain about this comment
"We were keen to exemplify the constitutional choice that confronts Scotland: which is to continue expressing our national identity within a wider state or to conclude that that identity can only be properly secured by independence."
Scotland has no identity outside of the United Kingdom. To the outside world we are either British or English. We may say we are from Scotland abroad and say we are Scottish but the world happens to be ignorant of the United Kingdom when it comes to internal matters.
By remaining apart of the United Kingdom, Scotland will be able to express her identity in Scoltand, but we will not have the opportunity to do so outside of Scotland, especially to the outside world.
Complain about this comment
The REAL constitutional choice that confronts Scotland:
Fifteen years being Lord Snooty's poll tax guinea pigs, followed by another 15 years of whatever crowd of even more polished liars Labour eventually cobble together......or take charge of our own destiny forever.
Hmmmmmmmm....that's quite a tough choice! Not!
Complain about this comment
Telegraph: "There were suggestions yesterday that more than 300 MPs may either step down or be voted out of office at the general election."
Bring it on!
Complain about this comment
Loving that picture accompanying this blog Brian.
I can just picture a grinning Gordon Brown sitting in the front seat of the tow truck with the driver as his car is loaded onto the back!
Complain about this comment
The Telegraph is tonight accusing the UK Government cabinet of mind-numbing sleaze unprecedented in the history of British politics and the BBC's top story is "Palace suspends 'tour' chauffeur".
Totally absurd.
Complain about this comment
Brian
Travels with Charley is nearly 50 years ago, 50 years ago the Scottish National Party were a joke. Are you saying that an outsiders view of Texas 50 years ago is still valid in the same way you would claim the SNP is still a joke? Maybe a rewrite of the Grapes of Wrath about the travails of the Britons fleeing the Westminster bankruptcy would be a better literary analogy. Or perhaps, Of Mice and Men on the defenestrated Unionists?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#36 Thomas 'but the world happens to be ignorant of the United Kingdom when it comes to internal matters.' After glancing at an unknown program on the tv at my work this evening where the subject was a marine turbine somewhere down south, the presenter went on ..... that more of these could be be of benefit just like the largest wind turbine site in Europe in the 'North of Scotland '. Now i can excuse Americans and foreigners in general for being ignorant but im sure an Englishman should know that Glasgow is not near John o Groats or even Inverness.
Complain about this comment
#28 oldnat
Why do so few of us believe those coming from MPs mouths?
Perhaps, because unlike you, they have no idea what they refer to.
Complain about this comment
#10 Anaxim
Two answers to your two questions:
1. National identity matters because it exists. If to deny that it matters is to deny that it exists, then to deny that it exists is absurd if it can be demonstrated, as it can, that, in spite of any such denial, it does indeed exist. If you were to consider that it should not exist, it would still matter, because in that circumstance you would be faced with the problem of how to go about causing it to cease to exist, which is not easy, which appears to be your problem, which you are manifestly failing to solve, as here it is manifestly manifest and spitting in your eye.
2. If sovereignty resides in the nation, as it does according to the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen (1789), it is for the nation to determine whether it requires statehood to protect that sovereignty so that it may exercise it in whatever manner it chooses to consider to be most appropriate for it.
Another way of dealing with your questions might be, of course, to point out gently that this is still only the 21st century and that the planet is still teeming with nations vying to exercise their sovereignty for their own benefit despite the existence of organizations such as the EU and the UN, of which no nation may become a member, of course, unless it expresses its sovereignty through statehood.
Whatever century you think you are living in and whatever planet you are living on, do consider coming down to earth.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#46 frankly-francophone
Identity may be nothing more than what reflects back when you stare into a mirror.
I'm quite intrigued as to your version of identity! as you seem to point to a more religious and political vision. Does the mirror of your wall show more than an identity of yourself.
Complain about this comment
What you're missing is that we are the same people. Fiercely independent, hard working (and believing that we should be able to keep the fruit of our labor), and charitable. We look after our neighbor and his as we do our own. We are defenders of the weak and the persecuted. Above all, we are honest, trustworthy, and humble.
Because of our geography (distances between our neighbors and the harshness of our climate) we've learned how to depend on each other and work together. Our kindness to strangers and our legendary hospitality was born in the Highlands and Islands out of necessity.
We are our own. Whether by Union of Crowns or Treaty, we brought Grace to those who would otherwise want, and enriched ourselves at the same time. We are the rudder and keel- the foundation and the conscience. But we are still our own.
And BTW, never call a Texan a Yankee. It's the same as calling a Scotsman "English". That will be about the only unpleasant experience you will have with a Texan. (although a good fight after a few pints is always appreciated!)
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Jeeves: Awesome! your propensity is ape-like aye-write.Remarkable, Darwinist to the core.Any consideration of the written letter?.
Complain about this comment
#49
Hell! that's a real steer chatting steak of a post, could it possible be junior nat, from the clan of the oldnatters.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Commiserations on the Arab's failing to qualify for a Europa slot - As a Dandy, It was hard to watch the bluenoses lift the title and simultaneously grace us a european ticket. Bittersweet if ever I saw it.
You have alluded to on these pages Brian? That's right - you do indeed give our scandinavian brethren the kudos they deserve and invariably - one can draw parallels with Norway & Scotland as a reswult.
It's just a shame that your colleague Douglas Fraser can't do the same. Picking and choosing the best or worst parts of the "arc of prosperity" had him declaring that Ireland was the SNP's economic inspiration for starting a sovereign oil fund - as a "Celtic Tiger" he described it.
What utter piffle.
He then went further by declaring that implementation of Carbon Capture Technology in UK was somehow "cutting edge" when in fact Norway have been developing it for more than 15 years.
You at least seem to acknowledge what the rest of us know to be true, instead of repackaging it as poorly researched, partisan journalism.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
I am not a new member !
Complain about this comment
When I was in Texas a few years ago, everywhere I went I met people proudly displaying their Scottishness - names, tartans, pipe bands, the works. Their Scottish ancestors seem to have taken the national determination to not be pushed around by anyone with them, including the larger nation they are part of, and they do it rather well. In Houston, where I was, I was overwhelmed by the hospitality I was offered, from strangers, just because of my accent. So who says we have nothing in common with them?? It's like a gigantic Scottish colony over there! Except that their manners are generally much better than you see on display here (yes, the man who refused a polite request to wait a moment until I took a picture of the fountain in Linlithgow Palace yesterday, I mean YOU!).
Poster #49 got it absolutely right.
Complain about this comment
# 36
What mince! Your argument is utterly irrelevant. What you appear to be saying is that we shouldn't opt for independence because people from other countries may get confused! I say, so? If anything the independence process would put Scotland more firmly on the map, so to speak.
Perhaps the people of say, East Timor would have given up their independence movement if they though that TP was ignorant of their existence! No, didnae think so.
Complain about this comment
The Texans are the friendliest people in the USA. Just thought I'd throw that in.
I still think this documentary is going to irritate me. I just don't think independence will ever be given a fair hearing by the BBC. Ostensibly this programme will be about ten years of devolution but I expect quite disingenously it'll still take a hatchet to independence.
Oh and it's quite true that people struggle with Scottish identity. We are subsumed as part of the UK and many aren't quite sure who we are. Of course this is another reason we should be independent. For our own sakes.
Complain about this comment
The moderation on this site is a disgrace.
# 29
My previous post was aimed at you. To say that Texas has a place is every Scotsmans heart is utter fantasy, like most of your bilous posts.
I usually scroll over your comments as they are irelevant, bigoted, not on the subject matter and bear no relation to reality whatsoever.
Unfortunately I chanced across this latest tirade, just woken up and still sleepy, and yet again you excelled yourself.
Texas is an extremely right wing part of the world, the heart of neo conservatism and has spawned some seriously nasty individuals over the years.
They spew out their venomous ideoligy more vigorously than any Muslim state with the priority being us, not the United States of America but US, as in our own.
OK moderators here we go. In one of my previous careers, myself and all the other Scotsman at our place of work were routinely called white "non whites" as a matter of course. Our black colleagues sympathised profusely and warned us not to open our mouths or we would be targeted. This was 1980, I dont think things have changed that much.
I think it says a lot about yourself that you admire that kind of a society.
ps sorry about the typing but its a japanese keyboard !
My experience is somewhat different to yours, although I doubt very much if you have ever been there or even met any Texans.
At my place of work
Complain about this comment
As a Texan living in Glasgow for the last 6 years, I can tell you Scotland reminds me alot of Texas. The people are friendly, the landscape is stunning, and the sense of identity great. Texans are Texans foremost and Americans a close second. We are fiercely proud of our seperate but equal identity. I believe Scots are the same. They are Scottish first and British a close second. Scots complain about the rest of the Union enough that I know if they completely devolved, there would be a sense of sadness and a mild upset at the fact they have no one to complain about but themselves. I say, stay with the Union and let Westminster deal with the bland little details and let Scotland do what it does best, churn out brillant minds, throw great parties (Fringe, Burns Night), and walk tall in the knowledge you're not English. :)
Complain about this comment
#44 ubin....
The marine turbine 'somewhere down south' is in Northern Ireland in the largest lough inlet in Europe (Strangford Lough)
'but the world happens to be ignorant of the United Kingdom when it comes to internal matters.'
Surely a Scotsman would know that Northern Ireland is nowhere near 'somewhere down south' :-)
Although technicaly I suppose it is down south from most of Scotland (geographicaly speaking) but i'm sure you weren't pointing that out just to poke fun at the English were you?
Complain about this comment
No. We won't miss moaning about Union. We must become independent. It's the only way Scottish potential can be realised.
I am glad we have good and constructive links with the USA. I think we are close and will always remain friends. However, our destiny is European. We belong to a group of small proud and rich EU nations. We can't afford to be sentimental. We must push for that society so many of us dream of and many of us believe possible.
Complain about this comment
Meanwhile , back at the ranch , the Chancellor charges the tax payer for an accountant to do his tax returns so that he " gets the tax which he has to pay correct" This is the Chancellor of the Exchequer speaking!
Bwahahaha!
Swick and swindle does NOT come into it!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#48 derekbarker
Be careful, Derek. If you gaze into your mirror for too long, you may end up not knowing your left from your right, like the Labour Party.
OK, step up to the mirror and question it if you must. One imagines the following conversation:
Mirror, mirror, on the wall,
Who in this land is fairest of all?
The mirror answered:
The Labour Party was fair; it is true.
But the party of Scotland is fairer than you.
With apologies to the brothers Grimm, according to whose tale what follows is as follows. The old queen was horrified to hear this, and so overtaken with fear that she could not say anything. Still, her jealousy drove her to go to the wedding and see the young queen. When she arrived she saw that it was Snow-White. Then they put a pair of iron shoes into the fire until they glowed, and she had to put them on and dance in them. Her feet were terribly burned, and she could not stop until she had danced herself to death.
Don't blame me. You're the one who mentioned the mirror on the wall.
Complain about this comment
#48 derekbarker
#66 frankly
Of course derek is interested in mirrors and what is reflected, as every time he looks the mirror cracks, so he's never seen himself as other than crackers.
Don't worry derek, it is still a true reflection!
Complain about this comment
#66 frankly-francophone
O' dear! the mirror and the ruby shoes, frankly does one live in the land of Oz.
What you fail to recognise is, identity like DNA is something your born with, the colour of your hair and the colour of your eyes and so on.
The political and religious identity you refer to is made up and often forced upon people.
Complain about this comment
BBC website: "Chancellor Alistair Darling is among nine cabinet members who used £11,000 of taxpayers' money to pay for personal accountancy advice, the Daily Telegraph has said. For most people, this is not considered a legitimate business expense."
"For most people"? You have got to be kidding me!
Rarely have I seen distortion of reality as bad as this, even from the Unionist BBC.
It's not "most people" it's EVERY OTHER PERSON IN THE LAND - except of course for this small coterie of people who are the ones who MAKE THE TAX LAWS FOR EVERY OTHER PERSON IN THE LAND!!
There can be no clearer example of "Don't do as I do, do as I say" than this! It's hypocrisy on an utterly breathtaking scale.
And before some spotty political student whinges at me: "Don't use capital letters - it's shouting..." let me make myself clear: I AM SHOUTING!!!
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
68 derek
"The political and religious identity you refer to is made up and often forced upon people"
I think you've just summed up the Nationalist argument very succinctly. They feel that being British and being part of the Union is something that has been forced upon them.
Complain about this comment
#70 derek
I was hoping for better than that, what if I've piles?
You're too young to remember the community pigswill containers at the end of the street under a previous Labour administration, but it's no wonder animals are crackers the way they are kept nowadays. Be thankful that those fences that keep you in also keep the "sane" world out.
Complain about this comment
"MP treated for brain haemorrhage"
Can someone explain to me the point of the BBC continuing to feature this news story if they are going to continue to leave it returning a "404 Page Not Found" error?
It's been that way for about 12 hours despite several people here pointing it out.
Complain about this comment
#1... How often does it have to be said.... It's the UK's oil not Scotland's!
Complain about this comment
54 GAberdeen
With you on that one. Qualifying for Europe at the expense of Rangers winning the league is a bit of a bitter pill to swallow.
Complain about this comment
#60 nee
You missed! re-read the post! you refer too then get off your horse and drink your milk......
Complain about this comment
The association of Texas with Scotland is real. At the Alamo it is thought around half the defenders claimed Scots ancestry (including Jim Bowie. Davy Crockett was part French, part Ulster Scot,part Irish). They had their bagpiper at the Alamo. Houston and Dallas didn't get their names by accident. The influence of Scots in particularly the southern States of USA is immense and some Scots actually became chiefs of the Cherokee nation.(The Ku Klux Klan initially had serious Scots/Irish connection) There were kilted Scots regiments on both sides in the American Civil War.
Complain about this comment
#69 bighulla
You aint the only one shouting - and I get the feeling there's more to come........we shall see. Maybe it will be enough to change the political system from the ground up, which is long overdue
I'm not holding my breath though
Complain about this comment
#74 deducted3points
Try reading what is actually there before making your "useful" observations. How often do you have to be told?
Complain about this comment
#72 handclapping
Piles of what? could be something there handclapping, fences and borders
and the road to entrapment?.
You want new pastures but they must be fenced in. Orwell! you might just a've a hive on there.
Complain about this comment
Brian,
Look forward to the programme. Quick question; did Texas and particulary Norway experience the incredible amount of corruption from their political classes while being a part of a Union with another nation?
That would be interesting to understand.
To further speculate; What would be their reaction, particularly that of Norway, if they found themselves, while in a Union, to find out that their politicians were indulging in the dubious financial practices current at Westminster?
I wonder!
Complain about this comment
#74, #79 I could be mistaken but 'deducted3points' lack of manners is very similiar to Reluctant Expat.
Complain about this comment
#80 derek B
Busy, busy and no respecter of borders, there's a lot to be said for bees. But you're a drone.
And while you're at it, can you fence off a pasture for your friend's cowpats.
Complain about this comment
#69 bighulla
The aspect that amuses me is that our dear Chancellor can't see that if he needs an accountant to check that he is paying the right tax on his expenses, which, if they really are expenses, is zero, the tax system is just a little complicated. Step forward the previous Chancer at the Chequer Board (TM reg frankly_francophone) whose 3000 pages of extra legislation have made a generation of accountants rich and happy. If the present chancer isn't going to do anything about the UK's slide into bankruptcy because Global hopes something will turn up, what chance that he will rip up this paper monument to the folly of his predecessor.
Not that Federal tax is any easier in Texas, their system is a tribute to years of pork-barrel politics in Congress and trying to change it will require turkeys to vote for Thanksgiving.
Off out now, but if derek wants to post, I'll give it a serious reasoned response on my return.
Complain about this comment
#84 handclapping
"The aspect that amuses me is that our dear Chancellor can't see that if he needs an accountant to check that he is paying the right tax on his expenses, which, if they really are expenses, is zero, the tax system is just a little complicated."
The reality is it's just another way of squeezing a few extra quid (in their world) out of the trough of free taxpayer cash to help line the pockets of one of his accountant pals.
There's nothing complicated about that. But they think we're too stupid to be able to see it.
I am getting sick of their pose of "people have to understand this" and "people have to understand that".
We DO understand - all too well. The UK system is rotten to the core and no amount of tinkering is going to change it.
Complain about this comment
The moderation on this site is a disgrace, constant removal of links to their own pages and other completely unexplained censorship.
It is no wonder the BBC is in such decline, and has been ever since the whole Dr Kelly saga.
I say cut their funding if they are going to pump such blatant propaganda and now silence any dissent.
Complain about this comment
Someone already beat me to this saying .... Meanwhile back at the ranch !!.
I've alluded to it a few times before, but the expenses revelations has left the Scottish media totally exposed, and boy does it show.
The main item on the Scottish politics page is the Languages protest at Edinburgh university. The item featured prominently on Radio Scotland this morning where the presenter, interviewing the vice priciple (I think) tried desperately to find anything to give the story merit. At the end of the interview you were left wondering if the BBC knew something that they had decided to keep to themselves such was the lack of any real story.
Is it a story? Perhaps it is, it is certainly important enough for some students to raise the matter. Is it the biggest story in Scottish politics? No, not even in the top five I would suggest.
Many of us laughed when Brian recently tried to breath some life into a Labour inspired piece of nonsense that sought to suggest that Fiona Hyslop was under pressure and vulnerable. The timing of the piece neatly coincided with the beginning of the very real scandals engulfing Labour at Westminster.
Over at The Scotsman they tried the same tactic with another SNP minister, Ian Macaskill, after a prisoner escaped from an open prison - that too has faded and died.
This, I believe, completes a 'full house' of SNP ministers who - at one point or another - have been the subject of calls from Labour and the rest to resign.
Russell over an Aviemore non story, Sturgeon over a C-Diff outbreak, Swinney over LIT - on and on ad-infinitum the Scottish media pick up these pathetic squeals and headline them.
The worst of course was the shocking campaign conducted by our media over Alex Salmond's entirely appropriate meeting with representatives from Donald Trump's planning team. A meeting that was reported in the local press at the time.
We have also experienced the latest strike threat from Unite, who have decided (all of a sudden) that lower class sizes is a good enough reason to ask their members to go on strike.
Anyway, back in the real unfiltered world, we are witnessing an all too real scandal as many Scottish Labour MP's are exposed by Telegraph revelations. The latest involving the use of taxpayers money to pay private accountants and a claim for thousands by Labour MP Jim Devine who submitted a receipt from a non existent company.
So, here's the question:
At what point do the Scottish media decide that these Scottish MP's are to be held to account. Printing a story once because it has appeared in the wider UK news and then not following it up is not good enough. Where are the angry journalists and pundits who speak for us and who are supposed to articulate the feelings of their readers and viewers?
Imagine Alex Salmond had altered his address in order to maximise his expenses claims. Imagine if Nicola Sturgeon has used taxpayers money in order to have a private accountant deal with her tax returns. Imagine if Fiona Hyslop had submitted a receipt from an entirely bogus firm in order to claim thousands of pounds for work to her home.
These stories would provide headlines for weeks and the individuals would be pursued by the Scottish media until they resigned. It wouldn't even be necessary for the opposition to demand resignations, the actions of the MSP's would be enough for the editors to go after them.
So, the Scottish media scramble naked and embarrassed from one contrived headline to another in the hope that the Telegraph will stop soon. They simply cannot bring themselves to admit that there are now Labour MP's in Scotland who should stand down.
The silence from our journalists is indeed deafening. The voters are left with only one means of expressing their dissatisfaction - thank god there's still that.
So, let's keep our eye on not just the ball - but also the Springburn voters register !!
Complain about this comment
#60, I could not agree with you more on the moderation on this site.
Complain about this comment
#87 greenockboy - the troughing at Westminster has actually managed to break through the international news blackout and be reported on CNN over here in the U.S. I think that tells us something of the comparative scale of events.
Complain about this comment
Can someone explain to my what on earth Brian Taylor is doing in Texas at the taxpayers' expense?
This country is in the grip of the worst recession since the 1930s!
This is a time for looking at whether every expense is justified AND acceptable to the people who supply the money - that's US!
I am telling you I DO NOT find this trip to Texas an acceptable expense for an employee of a public service corporation - even if it is part of a documentary about devolution.
The devolution took place in Scotland - not Texas.
Complain about this comment
Has Taylor been on a taxpayer-funded trip to Norway as well?
In this documentary Taylor will reveal his true loyalties.
Let's see if he says:
1. "Norway has done extremely well but Scotland is 'too wee', 'too poor' etc, to do the same."
or, whether he says:
2. "Norway has done extremely well and Scotland could easily do the same."
I know which my money's on.
Complain about this comment
What is with the moderation on this blog? My last post was "referred". Why? All I stated was that any MP found to have been claiming for non- essential items should be forced to resign.
And why the comparisons with Texas? You could say the same for any country in the world where there are Scots. But you could also say the same for any French or Spanish people. The same applies to the Irish.
Let's try and stay focused on what is happening here for a change.
#87 greenockboy
Unite will strike if someone breaks wind during a trade union meeting. They are a law unto themselves. Same with the PCS.
Complain about this comment
"Texas could choose to secede from the US. Texas chooses not to do so."
Texas will do whatever is to their financial advantage as should Scotland.
If it is advantageous for Scotland to get rid of this morally and financially bankrupt UK - and it clearly is - then Scotland should choose to do so.
That is the only lesson to be drawn from Texas.
Was a taxpayer-funded trip to Texas really necessary to see that?
Complain about this comment
The last time I was in Texas I had a conversation with a shop assistant that went something like this-
Assistant- "I can tell by your accent that you're not from round these parts, right?"
Me- "That's correct, I'm from Scotland."
Assistant- "Gee- Do you speak English?"
'Nuff said...
Meanwhile, back in the real world, how best to beat the recession? Maybe encourage all the bright young talent in the country to, er, leave??
[url]http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8065615.stm[/url]
You really couldn't make this stuff up.
Complain about this comment
Hmmm, well, alright, I think I can see your point, but I have to question its merit. I find any comparison between Scotland and a sub-state entity in a federal system a fairly difficult one to justify, never mind comparing Scotland to a State in the US which has constitutionally delineated powers and responsibilities across a whole number of levels. Never mind a diffusion of functional sovereignty that is once again codified in a constitution that stands in comparison to Scotland's current experience of asymmetrical devolution in what remains a highly centralised UK with just some bare cosmetic tinkering on the majoritarian - consensus axis.
Once again, regarding identity, hmmm, well, I can't help but think the strange little place we call Europe and the shared history and the process of 'shared memories' among certain little 'imagined communities' is not something that will travel all that successfully as a form of analysis in the US of States. It may well do, I'll look forward to the programme, but I can't help but think Europe would be a more successful place to seek to draw direct comparison (yes, yes, the 'arc of insolvency' ... oh do please go away!)
You know, what comparisons with the US really demonstrate is the success of union, and not necessarily the Westminster union that the Labour rosettes, and the Tory chaps, and the Lib Dems guys and gals seem to insist on in spite of everything and nothing their union has done for Scotland. I'm thinking, instead, of something normatively superior to Westminster centralism, something involving a lot more countries with a lot more interactions, a union that involves independence and partnership, independence and interdependence. As Obama declared the United States are in search of a 'more perfect union', and it says a lot that Labour, Tories, and Lib Dem's seek to deny Scotland the opportunity to advance that very search beyond Westminster clinging paternalism, and Labour's clawing clientelism.
Comparisons with the US, in fact, demonstrate the success of a large union of individual member-states grouping sovereignty, pooling sovereignty some could say. In terms of the US, think of the Senate and each State's right to equal representation, one could perhaps draw a somewhat indirect comparison with the Council of Ministers. Think of the electoral college, and again one could draw a somewhat indirect comparison with the QMV process in the Council. Think of the House of Congress, and think of representation in the European Parliament. In many ways, any analysis one hopes to make between Scotland and the US is something closer to an analysis of 'Independence in Europe', than dependence in the UK ... (OK, OK, you don't have to believe me if you don't want to, but there's a darned sight more opportunity to draw comparisons with the situation that would be 'Independence in Europe' than can currently be drawn with Scotland governed from Westminster. Furthermore, a rather loose and abstract ponderence on the concepts of identity and nationhood just ain't gonna rescue the analysis.) But, as I say, I'll look forward to the programme: politics, the best spectator sport in the world ... probabaly.
Complain about this comment
Just discovered this blog recently, and I must say all your responses brighten up my day! Hilarious!
A couple of points:
1. Nobody has really explained why identity may or may not matter. For me, I couldn't give 2 hoots, to be honest. I know what "box" I'm in, and its not for others to tell me, thank you very much.
2. Why do people keep complaining about the bias, alleged or otherwise, of the BBC? After all, what does the first B stand for? What do you expect?
Can we talk about something else now please? :-)
Complain about this comment
Ooh ! Moderated for saying , meanwhile back at the ranch , there are eight named cabinet minister and one of the nine not named .
Anyone any ideas??
So I'll try again, just because one moderator is making up their own rules does'nt mena to say they all are!
Mind you Patty must have been way beyond the pail to be moderated sooooo often!
Complain about this comment
#96 c15mnw
"Why do people keep complaining about the bias, alleged or otherwise, of the BBC? After all, what does the first B stand for? What do you expect?"
It stands for British and that is the point. Its reporting should apply equally (or at the very least, proportinately) and impartially to all parts of Britain, not just what comes out Labour benches of the Palace of Westminster.
Granted that, with circa 80% of the British population, most British news is English news, I can cope with that and I suspect, so can the majority of the population who live in the 'Celtic fringes' of the UK. What I think upsets most people is that BBC appear to be in breach of their charter by having a party-political bias towards the Labour party.
I can't comment on BBC Wales, BBC N. Ireland or BBC (insert whichever English region you live in here) but BBC Scotland does seem to give more time to the Labour Party than the other three main parties put together.
Complain about this comment
Maybe oldnat will correct me if I'm wrong?
Texas seceded from the United States of America in 1861 and resumed shared sovereignty with the Union states only after a bloody four year struggle called the American Civil War. My understanding is 1,260 Texans died in battle trying to maintain a confederacy of states separate to the Union.
How exactly can this be accurately described as Texas CHOOSING "since 1845 to share sovereignty with the United States of America."?
Complain about this comment
#96 c15mnw
"Why do people keep complaining about the bias, alleged or otherwise, of the BBC? After all, what does the first B stand for? What do you expect?"
We expect the much-trumpeted "impartiality" the BBC claims to uphold as part of their Charter.
In other words, we expect only what we're paying for through the compulsory TV tax.
Complain about this comment
#99 bighullabaloo
What? Me correct a fellow poster?
Complain about this comment
#98 Fit Like?
"What I think upsets most people is that BBC appear to be in breach of their charter by having a party-political bias towards the Labour party."
The BBC bias is towards whichever Unionist party is in power in London at the time.
At the moment that happens to be Labour but in a year or so it could be the Tories.
The BBC should not be using taxpayers' money to generate propaganda to support any one particular party.
Complain about this comment
Well alright! one shout and the fast shooter appears.
Oldnatters and the northern cowboys, rattling on down to rescue Scotland.
More beans!
Complain about this comment
Re 87. At 1:42pm on 25 May 2009, greenockboy wrote:
The Scottish media are shooting themselves in the foot.
They need to shift copy or achieve viewing figures just to keep up with their rivals, whether newspapers or TV channels. With the advent of modern media and a media savvy public that are completely aware of current news worthy events, that same public will just go elsewhere; e.g. non-terrestrial news channels or other newspapers. I believe the Telegraph has seen it's sales rise!
Rest assured, the public who need to know, will know and BBC Scotland and other Scottish media will see their share of the market slip away.
History will not be kind to them after this political storm has passed.
They may wish to ignore it due to vested interests, but everyone else isn't!
Complain about this comment
c15mnw:
#96.
"1. Nobody has really explained why identity may or may not matter. For me, I couldn't give 2 hoots, to be honest. I know what "box" I'm in, and its not for others to tell me, thank you very much.
Can we talk about something else now please? :-)"
National identity is important. It can create unity amougst strangers, and look at the United States of America. The USA was formed by immigrants from many backgrounds, what would have happened if they had no loyalty or patriotic feelings towards the stars and strips?
It is also important because it can explain your history. I know, we all have interesting history, no matter where you are from. But that sense of knowing that there is some history that can reflect where you came from is important. It what shows us what we are, what we are capable of and what we can do because we can relate to something.
Let's face it. We are a violent race of people capable of anything, everything. If we lost our identity and with it our unity then would the world be a darker place when loyalty to ones country does no longer apply?
Complain about this comment
#96 c15mnw
"Why do people keep complaining about the bias, alleged or otherwise, of the BBC? After all, what does the first B stand for?"
Biased?
Complain about this comment
Having been taking a look, as a result of BT's peregrinations on the American continent, at what is going on in Texas as reported in Texan TV and radio news reports primarily, one thing keeps hitting me in the eye: the current fascination with "the feisty Scottish lady" Susan Boyle, whom Texans and other Americans have evidently taken to their hearts.
Setting aside completely the fact that she was not referred to in the reports I encountered as a feisty British or even English lady, I cannot resist saying that, having seen Ms Boyle's latest performance, not previously having witnessed any of them, I now understand that something very special indeed is happening here. Extraordinary and beautiful.
The best of luck to you, my dear. Deep in the heart of Texas, Americans love you, and so do I.
Complain about this comment
#76
Ref #29 Fraid I cant read it again as its been removed, I wonder why ?
Complain about this comment
#102 bighullabaloo
The entire structure of the UK state (Parliament, BBC, Government etc) is institutionally corrupt.
Oddly, I don't see that as a core argument for independence. Even if the UK were as pure as it liked to pretend it was, I would still want Scotland to determine its own future.
For the sake of my English friends and family, I hope they can take the opportunity to reconstruct their own democracy, and (for the first time) seize sovereignty back into their own hands.
Complain about this comment
#101 oldnat
We can safely take it then my version of American history (#99) is 100% accurate since if there was anything inaccurate in it you wouldn't hesitate to correct it.
Thus, we conclude that the BBC, not content with bending reality to bolster the failing credibility of a corrupt British Union is now also trying to rewrite the history of America - for exactly the same purpose!
They really are getting just a little bit desperate!
Complain about this comment
#102 bighullabaloo
"The BBC bias is towards whichever Unionist party is in power in London at the time.
At the moment that happens to be Labour but in a year or so it could be the Tories."
You may be correct although I seem to remember that the BBC was decidedly harder on the Tory party in the dying days of their last government than they seem to be towards Labour at a similar point in theirs. Paxman v Howard, for example (even if there is some truth to idea that the constant harrying was just Paxman padding it out until the end of the programme because he didn't have anything to say, it should still be a lesson on how not to let a Government Minister (or any MP) off the hook for evading a direct answer).
Complain about this comment
Looks like the old teacher has lost the plot again, I wonder if he is belting the arm-chair with his old strap.
The BBC is the universal free voice of the world, long may it continue to represent all that is good in society in general.
Complain about this comment
#111 Fit Like?
If you detect a Unionist bias in BBC coverage that favours Labour slightly over the Tories then fair enough.
It's still a Unionist bias.
Complain about this comment
Let's see why the mods didn't like my #109
Westminster Parliament is institutionally corrupt.
Complain about this comment
#112 derekbarker
Cue for a rendition of Pomp and Circumstance.
The notion that the world depends on the UK to be its "universal free voice" is so unutterably, ignorantly and arrogantly crass that I simply cannot find words to describe it.
It just shows what it takes to be a unionist these days. I wouldn't touch such cringeworthy base insulting nonsense with a barge pole.
Complain about this comment
#112 derekbarker
My belt was long ago given to a museum. Your views on the BBC should be in one as well.
Complain about this comment
#115 post_meridiem
And I'd just add that if the BBC is the "universal free voice of the world" then the rest of the world can start paying for it!!!
Complain about this comment
#115 post meridiem
You obviously live a sheltered life! the "BRASS NECK" of some people.
And you registered your rant on a BBC web-site, tee hee hee!
Complain about this comment
Let's see why the mods didn't like my #109
Westminster Parliament is institutionally corrupt. (seems OK)
Westminster Government is institutionally corrupt.
Complain about this comment
#112 derekbarker
Thank you, Derek, for that little gem. Priceless British unionist insularity.
"Fog in the Channel - Europe cut off!" is another good one. Also a museum piece.
Complain about this comment
#119
My views on the BBC should be in one what?
Tosh/piffle and dry rot nonsense from the tin eared natbag.
Complain about this comment
#120 Lily- lola
Please write with a bit more clarity! that's just very murky.
for fog sake!
Complain about this comment
Let's see why the mods didn't like my #109
Westminster Parliament is institutionally corrupt. (seems OK)
Westminster Government is institutionally corrupt. (they don't seem to mind that either)
I also mentioned the Beeb in my #109. Any guesses as to the result if I post that again?
Complain about this comment
The BBC is institutionally corrupt.
Complain about this comment
#123 oldnat
If one substitutes "The BBC" into that sentence the answer is what happened to my #124.
Complain about this comment
The BBC was never the voice of Scotland and Freedom...and it never will be...The BBC has always displayed its Pro London Bias since its first transmissions here in Scotland...But of course that will be coming to an end after we take our Nation back again...
Having recently watched BBC Scotlands bias reporting on the Irish Economy... as an example to all us badly behaved Scots of the error of our ways....No coverage of a successful Norway who at present are bailing out the EU with their Oil Fund...No coverage of the amount of oil funds that were taken directly into the London Treasury ...No coverage of James Callaghans lies about Scottish Oil...No coverage of Maggie Thatcher using Scottish Fishing grounds to buy her way into the EU...No coverage of Alex Salmonds productive visits to the USA and China....No coverage of Alex Salmonds inciteful idea to push the Scottish Economy towards being a World Leader in Wave Power and Wind Power....No coverage or support of Scotlands right to not want Nuclear Power Stations on our Beautiful Countries Landscape...No investigative reporting of the amount of poverty and neglect New Labour have left our Nation with...And no apologies to every Scottish Bairn who was born into third world conditions whilst New Labour MPs had their snouts in the trough...
The BBC ? I dont think so...I'll settle for the soon to be Scottish Version SBC with its control ending at the Border of the Country that has Occupied My Nation for 300years...
Complain about this comment
The BBC is not institutionally corrupt.
Complain about this comment
#124
Bighubba, clam down put the claymore away and re-engage the debate.
Complain about this comment
#123 oldnat
In a nutshell it seems one is allowed to call any organisation "institutionally corrupt" except, er......you know who!
That seems a bit, er.........biased, don't you think?!!
Complain about this comment
#118 derekbarker
Not in the slightest, dear boy. Far from it.
The world is full of broadcasting organisations that provide a superlative service, which I could hardly be aware of if I lived a sheltered existence. One can post messages on numerous other websites of broadcasting services all over the world, which is, of course, far from entirely dependent on the UK for "universal free information", as everyone knows except insular British unionists, apparently.
You should get out more instead of pounding out unpersuasive unionist propaganda ad nauseam on your keyboard all day long, day after day. Get a life. Get a job even!
Complain about this comment
#123 oldnat
I'll just point out that although the thought police won't allow us to publish it (for some unknown reason) they still can't stop us from thinking it.
Just read my #127 and whilst internally verbalising the words, omit the word "not".
Sorted! ;-)
Complain about this comment
FitLike...They certainly have been drooling after Gordon Brown...one only has to look at the coverage of Glasgow East and Glenrothes...They even resorted to sending up London spin merchants as reporters and producers...The BBC Trust couldnt take a chance that a possible local renegade Reorter might actually start to point out how much Bob Marshall retired with...or ask how an ex Gordon Browns headmaster suddenly became qualified to be an MP to London...when he actually thought he was going to Holyrood...
Complain about this comment
#130 post- mermaid
Dependent on the drip feed Independent morse code!(whoopee)
Ain't the life of monopoly got a grip with you. Collect two Scottish coins and pass and go!. aye-aye
Complain about this comment
#128 derekbarker
I will now put my "claymore" away having metaphorically decapitated them in my #131.
No need to thank me. It was my pleasure.
Complain about this comment
#123 oldnat
If you can be bothered, you might care to write to the BBC formally and ask why you are being denied the right to criticise them in that generalised way yet they are willing to publish the exact same generalised criticism about other public institutions.
I'm not going to do it as I've heard enough of the BBC's non-responsive fob-offs to last me a lifetime. But it would be interesting to hear their answer if they actually gave one for once.
Complain about this comment
#135 bighullabaloo
Life is too short. By the time an honest answer was received, they would no longer be relevant to us anyway.
Complain about this comment
#123 oldnat
This also opens up the interesting possibility of writing any number of things phrased in a negative way but instructing readers to reverse the sense to positive in order to properly appreciate the intended message: as in: "derekbarker is not an idiot".
There's no hiding genius, eh?!!
Complain about this comment
Further to my #137
Actually, you could probably just get away with expressing that particular message positively and they'd allowed it on the basis that it's fair comment.
Complain about this comment
#136 oldnat
Was the leather strap a good deterrent? and would you welcome sharia law in to parts of Scotland.
Complain about this comment
#136
Life is too short. As in past tense! I do hope everything is ok oldnat.
Complain about this comment
#140 derekbarker
Derek, I think you'll find "is" is how people express the present tense.
It's something we sane people sort of agree on and if it's all the same to you we'd like to keep it that way.
Complain about this comment
So far we've had two efforts to justify this identity business. Franklyfrancophone claims it matters because it exists, which is rather like claiming eye colour matters because it exists.
Thomas Porter claims that it prevents violence in our 'violent race', ignoring the bloodbaths of the Twentieth Century, driven by racial, national or religious hatred.
Complain about this comment
#141 bighullabaloo
I fear you don't understand the problem that Labour supporters have through living in the past. Consequently, "was" refers to their present, "is" refers to their future. Naturally they don't have a tense describing what the rest of us describe as the future, since for them it doesn't exist.
Complain about this comment
#112 derekbarker,
Trying to impress your boss with that one?
;)
Complain about this comment
#142 Anaxim
We are on opposite sides of a Descartian gulf on this one.
I think (in terms of having a national identity), therefore I am (a Scot).
You think (in other terms), therefore you are (of no nation).
It is meaningless to debate such an issue.
Complain about this comment
This New Englander wishes they would secede.
Complain about this comment
My experience of the US of A is that they do indeed have an incling as to where Scotland is, considering many have ancestors from the Highlands and that the Decleration of Arbroath had been used a pretext for their own decleration, especially declaring independence from both the Pope and British monarchy. The US of A has loads in common with Scotland especially in terms of trade and how the monarchy, many people love here, deliberataly enforced trading sanctions. For example, William of Orange gladly traded with Scotland, as long as the Scots sold their goods to the English so as to not trade where the English felt they had a strong trading route.
However, in 1320, Robert the Bruce declared through Abbot Bernard that Scotland is free of the shackles of the English king, not for riches or for glory but for freedom, the very thing any free man would lay down his life to protect. Come 1702, William had crippled Scotland by refusing to help Scotland when Scotland needed help and he helped England all the more that Scots were glad to be rid of him in the year of his death. In fact, i asked a loyal follower if he knew how William treated Scotland. "Terribly", he replied, "but he was protestant."
Having lost William, the English now needed people with a huge influence in Europe, so came begging to the Scots to create a trading partner, where Scotland would be free and able to trade. I believe Queen Anne, after Wee Billy, also used the law against Scottish trade upto 1707. With the promise of free trade, it was written into the Act of Union that Scotland would trade freely for as long the Union existed. No English tarrifs levied against Scottish goods or any means to hinder trade would be used against Scotland. Without this union, Scotland would diminish. Compare with Texas. A state that provided men for the civil war and was the centre point of free trade in the west. A state as bold as it was broad, who had their own policing system in the Texas Ranger and would become the crown jewel in the US of A. Hence the fact Texans are so proud. Make no mistake about it, Texas was the place to be back then, I believe.
Having read your blog, yes, Scottish people like to believe they are Scottish but we have become subdued into believing that we are British first and Scottish last! So many Scots I met in the states were proud of their heritage over there because they were FREE of the shackles of this union. When down in England, the English are English first and British last and expect me to bow to their "poking" that this is how they see themselves! Now, it really is a tad tired the way you try to convince the few people who read these blogs (with the same people responding) that Scotland certainly has a voice in Britain because we are part of this union. Scottish people do not realise that Scotland wanted to be free of Britain right upto the First World War. Even protestants supported Bonnie Prince Charlie, an RC, if it meant freedom from England. That staunch protestant bank, BoS, supported the Jacobites - the reason I believe Gordon Brown wanted rid of it! It is only Scottishness, that proud and arousing internal force that causes us to, as Mr Salmond put it, have a resounding will to succeed but also contain a phenomenal will within us to fear success when we hold success in our grasp. No, there is no comparison to Texas at all. I think you are just trying to make everyone know you are in Texas.
Complain about this comment
When in Loon Valley, NH, I saw the same things as in your picture. I also noticed vacancy signs, for Scots only. I commented on this, saying that I did not like the xenophobia clearly on display. As I said then, Scots are not as ignorant. Keep in mind that we were discussing the English and my comment was not lost on my new found friends in Loon Valley, NH.
Complain about this comment
Latest headline from the BBC in Scotland reads:
Labour urges bank 'decline' probe
The BBC article goes on:
Scottish Labour has called for a special inquiry by Holyrood in to the "decline" of Scotland's biggest banks.
Finance spokesperson Andy Kerr called for the establishment of an "ad hoc" Scottish Parliament committee.
Hmm, reasonable enough suggestion from Labour - particularly the ad-hoc nature of the committee. The BBC can't be accused of trying to manufacture a 'friendly' Labour headline on this one.
BUT WAIT !! ..... What's this?
"On Tuesday 21st April, Rob Gibson, the SNP deputy convener of Holyrood's economy committee, wrote to Iain Smith, its LibDem convener, to suggest an in-depth Scottish parliament investigation by a combination of their committee and the finance committee.
He said: "It could be set up on an ad- hoc basis and include some members of each committee picked for the task."
The next day, Linda Fabiani, an SNP member of the finance committee wrote in similar terms to SNP convener Andrew Welsh.
"This would allow the parliament to show leadership on behalf of Scotland," she said."
So, it appears that Labour haven't urged at all, they have actually belatedly followed. Do the BBC think that no-one follows Scottish politics? Well, no, it's just that they know enough people don't and it's these people the headlines are aimed at.
It is election time after all !!
Keep your eyes peeled for more of this.
Complain about this comment
Remember how PFI was going to be put on the public debt?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/may/25/pfi-corruption-transport-roads
"Last year, the Treasury promised to bring private finance deals on to the government's balance sheets, in order to meet international financial reporting standards....... But on 13 May, at the height of the MPs' expenses scandal, the Treasury quietly reneged on this promise."
Complain about this comment
#150. oldnat
404 error when are the Beeb going to sort this problem as I have to copy links and paste in a new window. Can'be money as they are getting an increase of £3 in the licence fee.
Complain about this comment
Look, can we get a little bit serious please.
In the past month: Eurovision Song Contest, since we have a wonderful talent in Susan Boyle we should enter ourselves since we will win it, afer all Norway did! (Don't mention Ireland's entry)
Now we appear to have a little Scotland out in the good ole' US of A!
And if there was ever an argument against independence, it has to be that we would have our own entry into Eurovision!
149. At 9:09pm on 25 May 2009, greenockboy wrote:
"Do the BBC think that no-one follows Scottish politics? Well, no, it's just that they know enough people don't and it's these people the headlines are aimed at."
That statement sums up precisely why the SNP must be very, very pro-active if they want to achieve their aims. Any statement will be ruthlessly exploited.
Complain about this comment
#151 cynicalHighlander
Click on the link, when you get the 404 error take out the br/ and the angle brackets round it that appear in the middle of the word "corruption" in the URL, then go that address.
Complain about this comment
Comment 150 oldnat:
Thanks for the link.
This from the article:
Government departments will publish two sets of accounts: one that keeps PFI schemes on the books to meet international standards, another that keeps them off the books in order to conceal the extent of public liabilities. This is what Enron did: it produced different sets of accounts for different audiences.
The journalist is George Monbiot, this is real journalism.
Complain about this comment
Pretty confusing when some-people actually think they are instinctively born with the ultimate Scottish stamp and may I add pretty unreliable evidence to suggest anyone not conforming to those smoke and mirror rules are nomads.
Born identity! or raised identity!.
Complain about this comment
#153. oldnat
This is part of some of what I am getting now in the url links it goes on for longer.
{urlseek.vmn.net/search.php?tbn=avg&lg=us&type=404&q=http%3A%2F%2}
Complain about this comment
Only oldnat with a lesser form of DNA could believe in the "Scottish future trust fund" shurely shome bananas may increase his DNA above 94%.
If Salmond can't have it his way, then the threat of resigning comes into play, jeez! tea party for the nats! P.G. tips
Complain about this comment
#153. oldnat
No its not the br/ these times its about 3 - 4 lines mixed up with symbols etc I have tried to post part of the link but the mods must think its a secret code or something more spurious. copy/paste is the only solution that works, tedious.
Complain about this comment
#149 greenockboy
One of the best examples I've seen of how BBC Scotland acts as the Ministry of Public Enlightenment and Propaganda for the Labour Party when it comes to covering Scottish political issues.
Labour are now brazenly stealing the SNP's ideas and presenting them to the public as their own to try to maximise the control the have over our media and the ability it gives them to distort the public's perception of Labour.
As I predicted months ago, as political reality jumps up to bite Labour on the backside the BBC's attempts to manipulate public perception would become more obvious and more transparent. Even by their base standards, this is a very blatant attempt and just shows how desperate they are becoming.
Complain about this comment
The cynical nationalist: where's all the tartan paint gone.
Complain about this comment
So Neil has no sense of direction and he's all at small's over the Eurovision song contest.
O' by the way Neil General Dalyell son is no socialist.
Complain about this comment
http://www.cubroundtable.com/assets/rightfacingBALOOstanding.jpg
Did someone call an identity parade!
Complain about this comment
derekbarker's going into warp drive - with the emphasis on the "warp".
He works himself up into a tizzy and starts to post whole sequences of meaningless gibberish and bizarre insults - so that's it for me for today.
Complain about this comment
#161
Goodnight Baloo!
Complain about this comment
#162 derek
I put in the comment about Eurovision because someone actually made a serious point about it! Not on this blog I may add.
147. At 8:56pm on 25 May 2009, ScaraBraeSingleMalt:
I've read your post about four times, and I am a little concerned that you have highlighted religion several times.
Religion has no place in modern politics, save that the law protects all those who follow their faiths.
Complain about this comment
162. At 11:10pm on 25 May 2009, derekbarker:
How long did you spend looking for that??
I don't think BigH will be wearing shorts in this weather.
Complain about this comment
With hairy legs like those, I think Baloo will wear shorts in any weather.
LoL.....
Complain about this comment
#103, 112, etc., etc., from derek
As promised my serious considered response to your posts:-
Rubbish!
If the Beeb represents what you say, why on earth do they let you post?
Complain about this comment
#168 handclapping
Your caught between the twist of fate! not entirely convinced of your national credential, you respond in half truths.
If these blogs represent public opinion, then for sure, Britain and Britain's politics needs reformed but the question is how far do you want those reforms to go in a very volatile world.
Would you accept a further progression of the Scottish parliaments fiscal control as a process, while still linking the UK with defence and policing control?.
At some point my friend! you'll have to choose, full Independence or a process of continued development.
Complain about this comment
#165
I actually agree with you but was merely digesting Scottish history. Covenanters were fact, not fiction. 1688 to 1707 is actually a very important turning point in Scottish history that has indeed shaped our society and political system. Where I pay no heed to colour or race or spiritual beliefs, I utterly believe that the majority of people in Central Scotland do, have done and will continue to do so.
However, I must stress that my intention was to show how Scotland, although adhering to political loyalties, was indeed forced into a union and that the fight for political freedom in Scotland saw no bounds. Indeed, Scotland did not have a choice and would have taken any route to avenge this fact. I make no apologies for Scottish history and I prefer the long winded comments, it makes me look I have a way with the words, more than the burds! (My attempt at self deprecation by the way, although not a very good attempt. I hang my head!)
Complain about this comment
#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?
Complain about this comment
#171 singlemalt
You want to play the so called identity card to much. There's no doubt the union was the saving grace for Scotland, England,N Ireland and Wales
during the 1st and 2nd world wars. I think most people would agree with that.Alex Salmond doesn't argue against the 600Bn stimulus to save both the banks you mention (as opposed to the "arc of insolvency")
Scotland has nothing to apologise for! many of Scotland's people have been highly decorated for their action in defence of the UK, again most people recognise that to.
At this time in history it is very important to lift business in all areas with lower rates, that's the right and proper thing to do and something we both agree with.
Singlemalt, 1707 was over 3 hundred years ago, it's not always the case that history is the best defence for anything.
Complain about this comment
#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!
Complain about this comment
Anaxim:
#142.
"So far we've had two efforts to justify this identity business. Franklyfrancophone claims it matters because it exists, which is rather like claiming eye colour matters because it exists.
Thomas Porter claims that it prevents violence in our 'violent race', ignoring the bloodbaths of the Twentieth Century, driven by racial, national or religious hatred."
You're misrepresenting my opinion. The question I answered was why does national identity matter. I never went as far as to claim that it prevents violence.
To an extent it does prevent violence between people of a country, but it also allows people from one identity to unite to fight others of a different identity.
It's quite easy to put down another poster's view, but what is your opinion on the matter? Does national identity matter to you?
Personally it also may highlight the cultural differences that we share. In Scotland it is kilts and bagpipes, the rest of the world may not understand but in Scotland we do.
Complain about this comment
#174 Thomas
The kilt and the bagpipes are universal, you only have to attend the world pipe-band championships held in Glasgow every year to witness that.
Last year the winners in grade two were from France and the winners in grade one were from Canada.
Complain about this comment
#173 singlemalt
Although you are right to point out the differences between the two parliaments in the NHS, can I point out that through out the swine-flu crisis that Nicola Sturgeon and Alan Johnstone both worked very closely on the issue.
Policing can take many forms singlemalt, from border control to classified intelligence.
Complain about this comment
#172
The fact hat we faced the 1st and 2nd W Wars together has no real significance. After all independent Canada, New Zealand and Australia were with us as well and citizens of lots of other independent nations large and small. The country suffering the second largest level of carnage on a population basis after Scotland (Eire) left us almost immediately after WW1. The Eireans took 6 Victoria crosses in WW1. N Ireland refused to bring in conscription for WW2.
Are you aware that Scotland, with just over 8% of the population on the Allies side in WW1 provided over 20% of the fatal casualties (around 130,000 men). One man in six of fighting age in Scotland died in WW1 and left towns and villages all over Highland and Island Scotland with no able bodied men at all (and b*gger me, if we didn't do exacly the same in WW2 if you count the men from the Western Isles who drowned in convoys).
We owe Britain nothing.
Don't start flinging about insensitive stuff about wars in your silly posts
Complain about this comment
#172
Just noticed your figure of "£600billion" to save the banks.
Don't be absurd.
Come back when you can quote the real figure.
Then you can tell us how much was used to save Nat West and how much was put up to save Ulster Bank and how much of HBOS was in fact Halifax.
Complain about this comment
#175
Just about the stupidist post I've seen on this blog.
Complain about this comment
177 sneckedagain
The significance was pointed out or the lack of by singlemalt quote"171. At 00:40am on 26 May 2009, ScaraBraeSingleMalt wrote:
#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"
The act of the union did save us from the fascist regimes of Hitler.
What your problem in recognising that fact?.
Complain about this comment
#179 sneckedagain
Well! that's just about your size!
#178
Your about as much up to date as your history account.
Complain about this comment
And while am at it you "HASBEEN" don't dare hold those brave soldiers in vain.
Complain about this comment
Eye colour, which has been introduced into this discussion for some reason, certainly matters because it exists, in so far as it may contribute to one's sense of identity. Similarly, one's identity may be said to matter because it exists and in so far as no man is an island entire of itself, identity being relation, which matters. It is relation to community and environment.
One's national identity determines where one's loyalties lie and to which national community one has duties and responsibilities, which is why anglo-unionists and independentists are at one another's throats. When 60 per cent of the population of Scotland are unwilling to declare loyalty to the state of which they are citizens, this matters, and it matters because of the existence of an identity which is such that nationality and citizenship may be said to be in conflict with one another for a significant proportion of the population.
This conflict matters because it exists and because it will have consequences, which also will matter because they will exist. Were all of this merely imaginary, it would not matter, but, as it is not, it does. The fact that Scotland is a nation but not a state matters because this state of affairs exists and is not accepted by enough of the population to make this fact insignificant or uncontroversial.
If you take the view that this fact does not matter enough to be either significant or controversial, what have you all been wittering about all day? This controversy matters because it exists, for its existence brings forth consequences which have to be responded to, just as the existence of national identity brings forth consequences which have to be responded to, which is why there is a controversy, which matters because it exists, because . . .
And a very good night to you all.
Complain about this comment
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mps-expenses/5384341/MPs-expenses-Dennis-Watts-husband-of-MP-Meg-Munn-paid-for-tax-advice-by-ministers.html
Complain about this comment
Just back from a break in the South Downs (I never could understand why it is called 'Downs' when it is obvious that they are 'Ups'.) and I am glad, but not surprised, to see that BT's blog is still the same.
I was so disappointed that the Arabs missed out on Europe and I would like to offer my sincere congratulations the Dons for squeezing into Europe; but my mother brought me up not to tell lies so I won't bother. I offer my heartfelt congratulations to Rangers for winning the league. I have a soft spot for Rangers...it's called quicksand.
I am intrigued to find out what Texas has to do with the devolved Parliament in Scotland. I do hope that this programme is shown in England; I would love to see it.
Complain about this comment
#184
Speaking as someone who has to submit a tax return on additional income. This tax business is even more intriguing than it looks. Our esteemed chancellor is technically correct in saying he employs an accountant to ensure he pays the correct amount of tax, but in reality its the other way around. The accountant's job is to reduce tax liability by offsetting allowable business expenses against income. ie; if for every £100 of gross income you are able to offset £30 in allowable expenses, you are only taxed on the nett income of £70.
That's straightforward enough, but leaving aside any question of whether Mr Darling and his colleagues are entitled to charge the tax payer for having an accountant reduce their tax bill, the accountant is himself an allowable business expence.
In other words what AD and his chums are doing is legitimately reducing their taxable income by the cost of their accountant, while at the same time rather ingeniously, but perhaps a lot less legitimately, reclaiming that same cost from the Fees Office.
Complain about this comment
The Priciples from the MPs 'Green Book'. [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]
The principles are:
1.Claims should be above reproach and must reflect actual usage
of the resources being claimed.
2.Claims must only be made for expenditure that it was
necessary for a Member to incur to ensure that he or she could
properly perform his or her parliamentary duties.
3.Allowances are reimbursed only for the purpose of a Member
carrying out his or her parliamentary duties. Claims cannot
relate to party political activity of any sort, nor must any claim
provide a benefit to a party political organisation.
4.It is not permissible for a Member to claim under any
parliamentary allowance for anything that the Member is
claiming from any other source.
5.Members must ensure that claims do not give rise to, or give
the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial
benefit to themselves or anyone else.
6.Members are committed to openness about what expenditure
has been incurred and for what purposes.
7.Individual Members take personal responsibility for all expenses
incurred, for making claims and for keeping records, even if the
administration of claims is delegated by them to others
Complain about this comment
Does Texas Really Matter ?
'At the Wembley launch event attended by Prime Minister Gordon Brown and David Beckham and addressed by Prince William, Football Association chairman Lord Triesman will attempt to define the message on which England will campaign for the next 18 months.'
'The FA is seeking £5 million from the Government to augment its own £10 million campaign fund. Brown has been the bid's most enthusiastic supporter, promising in 2007 that he would make it his "personal mission over the next few years to persuade countries around the world to support the bid.'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
£5 million of taxpayers funds for the bid only, I suspect the Barnett Formula By Pass will be implemented, should the bid be successful should we add the cost to the 10 billion to regenerate east London at the cost of the 'BRITISH' taxpayer?
Lord Triesman stated:
'The economic benefits, both to Fifa and the British economy as a whole, will be central to the campaign message, but the launch will take place with questions about bid funding unanswered.'
In these circumsatances a Texan would reach for his gun ?
Wansanshoo.
Complain about this comment
Re #180 Derekbarker
"The act of the union did save us from the fascist regimes of Hitler"
Unbelievable what some unionists will claim - so it wasn't the Allies then? and all those brave American, Polish, Norwegian, Australian, Canadian etc.... soldiers that died saving us from the fascist regimes were what, just a figment of our imagination? or perhaps it's all just nationalist propaganda .......
Is there no level to which unionists will not sink !
Complain about this comment
#187 gedguy2
"Members must ensure that claims do not give rise to, or give
the appearance of giving rise to, an improper personal financial
benefit to themselves or anyone else."
So every single MP who claimed their expenses were "within the rules" was actually breaking at least this particular rule! Why am I not surprised?
Complain about this comment
Yesterday (#85) I wrote: "The reality is it's just another way of squeezing a few extra quid (in their world) out of the trough of free taxpayer cash to help line the pockets of one of his accountant pals."
Today I read on the BBC website: "MP's husband 'advised ministers'"
And no, I never get fed up being right.
Complain about this comment
#189 googlehoo wrote:
Is there no level to which unionists will not sink !
I don't care how far they sink, it's when they bob up again I get upset.
Complain about this comment
# 190 bighullabaloo
It may, to the vast majority of the members of the public, be that the MPs have broken ALL the principles laid down in the 'Green Book'.
The link to the 'Green Book' may be found by # 184 pattymkirkwood then clicking the appropriate link in the column on the right.
Complain about this comment
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.
Complain about this comment
# 192 handclapping
Try keeping your foot on their head.
Complain about this comment
The little round man with the big A' BooBies.
ScaraBrae indeed!
Complain about this comment
#180 derekbarker
"The act of the union did save us from the fascist regimes of Hitler."
As an experiment, I have been trying this unconscionably egregious statement out on various generous-spirited acquaintances in the francophone world. Shall I give you three guesses as to what their response has been? What, you don't need three guesses? Thought not.
The consensus seems to be, as one might expect, that without Uncle Sam there is not much that Blighty could have done to defeat Nazi Germany. Otherwise why would Churchill have attached so much importance to bringing the USA into the war? While the role of the UK in World War Two is not to be forgotten, of course, it is not properly appreciated if it is imperfectly understood.
The fact should also not be lost sight of that, as an aged Sutherland couple stated recently when returning their wartime medals to Her Gracious Majesty, the world that they sought to defend no longer exists. Today's controversies concern the world of today and what we are to do with it.
Complain about this comment
#194
Delighted that you agree with devolution.
Singlemalt, there wasn't much choice about the bail-outs of the banks
you either done it or suffered an Iceland situation.
The final collective figure will be the responsibility of a collective UK
to narrow and red-line.
Complain about this comment
derekbarker
Any possibility that you will furnish us a with a correct figure about the money the UK borrowed to keep afloat the banks they had encouraged on the road to ruin ?
Complain about this comment
#197
Francophone, yes! wouldn't disagree there however! Churchill did sink the french fleet and the Battle of Britain was a majestic fight of spirited will that bought us that essential time.
Complain about this comment
#197 frankly_francophone
"While the role of the UK in World War Two is not to be forgotten, of course, it is not properly appreciated if it is imperfectly understood."
Maybe derek could ask Brian Taylor to rewrite the history of the Second World War?
Taylor's done a fine job of rewriting the American Civil War, with Texas apparently "choosing" to share sovereignty with the United States of America."!!
Complain about this comment
# 200 derekbarker
'Churchill did sink the french fleet'
Indeed he did. However, Admiral Darlan did stick to his word and scuttled the French Fleet when the Germans tried to take control of it. Therefore, over a thousand French sailors died needlessly.
Complain about this comment
#183 Frankly
I agree completely, it matters because it exists - and for very good reason. National identity matters to us all, after all a lot of the ill feeling on both sides is because of the lack of a 'feeling' of national identity; not because on actualy exists
A hypothetical question: If national identity does not matter, would Scotland be willing to change identity to achieve independance? What do the scots nats think is most important: Independance or being identified as being Scottish
BTW - purely a hypothetical point and not a wind up!
My opinion (being English) is that being identified as Scottish matters. Whilst in England most (albeit not all) people are OK with being identified as British or English - it's just the way we are raised. In some matters we are British (ie sport etc) and in others we are English. In some ways it is rather confusing, we have an identity but are perplexed by that very same fact! Who are we?
Personally I would like to have just the one identity -and i'm not really bothered which it is, both are fine with me.
However - what would you choose??
Complain about this comment
I suggest Brian puts his theory to the test by swaggering into a Texas bar wearing a very tall white cowboy hat and jingly spurs, leaning nonchalantly against the counter and shouting: "Any of you Yankees like a drink?"
That should result in a lot of very helpful feedback.
Complain about this comment
#203 mightychewster
"In some matters we are British (ie sport etc) and in others we are English."
Yes, we've noticed how "British" Andy Murray suddenly becomes every time he wins a tennis tournament!
Complain about this comment
Couple of things;
1. Derek, you're outdoing yourself with this latest nonsense. You're suggesting that we would have been over-ran by the Nazi's? An independent Scotland would be incapable of a joint defense of these Isles? Or indeed to join the offensive like all of the other countries listed earlier. I can only assume you are at the wind-up because noone of rational thinking can surely hold that view.
2. We can talk all day about hair/eye colour etc being part of your identity but for me it's how you feel and project those feelings that really identify a person. Yes, where you are born is also important but mainly in the sense that you are pre-conditioned to that region/country's identity. I am Scottish first, European second and British third. I say British (almost ashamedly!) not in the sense of the establishment but in the people. We do have a shared history, and outside the ruling classes, hold similar views on most subjects. There are many first generation immigrants that have lived here a while (including English) who view themselves as Scottish first and their country of origin second. To me these people are just as Scottish as I am, they live here and have been immersed in our communities and culture to an extent that they feel that they share that culture.
One last question for DelBoy (which incidentally is what my Mother calls her parrot). Do you feel Scottish first or British first? If Scottish, why do you feel it is in our best interest to be ruled by another country?
OK two questions!
Complain about this comment
And several of the nationalists continue to pour considerable scorn and resentment towards this blog, its author and/or the BBC....yet they return each and every day instead of sticking to their historic and massive forum of groundbreaking proportions that is 'quirkynats.freeforums.org' (a mighty 66 members, folks. Awesome).
What type of people continue to frequent a place they despise so much?
Complain about this comment
Some have complained that calling the BBC institutionally corrupt has led to the comment being moderated.
Not sure if the entire BBC is as bad as that, however I will say that there is a Unionit influence at work in Scotland.
Does this mean that the BBC are institutionally corrupt North of the border - yes, there is no doubt about it.
Complain about this comment
re #207 Reluctant-Expat
"What type of people continue to frequent a place they despise so much?"
It's exactly what I keep asking myself when confronted by the unionists that live in Scotland .......
Complain about this comment
# 203 mightychewster
I sympathise with your post. I have lived in England for over thirty years and have noticed a confusion with the Englishness of the English. Most of the Scots I have met in England see themselves as Scots first and British next. (I put myself into this category until we get out independence.) One of the idiosynchracies of the English that surprises me is the English reluctance to wave their own national flag. It is as if they were embarrassed to be seen as a patriotic Englishman. However, I have noticed that the St. George's cross is making a greater appearance at sports events. I have no problem with that; England should be proud of being England. They have, as a nation, contributed much to the world.
As to your point of: 'What do the scots nats think is most important: Independance or being identified as being Scottish'
It is because that we are Scottish that we want independence from England and its controlling Westminster Parliament.
Complain about this comment
Derek, here's something that will make your day!
On quirkynats, gedguy has written: "By the way I assume that all of you who are members of this 'Quirkynats' will know that there is already a file on all of us at MI5."
Gedguy, I suspect MI5 are a little too busy tackling terrorism, foreign intelligence agencies, international organised crime, sanction busters etc. to worry themselves with maintaining files on a small group of fanatical nationalists who pose no threat to law or life.
And then there's oldnat claiming he had his phone tapped in the 70s when he was part of CND. You name would have been on a list somewhere but I very much doubt you deserved a small team of intelligence officers monitoring your phone calls in that pre-computer age.
Complain about this comment
#208 greenockboy
I think you'll find the real complaint is that calling the BBC "institutionally corrupt" is moderated whilst calling any other institution "institutionally corrupt" is not moderated.
Why should the BBC regard themselves as having a special right of immunity to being called "institutionally corrupt"?
Complain about this comment
One of the organisations that regularly apear on BBC programmes whenever an election campaign is ongoing is one 'Govan Law Centre'.
People who have followed the recent by-elections will have noticed the BBC's penchant for providing spokesmen from this organisation a platform whereby they go on to criticise an SNP policy or other.
Indeed the BBC surpassed themselves prior to Glasgow East when they gave unprecedened TV airtime, minutes before a live debate, to one Mike Dailly a lawyer with the same organisation and a well known Labour activist. Mr Dailly went on to accuse the SNP, live on air remember, of political victimisation. A claim that was subsequently proven to be 'mistaken'.
The latest little titbit from the BBC concerns a story regarding class sizes, the Web article headline stating quite clearly (and incorrectly) that class sizes are rising due to a loophole.
There then follows an article that refers to Iain Nisbet, of the Govan Law Centre in Glasgow. Mr Nisbet was allowed onto the BBC Radio Scotland's Good Morning Scotland in order to offer 'expert' opinion on the matter.
It may interest readers of the blog to know that this story was originally covered some months ago when the 'loophole' was first identified. So, one might be inclined to ask why it was deemed the top political story in Scotland.
Yesterday we had the BBC running a story suggesting that Scottish (sic) Labour were urging Holyrood to hold an inquiry into the banks collapse. This was despite the SNP calling for such an inquiry over a month ago.
I said yesterday to watch out for these little 'items'.
Also look out for one Arthur Midwinter - formerly a dab hand at creating 'black hole' headlines.
What you won't see are headlines calling for the resignation of Labour MP's.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#207
Haven't seen much evidence of forums supporting your peculiar views, Expat.
Maybe you could form your own support group, possibly along the lines of "reluctant-north-brit.org" ?? :|
Complain about this comment
BBC Radio Scotland pursuing this months old story right now at 13:05 pm.
The news reader's statement contained the following:
May well win appeal ........
if they appeal ........
could mean more councils expand classes .......
So, with all of these if's but's and maybe's it's fair to ask where the headline for their web article came from?
Are the BBC suggesting that there will now be an avalanche of appeals throughout Scotland?
Thus far only East Renfrewshire have suggested doubt.
Reluctant-Expat asks why we post here when we believe the BBC are biased.
Where else does he think we should post? Is he suggesting that bias should be met with silence?
Complain about this comment
# 208 greenockboy
'Does this mean that the BBC are institutionally corrupt North of the border - yes, there is no doubt about it.'
I'm not too sure about the 'corrupt' bit unless you mean that there is a strong Unionist biasedness in their reporting. If that is what you mean then I would support that view.
I suppose that several of the reporters, insert whichever one suits your purpose, may be worried about their long term future if Scotland gets its independence, never mind their pensions. However, I suspect that the majority of reporters working for the Scottish arm of the BBC have their point of view because that is what they believe. If that is the case then I support their right to be wrong. What I don't support is the blatant misrepresentation of what is happening up here, politically. Apart from that I enjoy reading the BBC's newsweb about what is happening up in Scotland. I just wish that more BBC Scotland reporters were more fairer in their reporting.
Complain about this comment
#211 Reluctant
Sunny days and nationalist always make me smile!
Especially when they all do that face painting identity stunt.
Complain about this comment
Douglas Alexander caught breaking rules by claiming 5000 pounds for a makeover. He also used taxpayers money to pay for a private accountant.
Westminster rules ban MPs from using public funds for self-promotion or public relations.
He should resign as an MP now.
Complain about this comment
# 211 Reluctant-Expat
I don't normally reply to his rantings but I will on this occasion and publish the posting. It was about Brian and his bletherings.
'In a way I feel sorry for Brian and his blethering because he is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Since starting work for the BBC in 1985 he has rightly worked his way quickly up the ladder and has now been left with a political hot potato as BBC Scotland's political editor. I don't think that he could have forseen the events that have led to the SNP gaining power in the Scottish government. This is where the rock and hard place comes into it. He works for a Unionist company (BBC) and has to be careful of his masters,as well as those who are watching his masters (MI5). (By the way I assume that all of you who are members of this 'Quirkynats' will know that there is already a file on all of us at MI5. You are being watched . Personally, I'm not particulary bothered about it as I would have thought MI5 negligent in their duty to the crown if they didn't have files on us. They are just doing their job.) I'm still not sure about Brian's political leanings but he does seem sway towards a more socialist leaning than right wing. If he had to do his job properly and report the political situation in Scotland fairly then he would almost certainly be in trouble with his masters in Wood Lane, even might even have his file stamped with a tree. So, poor Brian has to, whether he wants to or not, toe the line and try not to be nice, or even fair, to those nasty Nationalists.
He must see that the SNP have a good chance of being in a situation where we can start the negotiations to independence and, therefore, his beloved job at the BBC will almost certainly cease. I don't envy him these next few years. I sincerely hope that when the dust settles he will Ok and be able to continue in some form or other. I know that on some of my postings on his blog I have attacked him personally (from a political point of view), but that is politics. I carry no animosity towards him, whatsoever, how could I; he's an Arab.'
Complain about this comment
Reluctant-Expat,
Apparently the real Scottish liberation army wanted to halt the SNP and Alex Salmond.
Talk about the enemy within!.
Complain about this comment
#205 bighulla - touche! that always gets me as well, it is amusing...
#210 gedguy - My question was a hypothetical one tied to the point that frankly was making. The basic argument being does identity matter: a lot of nats on here say 'not really as long as we have independance' (the mian thought behind it is that not many identify themselves a British) so I was just asking the question 'would you choose independance over national identity' - I do realise it's not a likely scenario, but I just wondered what your thoughts were. Would you be willing to abandon "Scottishness" to gain independance?
On the other point i'm glad that people are flying the George cross more and identifying with being English. I can sympathise with that; a lot of English people do feel that we should be British first, and should only be English when the footy/rugby etc is on, whereas Scotland/Wales/NI are always classed as their own nations first. In the past it has almost been frowned upon to be English. I'm proud of our history as a nation as a whole. There are parts we should be ashamed of but on the whole i'm OK with the most of it
I think the sooner all our nations can identify themselves as individuals the better, after all so much of the arguments are petty and based on centuries old preconceptions
Complain about this comment
The Texas-Scotland comparison is interesting but, I suspect, doesn't bear much examination.
First, as I understand it, a Scotland that votes for independence will become independent, if not with the blessing of Westminster then with its cooperation. If Texas, or any other state, voted for independence it would be seen as secession, illegal and treasonous. That action would not be allowed to stand. Whatever Texas was for a few short years in the past means nothing today.
Also, as has been pointed out, Scotland has a separate and distinct cultural heritage from the rest of the UK that stretches back thousands of years. Texas is not yet 200 years old. Its heritage as a distinct place on the map begins with the Spanish colonial conquests, and its heritage as "Texas" begins in the early 1800's with the influx of thousands of pro-slavery southern Americans. The culture of that Texas has always been thoroughly American.
On a side note, I want to disagree with a few comments asserting that slavery was not the cause, or even a primary cause, of the American Civil War. Without the existence of slavery, there would have been no war. All the Southern trappings of states rights, etc., were created or manipulated to legitimate and defend the wealth and power of the slaveholding aristocracy, both within those states and within the national government in Washington. Even such figures as Virginia's Jefferson and Madison played the states right card explicitly to defend the slave culture and political clout of their region.
Complain about this comment
# 222 mightychewster
I agree with your posting.
Complain about this comment
# 223 justcorbly
I'm not too sure that I agree with you that Slavery was the prime motive of the southern states wanting to be independent from the Northern states. I suspect, from my readings on that particular moment in the history of the USA, that it was more to do with the North wanting a Federalist Union as opposed to the Southern ideals of 'mind you own business' attitude. I suspect that it was more a point in their history whether the USA was to become a Federalist or Confederal political system. The 'slave' question was just a focal point for the North to rally around.
Complain about this comment
Dear Moderator ,
Having read through this site it appears that there are MANY comments off topic , obviously Texas has not gripped the imagination quite in the way other subject matter has gripped the nation.
So if my ,
"Posting:Meanwhile , back at the ranch , the BBC continues to play down the Labour party expenses claims while reminding all an sundry about the Tory party moat and duck house .How many digital cameras can one couple use?How many accountants can a chancellor use?How much media coaching does Harriet need?"
is judged " Off topic" where do some of the others fit in??
I look forward to clarification!!
Surely it could'nt be because " someone" did'nt like the suggestion that impartiality is compromised??
Complain about this comment
221 Derek Barks
You and Ex-claptrap are the worst posters on here and that one sums you both up!
Ex - Quirkynats may have 66 members but that's 66 more than any pro-union blog! Do you pay the BBC tax?
Complain about this comment
222. mightychewster: "I think the sooner all our nations can identify themselves as individuals the better, after all so much of the arguments are petty and based on centuries old preconceptions"
Misconceptions too. And plenty of them.
Complain about this comment
It seems to me that bringing up Texas as a comparison piece to Scotland, in the larger context of devolution, is interesting. It is one of the three States of the United States which was, prior to joining the Union, more or less independent countries (just how independent Texas and California were is somewhat questionable; the third, Vermont, was recognized by a number of European nations, however, and was surely an independent nation in any sense of the word).
What is important, however, and is often overlooked in considerations of the United States system of Federal government and the United Kingdom system of devolution is what, exactly it is that makes the United States system of Federal government work. Without getting unduly detailed, it is embodied in the Great Compromise of the Constitution: that there is one legislative house, the House of Representatives, the members of which are elected on as close to a 'one man, one vote' basis as is practical, and there is another house, the Senate, which has two members from each State. Both houses must agree to pass any legislation. Thus there is representation of the people, but there is also representation of the various States on a geographic basis. This may sound trivial -- but it isn't. Only because of it is it possible to have the Federal government hold together.
The United Kingdom had just such a system -- a century ago. The Commons is broadly analogous to the House of Representatives. The House of Lords was broadly analogous the the Senate, although the Lords were not elected. However, for various reasons, the power of the Lords has been diminished (and in a sense 'Londonised' -- the appointed Lords are basically London people, and have no regional or geographic interests) over the years to the point where it is virtually non-existent, and thus there is no effective regional representation in Parliament. Seen with a very broad brush, devolution might be seen as an effort to re-establish that critical element of regional representation, and in the humble opinion of this displaced Scot, it would be well (although I recognize that it would also be distasteful) to examine the Federal system of the United States and to frankly borrow what works -- and re-establish the Lords as a branch of Parliament with equal powers to the Commons, and with regional representation.
Complain about this comment
#207 R-E,
Thanks for the plug, R-E, visitor numbers jumped just after your mention of Quirkynats, including a visit from someone at the UN.
Oh, and are you calling Oldnat a liar?
Complain about this comment
227. Great post. Well done.
Complain about this comment
Brian, I feel your choice of country (oops, I mean American state) to compare 10 years of Scottish devolution is very poor judgment! Why there???
I'd like to point out that Scottish independence is not just about our identity as many people here appear to be focusing on.
Can anyone explain why the links do not work here? Is it deliberate?
Media Monkey in the Guardian highlighting the BBC blunder regarding Alex Salmond ..... lets see if it works!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/mediamonkeyblog
Complain about this comment
# 230 Richard_the_Rogue
'Oh, and are you calling Oldnat a liar?'
It would be nice if he did as a libel case against him might reveal who he really is. However, I doubt that he has the guts to say that online.
Complain about this comment
229. I believe that is the main point of Brian's trip to Texas. Our current system of devolution approaches federalism in that certain powers are decentralised and strongly protected from removal by the referendum that brought them about. I cannot see any UK Government taking back any significant powers just by a UK Parliamentary bill. I am a subscriber to the Federal Trust which sees considerable cross-party support throughout the UK and while I don't see full-scale Federalism along USA lines happening any time soon, many do see us moving towards it as the English seek their own separate legislature. Nats fret about England being too dominant a force in any federal system, but English regional assemblies may still come about as long as there is also an English Parliament (with responsibilities split between them).
The Lords certainly has its advantages in being manned mostly by the best and brightest of the land rather than another class of politician. They bring experience, knowledge and objectivity to the legislative process. However, my first reform to the Lords would be to require members to qualify only by achievement (national leader in their field etc.) than by association with any person or party. Members would also then be allowed free votes instead of the current Whip system.
Regional representation could be introduced into the Commons via a double majority as seen in the European Council. For a Bill to pass, it must receive both a simple majority of the entire House plus majorities among the representatives of each of the four nations. How this would work in practice.....?
Complain about this comment
233. "Libel"?! LOL! Get a grip, gedguy or I'll get the security services onto you. They are always close to you, you realise?
Always. Ssh, what was that noise?!
Yes, oldnat's a liar. He's made it up. Utter nonsense. A big, fat liar. (And not the only nationalist liar on here by a long shot.)
That or he's astonishingly paranoid and bloated with his own self-importance.
One or the other.
Complain about this comment
#225 gedguy2:
The issue of federalism versus confederation was resolved by the Constitution.
Beginning almost immediately after voting to accept the Constitution, Southern states began to use the trappings and language of states rights to defend and expand slavery. In fact, few believe those states would have accepted the Constitution if the Framers had banned slavery outright, as a number of them desired. I.e., their agreement to join the U.S. in the first place was always conditional on the federal government's acceptance of slavery.
As opinion turned against slavery, albeit slowly, the south leveraged its inordinate political power in Washington to ensure that institution's survival and expansion. (E.g., Texas.) The south saw the election of Lincoln as evidence that they could no longer preserve slavery via politics. Instead, they went to war.
Absent slavery, hardly any of the issues of federal versus state power would have emerged in the antebellum era. Certainly, a slave-free south would have had no more impetus to raise those issues than did the slave-free North.
It was the compulsion to sustain and expand slavery that drove the states rights, leave us alone attitude of the South, not the other way around. The South merely deployed that rhetoric to defend the institution. Their dependence on, and faith in, slavery was the cause -- not the result -- of the social and political attitudes that drove southerners' indifference and hostility toward industrialization.
The South took the nation into war rather than rid itself of the fundamentally evil institution of slavery. Other choices might have been made.
Complain about this comment
Conservative & Scottish Nationalist praised on transparency, but not Labour!
http://news.scotsman.com/politics/Scots-MEPs-praised-for-fighting.5300741.jp
Complain about this comment
Someone on here is so, so easy to wind up. I wonder if that person will name all the other nationalists who are liars too?
Complain about this comment
# 236 justcorbly
We are not going to agree on this point so we will have to agree to disagree. However, I do, mostly, agree with your last paragraph.
Complain about this comment
231 Ex claptrap
Do you pay the BBC tax? Mines wasn't a good post just a truthful one. I know you like the truth or am I a nat liar? Another thing how can you expect an unelected chamber of old sleepy heads to be good for democracy? I suppose it keeps the trough snouting going! The more I think about so called British democracy the more I crave Scottish independence and i'm not lieing!
Complain about this comment
238. All of you. Every single one of you nationalists. And you do it every day.
Now, off you go to the Mods and complain.
You're right. I am so, so angry right now. Positively fuming. Grrrrrrrrrr. Do not dare to mistake my sheer rage for mockery.
Complain about this comment
# 241 Reluctant-Expat
I still can't see any names and incidents where the nats have been found out to be telling lies.
'You're right. I am so, so angry right now. Positively fuming. Grrrrrrrrrr. Do not dare to mistake my sheer rage for mockery.'
I was nearly frightened there for a moment.
Complain about this comment
#241 R-E,
Please point to any statement that I have made which is demonstrably a lie.
Complain about this comment
#241 Reluctant-Expat
Sheer Khan was a tiger if I remember that old imperialist Kipling aright, but Sheer Rage? King of the Monkeys? Balloo was a bear. What fun to be remembering all these old unionist childrens tales; I am glad you posted, quite made my afternoon that has.
Complain about this comment
241
If you're angry you've lost the argument. Give up the Unionist nonsense and you won't be so angry.
Complain about this comment
+++STOP PRESS+++
Reluctant-Expat revealed!
[url]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_F5fY63LECJY/STQ2X0OiarI/AAAAAAAAAsE/1fmR_CjQrU0/s400/blog+kenny+everett.gif[/url]
Complain about this comment
Anyway, back to talk of a federal UK......
Complain about this comment
# 246 Richard_the_Rogue
You can't be serious!
Complain about this comment
#247 R-E,
Oh no you dont...
Pleas point to any statement that I have made which is demonstrably a lie.
Complain about this comment
# 247 Reluctant-Expat
What! No list? I'm disappointed in you. I had visions of dozens of libel cases being brought forward.
By the way, most of your posting (# 211) related to SIS (MI6) not MI5. No need to apologise for that error I'm sure that you were aware of it just after you pressed the 'post comment' button. However, it may be MI6 after we get independence.
In July 2006, Norman Baker MP accused the British Government of "hoarding information about people who pose no danger to this country", after it emerged that MI5 holds secret files on 272,000 individualsequivalent to one in 160 adults.
As to your # 234 posting, I prefer confederalism; it's more honest.
Complain about this comment
#241 Reluctant-Expat
Never mind, son. You away and lie down in a darkened room after having a nice cup of camomile tea.
We'll look after Scotland while you're gone.
Complain about this comment
Thomas Porter asks:
"It's quite easy to put down another poster's view, but what is your opinion on the matter? Does national identity matter to you?"
Like my views on religion, it matters for me, and it is a matter for me, and me alone. Not the state.
Complain about this comment
#252 Anaxim
I wouldn't disagree with you on that. Having been brought up in a UK state which constantly rammed "Britishness" down my throat, I don't want to see any state of which I am a citizen repeating that.
Complain about this comment
Brian, nice talking to you last Saturday. I am responding to some of the comments and questions posted about your visit to Texas and comparing it to Scotland and its strugles. First, let say I am looking forward to the upcoming documentary. Secondly, you were on target by picking Texas to visit and seeking parallels and insights. Texas was a wilderness, unsettled, even by the Mexicans because of the Indian threat. This was the case until Mexico invited settlers to help tame the land, of which many were Scottsmen. They brought their courage, tenasity, work ethic, and stubborness to Texas and made it a success. Yes, they did fight and won their Independence after many years under Mexican rule. We were a nation for ten years. This should prove we were not a flash in the pan. We had our own president, congress, court system, navy and army. We had and printed our own currency, of which I have an original "red back 20". We are not trying to say we are in the same situation as Scotland, but merely that we are proud to be Texans, proud to be Scottish, and because of the early Scottsmen who chose to go to Texas, while the others went to hell, we are who we are today. Texas, its place in history, its worth to the world, its pride and symbolism of individual freedom, is the direct result of the Scotts and Irish who fought and died to make her so. We are different from other Americans. Even they say so. We are not better than the rest, just more fortunate. Philip
Complain about this comment
#252 Anaxim
So what do you do for a passport? If I'm feeling particularly American today can I apply for a US passport?
Won't it be fun having your eyes photo'ed at Gretna on your way to Glasgow?
Complain about this comment
#254 texanscott
It's clear you have a very extensive knowledge of the Scotts.
;-)
Complain about this comment
TexanScot,
Could you tell me (if you know) out of the 24/25 million Texan population how many have a Scottish ancestors?
I have another question regarding the forth coming BBC Brian documentary, do you have to pay to watch it in America?
Complain about this comment
#211
You are incredibly naive. Christine Graham MSP established last year by asking Parliamentary questions that every police force bar one in Scotland had or has "plants" in the SNP in every area. This is not shocking or unusual. It would be very strange if this were not the case. The SNP is a much bigger threat to the UK than any marxist or anarchist group ever managed and they were and are systematically infiltrated.
I have a very close relative who has just retired from a high position in the police and he confirms that all significant SNP activists are on file and are monitored.
Obviously you have not seen the BBC Alba exposure "Diomhair". You should watch it. It is accessible on the Independence Convention site.
Complain about this comment
#256
If you had asked me that question forty or fifty years ago, I could have told you that the percentage of scots in Texas were high. We have seen a large influx of northerners in the 80's, not of Scottish decent, and the last 20 years we have been invaded by illegal aliens from Mexico. So,that has deluted our Scottish popoulation. But in the heart lands of Texas, in the small towns that are not on the main highways, we still hold our own. For example, my little home town is McGregor in the county of McLennan. All the small towns in my home area are named after Scots. Crawford is only 5 miles away. Texas also has a rich heritage of German, Polish, and Cezhs. but the early settlers were mostly Scots and Irish. The death list at the Alamo is about 1/3 Scotts and Irish. The answer to your second question is yes. We can only get the BBC through cable TV which is a monthly subscribtion. It is not unusual to go to a local "family reunion" and see hundreds of Scots gathered to visit. My wife and I are members of the Scottish Society of Dallas. TexanScot
Complain about this comment
#234 Reluctant-Expat -
"The Lords certainly has its advantages in being manned mostly by the best and brightest of the land rather than another class of politician."
So these are the "best and brightest of the land" are they? Truly your moral compass points a different way to everyone elses. And, as far as being "another class of politician" goes - it seems to me that they belong in exactly the same 'class' as all the other piggies.
Complain about this comment
TexanScott,
Thanks for your answer, I still find it a highly unusual place to pick for a comparison.
I feel ten years of independence is not the same as ten years of a devolved Parliament.
Scotland has very few powers, the UK Westminster Government still rules over the majority of issues.
However, the past two years have seen changes in Scotland since the Scottish National Party have been in power. Prior to this it was in the hands of the unionists so there was no real different from being governed by Westminster, it's the same parties after all.
We want the chance to vote on Scottish independence but the unionists will not allow it.
The reason I asked if you have to pay to watch the BBC is because we have to even if we don't have a tv... Crazy or what!
My son moved out to go to uni last year, he has no TV but he still has to pay for a BBC tax at £142.50 per year.
Like you I pay for cable tv but I still have to pay for the tax on top of the cable charge, whether I watch the BBC or not.
So, Brian & his crew swanning off to the States comes out of the public purse at a ridicules amount!
May I suggest you watch Diomhair another BBC documentary, it was only shown in the North of Scotland so that is a small proportion of veiwers out of our small 5 million population.
Thankfully Youtube has come to our rescue, along with the freedom of information act!
The information which has never been disclosed prior to this film is quite mind blowing!
I hope you find the time to watch it, I'd be very interested to hear your views on it?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S9BgbQ8fo6A
Solstice
Complain about this comment
Actually, Texas canNOT secede if it wants to -- that's a big myth. However, Texas can divide into 5 states if it wants to, per the provisions in the annexation.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS