Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Critics round on Brown as G8 hopes fall short of dream

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date:
06 April 2007
Meeting in grounds of Gleneagles analyses G8 promises Brown defends UK efforts, but admits more has to be done Main culprits are the United States, Japan, Canada and Italy
Key quote
"The world can't wait. With all the knowledge, technology and wealth at our disposal, another generation must not be consigned to a life of misery and unnecessary struggle for the want of political will." - Cardinal Keith O'Brien

Story in full IT WAS a vision of hope delivered less than 24 hours after one of Britain's darkest days.

The leaders of the world's richest nations lined up in front of the Gleneagles Hotel in Perthshire to announce a set of bold pledges: poverty would be eradicated, debt would be dropped and trade would be fair.

Yesterday, those promises came back to haunt Gordon Brown, as campaigners and activists accused his government and the other members of the G8 of falling short. Church leaders, pop stars, schoolchildren and activists all piled pressure on the Chancellor; Hilary Benn, the International Development Secretary, and Jack McConnell, the First Minister, at a meeting to gauge the achievements of the last two years.

Kofi Annan, the former secretary general of the United Nations, was also there to call for more aid for the developing world.

The meeting was held in a tent in the grounds of Gleneagles where the 31st G8 summit was held. On 8 July, 2005 - just a day after the London Tube bombings - its leaders pledged to increase aid to $50 billion (£23.3 billion) by 2010.

However, this week the Organisation for Economic Co- operation and Development found contributions from those countries had fallen by 9 per cent from 2005 to 2006. The main culprits are the United States, Japan, Canada and Italy. But charities claim the UK is also lagging behind, with only 0.38 per cent spent on aid, excluding debt relief, 37 years after the UN asked all countries to commit at least 0.7 per cent to aid.

As the main representative of the governments present, Mr Brown was not about to get an easy time.

The first to take to the podium were Church leaders, who pulled no punches in holding him to account for spending millions on "weapons of mass destruction" while the poor of the world continue to suffer.

The Rev Alan Macdonald, the Moderator of the Church of Scotland, spoke directly to Mr Brown as he attacked Trident, the nuclear base on the Clyde. He questioned how money could be spent rebuilding the nuclear arsenal at an estimated cost of £25 billion - some say even £76 billion - when 30,000 children a day were dying from poverty and it cost so little to feed them.

"What aid could £25 billion or indeed £76 billion deliver for the poor of the world?" he asked.

He recalled the enthusiasm felt in Edinburgh two years ago, when nearly a quarter of a million people marched through the city's streets. "There was huge optimism that this could be the break to make poverty history," he said. "However some of that enthusiasm has dribbled away and some of those promises have not arrived."

Cardinal Keith O'Brien, of the Roman Catholic Church, also attacked Trident to applause from the audience, including Mr Annan.

He complained about government spending on the Iraq war being more than the Department for International Development spent in 2004-5 and said: "The world can't wait. With all the knowledge, technology and wealth at our disposal, another generation must not be consigned to a life of misery and unnecessary struggle for the want of political will."

A message from Bono read out by the cardinal said: "Enough is enough. If we truly believe that the value of a child's life in Africa is equal to that of our own children, we cannot break our promises to them."

A message from Bob Geldof said: "The poor of Africa will not be forgotten, despite the best efforts of their governments and our own."

Sweating in the heat of the tent, Mr Brown gained no spontaneous applause, unlike the previous speakers, despite a passionate speech. The father of two likened the fight to eradicate poverty to the one to end slavery 200 years ago. "Let nobody tell us there are no good causes left," he said. "That 30,000 children will die today because of our inability to help. Each child is unique and special and we desire for each child what we would desire for our own children."

Mr Brown insisted progress has been made on the G8 promises. Aid in Britain had gone up by 13 per cent between 2005 and 2006 to £6.4 billion.

He went on: "By your efforts, $170 million of debt relief is available to the poorest countries of the world. And by your efforts, because of debt relief, it has been possible now, even already, for education for millions of children and healthcare for millions of adults and children at risk.

"Let nobody say that debt relief doesn't work. What doesn't work is doing nothing and we're determined that we act."

He announced £20 million for the UN's children's agency, UNICEF to establish a fund for education for those in war-torn or unstable areas of he world.

He also repeated a pledge of £50 million for a fund to plant a billion trees around the world and planted one in the grounds of Gleneagles.

However, the Chancellor also admitted that more had to be done and promised to take the fight to the World Bank, Westminster and the G8.

But Mr Annan called for action, not just "lip service". He said: "I think it is important that we maintain the pressure and we remind the governments that they made promises and we took them seriously and we want them to honour those promises.

"We do not want lip service; we do not want promises that are made to be forgotten."

Judith Robertson, the head of Oxfam in Scotland, said rich countries were breaking the promises they made at Gleneagles. "In 2005, the G8 promised to increase aid by $50 billion annually by 2010. Although far from what is needed to end poverty, this money could pay for every child to go to school, save the lives of 500,000 women who die each year in pregnancy and childbirth, and help train the six million teachers and health workers urgently needed around the world."

Ben Young, national co-ordinator of Jubilee Scotland, demanded progress on debt, as only 22 out of 60 countries in debt have been helped. "The culprits behind the debt crisis must be named and shamed. Debt is at the root of global poverty, and the blame for it can be laid at the door of western banks and governments," he said.

Jasmine Whitbread, the chief executive of Save the Children, praised Mr Brown's UNICEF donation and said:

"This announcement sends out a clear challenge to the rest of the world's richest countries to raise their game."

'I'm doing the most important job in the world'


THE G8 Make Poverty History march in Edinburgh in July 2005, was a seminal moment for many of the 250,000 people who took part - but for me it was a life-changing moment.

That day was absolutely inspirational. It is clear to me that making poverty history should be the number one priority for the world. It is a scandal that one billion people live on less than $1 a day - around 52p.

After working as a steward on that day, I gave up my job as an investment manager in Edinburgh's financial sector and I now earn around a third of my former salary.

I now lead a team responsible for policy, campaigns and media at Scotland's biggest international development charity, the Scottish Catholic International Aid Fund.

My old job was well paid, but in some ways you could say the cause I now work for is the most important job in the world.

Two years on from G8, I'm as passionate as ever about the cause - but disappointed with the G8 leaders.

It's all about having sufficient political will. We manage to find billions of pounds to build nuclear weapons and pay for the London Olympics, but choose not to meet our international aid commitments.

Britain is shamed by many of its neighbours. Many of the smaller countries which surround us manage to spend a higher proportion of their national income on aid, such as the Republic of Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands.

While the UK government has made some progress, there are a number of simple steps they are not taking that they could.

One thing that Gordon Brown could do is meet the commitment made 37 years ago to spend 0.7 per cent of our national income on aid - we currently spend just 0.38 per cent of our gross national income on aid.

The other thing I'd really like the government to do is flex its diplomatic muscles to bring about change in the world's trading system, which is very unfair to poor countries.

For example, at the moment the EU dumps its subsidised agricultural products on the developing world, which drives down prices, ruins local farmers and destroys economies.

What the government promised and how the G8's progress is rated


HIV

The promise: Universal access to anti-HIV drugs in Africa by 2010.

Governments say: A global fund has been set up to fight HIV/AIDS, malaria and TB. Unitaid, a joint venture between France, Britain and other countries, has also been set up.

Charities say: The current estimate of AIDS sufferers in Africa is 28 million, only 20 per cent of whom receive treatment. More than 90 per cent of children who need access to drugs do not get them.

Trade

The promise: To reduce subsidies and tariffs that inhibit free trade.

Governments say: Work is ongoing with the World Trade Organisation for a deal that will reduce agricultural subsidies to the developed world.

Charities say: Nothing has happened since talks at the World Trade Organisation's Doha Round collapsed in 2005.

Developing countries should have the right to help themselves if they can.

Aid

The promise: £23.3 billion a year pledged to developing nations by 2010.

Governments say: Total aid has gone up by £20 billion since 2004 and is rising. Britain aims to give 0.7 per cent of gross national income by 2013.

Charities say: Target will not be met at current rate. The contributions of G8 countries dropped by 9 per cent between 2005 and last year. Britain should give 0.7 per cent of wealth by 2010 at the latest if poverty is to be cut.

Debt

The promise: To cut debt owed by poor countries in return for good governance.

Governments say: More than 20 countries have had their debt cancelled and negotiations are ongoing with another 19. Some £40 billion of debt relief has been delivered so far.

Charities say: More than 30 countries still need debt relief and many are struggling to meet the conditions attached. Less than 1 per cent of aid to Zambia was available to cut poverty.

Education

The promise: Universal primary school education by 2015.

Governments say: Announcement of £20 million for Unicef to deliver education in post-conflict countries, with £8.5 billion of Britain's aid budget over the next ten years going to education. In 2005 there were 100 million out of school - now it is 80 million, so it is a 20 per cent improvement

Charities say: Aid remains low and 80 million children are still not in school.

Environment

The promise: No agreement was reached largely due to US opposition, but the G8 did agree that global warming exists.

Governments say: Britain has vowed to cut emissions by 60 per cent by 2050.

Charities say: The government's own Stern report admits that emissions need to reduced by at least 80 per cent by 2050 to prevent a rise in the world's temperature of 2C. The poorest will be the worst affected.

The full article contains 1999 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

 
1

K.Y,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 00:34:38

Surely better to have a Labour government pushing the International Community for action than an SNP government that would pull back from any involvement in the world stage?

I am sure I will now get shouted down by the SNP drones on this website, but I think most people would agree that it is better for the rest of the world to have the UK government pushing for progress, than have a Scottish Executive that wants to pull back from the rest of the world?

2

Darryl Matheson,

Elgin, Morayshire 06/04/2007 00:34:47

How can you blame Grodon Brown when he is the one trying to tell the other governments to do their bit like Britian is and he was not even involved in the talks at the time anyway.

3

Tom R,

06/04/2007 00:54:03

#1 "..pull back from the rest of the world.."

Scotland is cut off from the rest of the world at present. No UN seat, no place at the EU top table.

It is primarily to achieve involvement for Scotland in interaction with other nations that the SNP exists-but this does not mean foreign adventurism in Iraq.

4

Scullion,

Canada 06/04/2007 00:57:04

#1
I'm an unbiased observer on the Scottish electoral scene but I don't recall the SNP saying that Scotland will back down on the world stage. Ireland and Norway, 2 nations to which an independent Scotland would compare, are leading lights in this struggle against world poverty.
#2
Any elected government picks up the old government's promises. If not, of what use would the commitment of any regularly elected legislature be? Gordon Brown must take the heat simply due to his position.

5

Robbie,

06/04/2007 01:19:02

1. K.Y, Edinburgh says, "I think most people would agree that it is better for the rest of the world to have the UK government pushing for progress....."
KY - It would be better in any forums for a Scottish Government to be voicing the opinion of the Scottish people. At present there are 192 countries which are members of the United Nations General Assembly. They can speak for themselves, forge their own alliances and groups with like-minded nations - Scotland can't - it is spoken for.

6

buzzer,

06/04/2007 01:48:17

1# 'KY Britain is shamed by many of its neighbours. Many of the smaller countries which surround us manage to spend a higher proportion of their national income on aid, such as the Republic of Ireland, Norway, Sweden, Denmark and the Netherlands'.

A UK government pushing for progress....my arse.

Scotland is one of the highest doners to charity in the UK and we could given the chance we would never 'pull back from the rest of the world'

Anither Labour supporter who puts Scotland down at any opportunity.

7

Gnasher,

06/04/2007 01:56:45

#5 and #6 - Aw da babba. Aw da wee babba. Yes doo are! Yes doo are!

8

Freeman Stand,

06/04/2007 02:14:14

#1. KY -is your third name gel?

9

Alex Young Laird of Drumchapel,

Madrid 06/04/2007 02:28:30

Eh, how much is Gordy spending on the Iraq war? How much does it cost to kill between 650, 000 and 1 million Iraqis? Maybe Daryll or KY can help me out here?

10

,

06/04/2007 02:34:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
11

Scullion,

Canada 06/04/2007 02:37:15

Brown-"The card you are thinking of is the ...six of diamonds".

12

Skirvy,

Auld Reek 06/04/2007 02:56:47

Scottish people are very generous at giving to the inpoverished. I think no matter how big a country we can always give what we can afford, we live in such luxury which we take for granted. Something needs to be done soon, Bliar and Bush can spend trillions on murder and death in the middle east plus they want to buy new nukes. That money could have been spent on Africa, think about how much a trillion quid would do for africa it would save millions upon millions, instead bliars and bush's trillions have killed hundreds of thousands. They are the biggest threat to humanity since the plague!

13

Cadgers,

Perth 06/04/2007 06:13:55

All the money that has been poured into Africa over the years, where has it gone? The talk is, rightly, of feeding starving children but why are they hungry? I really think African countries should start being accountable for their own populations.
And yes I'm against Trident, the illegal Iraqi war,ID cards and this inept Labour government.

14

Scotland Expects,

06/04/2007 06:18:14

@1
do you know what the Norwegian oil fund is doing in fight against child labour... wake up and smell the coffee and stop Brown nosing london

http://www.aftenposten.no/english/business/article1721347...

15

Tatties ower the side,

Johannesburg 06/04/2007 06:26:49

#15 and#16 Spot on gents. give a man a fish and you feed him for a day.. teach a man to fish and he can sit by the lake and drink beer all day....

Seriously, trade not aid is the only answer.

16

ddmc,

06/04/2007 06:45:27

#10 i think it's Jelly

17

Citylocal Fife,

Citylocal Fife News Room 06/04/2007 06:52:56

Both Africa and the UK suffer from the same problem, which is greedy, corrupt, and incompetent politicians, who care more for themselves than the plight of others.

It's funny how the solution for Iraq was to remove the leader and dismantle his support structure, but for Africa, we even have the 'man of Straw' shaking hands with Mugabe, the man who bulldozed down his own peoples houses.

However it is not just Straw - now the promoter of 'Greedy Grabbit Gordon' - who is to blame, our contribution from Scotland to halt Mugabe's vile acts was the draconian act of removing Mugabe's' honorary degree....?

Yup, that really should get him to feed his people and stop his regime of brutality.

It is a great pity that we couldn't give the Africans what we have on May 03rd - the chance to remove the corrupt, rhe squanderers, and the incompetent from Government, and make the country a better place for all.

18

jim lad,

the capital 06/04/2007 06:59:07

#14 You'r so wrong
#15/#16 You'r so right

19

redandwhitehoops,

06/04/2007 06:59:40

#1 Ms Gel,
Look at the Aid given through Scottish Charities such as SCIAF and SIR to the Third World, in particular Africa, and your argument falls down. Scots tend to be charitable by nature so why should that stop when we become Independent.
As for the British Labour Government arguing for more Debt Relief in the International Community, why should others listen to them? As a Country, Britain is now almost as hated on the World stage as America. Look at the lack of support for Tony when he went to the UN about Iran recently.

20

jim lad,

the capital 06/04/2007 07:00:21

#18 Well put

21

oder,

Scotland 06/04/2007 07:10:24

I am all for helping the poorer nations but ... Africa to give a trillion to Africa is to invite more corrupt goverment, less human rights , more tyrants despots, no to save Africa almost every leader in every contry has to be removed,sad but true this really is a case were we have to be cruel to be kind
reason escapes African leaders on the one hand we should not interfere, on the other we should pay. sorry! you can not have it both ways

22

frhugh,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 07:14:41

It is very simple really - the Governments which made so many hopeful promises to the poor of the world have lied to them. Many Governments, including our own, have not only lied to the poor of this world, but have lied to us, the electorate.The people of Scotland, across the political and religious divide, have made it abundantly clear that they want no part in replacing Trident. It appears to me that the Government have completlely ignored us.
They will be held accountable by the electorate.
I hope the major political parties make helping the world a safer place to live in a major part of their next manifestoes, and that will only happen if we keep putting pressure on them. Enough is enough.

23

The Strategist,

06/04/2007 07:18:01

Trade and economic development is indeed the only way of hauling Africa out of poverty.

But that requires real democracy for it to work well and there isn't a lot of evidence that democracy is top of the agenda for many African leaders.

24

11+failed,

the pans 06/04/2007 07:25:52

Why doesn't Gordon just take a bit more from the pensioners at home to help these poor third world countries that squandered their loans on corruption and grandiose posturing and now have trouble paying the interest.

25

Phil C,

06/04/2007 07:34:13

KY #1 Thinking like yours is really sad and backward. You don't seem to understand the core principles changes to make Scotland more involved in world affairs. KY,open your mind, if only for your own sake. How anyone can have any belief in anything to do with Labour is my little mystery!

And nobody's shouting at you!

26

Dave From Barra,

Western Isles 06/04/2007 07:57:29

The headline should read

"Doh! Gordon Brown Does Homer Simpson Impression"

27

Scott 'Ola' Foam,

Scotland 06/04/2007 07:59:23

We should send the health & safety executive over to Africa so that when they decide to spend 2.5million pounds teaching them how to wash there hands they can spend some of that money providing running water so they can do just that!!!

Numpties the lot of them!!!

28

Craig,

Falkirk 06/04/2007 08:08:32

Its funny how times have changed, Britain led the way over the past 10 years to fight gobal poverty. Gordon Brown's key belief is an education for all, how can yous not support this man for doing this. You cant end world poverty and let every child have access to education without world support, as mentioned in the article
"The main culprits are the United States, Japan, Canada and Italy"
its to these nations we should be angry with

29

jennie,

inverness 06/04/2007 08:15:12

Seems like we only give aid to countries in Africa which will spend it on arms at our next big Arms Sale - and we only invade loathsome dictatorships when they have large oil reserves. If Zimbabwe had oil, how long would Mugabe have lasted before the Atlantic Axis powers invaded? A day or two at best

The further North and West in Scotland you get, the poorer the people and the most generous (not to disparage you Border folk, of course). I worked for a charity cold-calling businesses, and if we couldn't get a sale anywhere, we would call Shetland or Lewis and they would always, but always, say yes. Best little country in the world.

30

Calum10,

06/04/2007 08:20:20

The aspirations and promises never became a reality.

This is failure on a huge scale. The politicians failed, the celebrities failed and the people who marched failed.

The Make Poverty History campaign has created it's own little bit of history by being a complete failure.

31

think,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 08:21:13

All of the British public and that include Scotland have donated millions to aid in Africa,but while you have a corrupt regime the money is not going to the right causes.
How our politions can shake hands with Mugabe and think this is acceptable is beyond all comprehension.
Like all governments including the British one are all crooks insuits.

32

rab, glasgow,

06/04/2007 08:23:06

1. K.Y, Edinburgh /Are you a comedian or just plain thick?

33

Neil Mac,

Skye 06/04/2007 08:23:33

Does K Y have any grasp of reality? Better to have a Labour government pushing the international community for action than an SNP led independent Scotland?!!!

His Labour led UK government has taken us into an illegal war in Iraq at a cost of billions, sacrificing thousands of lives to support a neo con US led by a semi fascist ; they have succeeded in turning the UK into a target for extremists; they are proposing to buy a new lot of WMD from the US at a cost of tens of billions breaking another set of international agreements. And KY like others of his blind Labour supporting numpties thinks we are better off with them and with Westminster! It is truly scary that there are many people who think like he does. For the sake of peace and prosperity and justice here and abroad let us put the SNP in charge in Holyrood.

34

Neil Mac,

Skye 06/04/2007 08:23:58

Does K Y have any grasp of reality? Better to have a Labour government pushing the international community for action than an SNP led independent Scotland? The Labour led UK government has taken us into an illegal war in Iraq at a cost of billions; they have succeeded in turning the UK into a target for extremists; they are proposing to buy a new lot of WMD from the US at a cost of tens of billions breaking another set of international agreements. And KY like others of his blind Labour supporting numpties thinks we are better off with them and with Westminster! It is truly scary that there are many people who think like he does. For the sake of peace and prosperity and justice here and abroad let us put the SNP in charge in Holyrood.

35

Scott 'Ola' Foam,

Scotland 06/04/2007 08:24:29

To Be honest were throwing money at a bottomless pit. Infrastructure is the problem, no facilities no running water no industry to support it.

36

Scott 'Ola' Foam,

Scotland 06/04/2007 08:28:02

#1 KY

Rather have the SNP supporting world issues rather than sticking there noses in other peoples business like our current administration likes to do. Apparently Tony has god like powers which will solve the worlds problems.....

If only they would listen I could be your all powerfull ruler Crowned king of planet earth Tony Blair....

Numptie!!!

37

jim lad,

the capital 06/04/2007 08:33:45

#31 Craigie
You sure make a valid point.

38

Jemima,

north of scotland 06/04/2007 08:34:16

#1 KY I'll bet you have days when you just wish you'd said nothing at all eh?!! Poor dear.

By the way I am an SNP "drone" as you sweetly put it, and I've been at the conference and heard the commitment which the SNP have to world poverty, and I can assure you it would NOT be a back seat, or a voice not heard. The people who live in Scotland are renound for their ability to be generous in times of crisis, go to any fishing village for instance and ask about how much was raised by the people when there has been a loss at sea. Go to the mining areas (before Maggie decimated the mining industry) and see how communities rallied when there was a loss of life in the mines. The list goes on, this is a generous country - it's in our nature to help others.

39

www.scottwebb.co.uk.,

06/04/2007 08:43:21

The politicians you see are just puppets to the International Banksters and secret societies that run them.......The New World Order....One World Government brigade :)

40

Scott 'Ola' Foam,

Scotland 06/04/2007 08:53:55

#43 AM2

But then again how much trouble do Iceland & Finland cause in the world?

Then think about how much trouble New Labour are causing!

41

Neil Mac,

Skye 06/04/2007 09:00:34

AM2 is so right - what influence do Iceland or Finland or Ireland or Norway have on world affairs? The UK has the right to invade countries illegally killing tens of thousands and to spend millions on a replacement for Trident - not to mention further billions on vainglorious exploits like the London Olympics. AM2 thinks that all these noble and worthy!!

If these acts are proof of our influence on world affairs any decent right thinking person would hang his head in shame. Wake up Unionist ranters like AM2 and KY to the reality of the UK's place at the top table.

42

Stuart Tooley,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 09:05:12

Scotland, as an independant country would not be a even be part of the G8 summit. We would have the economy roughly the size of Kazakhstan. We would have the population roughly the size of Turkmenistan.
Those who feel that Scotland would improve its world standing by detatching itself from arguably the world's most sucessful union and the 5th largest economy should think again.

43

Flabbergasted,

Ayr 06/04/2007 09:10:04

Given the record of this over spun government whose only aim in life it seems is to hold on to power for as long as it can. Does anyone actually believe that Gordon the Great meant any thing he said? We have all heard the promises that are made with a great publicity flourish then surprise,surprise nothing happens. More labour tripe and spin!

44

Shy Talk,

06/04/2007 09:10:37

Broon has been lying his two faces off to the electorate for the last ten years.

Why did the G8 expect him to tell them the truth?

45

conservative,

Fife 06/04/2007 09:10:56

For goodness sake let all of these begging whingers get off their a*rses and do something for themselves instead of continually holding our their begging bowls. A bigger collection of wastrels, thieves and parasites the world has never seen.

Instead of pouring money endlessly into these foreign pits we should be concentrating on looking after our own young, old and sick. If individuals want to try to help that's up to them. The gonvernment should be governing, not flinging our assets away abroad.

46

Kay Y. Jelly,

06/04/2007 09:12:56

#10. He's no relation of mine.

47

Scott 'Ola' Foam,

Scotland 06/04/2007 09:15:52

#46

I seem to recall the British Navy sticking there noses into Irans buisness recently. Or was that just alleged?

48

The Strategist,

06/04/2007 09:18:10

Size - as the saying goes - is not particularly important it's how you use your resources and abilities to best effect.

In Scotland's case - free of the UK's very poor image in countries like Africa - could be in a far better position to develop trade links and so grow it's sphere of influence.

49

Dee Nyal,

in a very large sandpit 06/04/2007 09:18:31

51.
There's plenty of room for you to plonk your head in next to mine.
Your worldview won't change, I promise!

50

Scott 'Ola' Foam,

Scotland 06/04/2007 09:19:14

#46

Maybe its the British culture of bad news, gossip, soap operas, reporters and camera men that causes us to be nosey to the offence of other nations.

Then it causes paranoia, as a nosey person is usually one with a hidden agenda.....!

51

Neil Mac,

Skye 06/04/2007 09:20:44

So AM2 considers that he may accuse the SNP of pandering to anti English sentiment without any evidence to back up such a statement - but criticism of the Iraq war, of nuclear proliferation or references to cash for honours is not acceptable unless prefixed by the word "alleged ".

His paranoia is revealed when the old hoary of anti English sentiment is trotted out when any criticism of the British state is bruited. I assume that he is entirely content with the state of affairs in Iraq and that a great and glorious victory was accomplished by the allies 3 years ago.

52

morris,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 09:44:02

1
Firstly its your Labour government which has not delivered.Hardly a minor point!
The SNP has no lack of committment to the third world and would meet our obligations to aid to the third world. Maybe if you engaged your barin instead of repeating garbage because Labour said so,maybe you would avoid being shouted down more often.
When you raise your horizons to include reality then you start to go places!

53

Scott 'Ola' Foam,

Scotland 06/04/2007 09:46:05

#60

Its rather remeniscent of the Cold War between Russia and America, one trying to justify having Nucleur weapons while the other builds nucleur weapons.

Are we more saintly or right to have these weapons while Iran is not.......

Then when you answer that question think, of the insult you have just given Iranians.

54

Scott 'Ola' Foam,

Scotland 06/04/2007 09:48:22

#60

I feel neither should have nukes, and so do the SNP.... waste of time. and 25 billion

55

Lock,

06/04/2007 09:49:51

'Judith Robertson, the head of Oxfam in Scotland, said rich countries were breaking the promises they made at Gleneagles. "In 2005, the G8 promised to increase aid by $50 billion annually by 2010'

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

What I was going to say was that in is hardly breaking a promise if it is only 2007 now. It would be breaking a promise if it was 2011.

BUT having read the rest of the article:

'Aid
The promise: £23.3 billion a year pledged to developing nations by 2010.'

So the annual increase from 2010 is going to be larger than the total spend. My suggestion is that the figures in this article shouldn't be taken at face value.

AND if they are correct then the UK spends 27% (6.4/23.3) of the G8's 2010 pledged spending on aid NOW, which would lead me to believe that Gordon Brown is not the person we should be pointing fingers at.

FINALLY:

'He complained about government spending on the Iraq war being more than the Department for International Development spent in 2004-5'

Cardinal O'Brien, our government thinks the Iraq war IS international development.

56

morris,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 09:54:35

15

50% of all monies promised in international aid never materialises. This is fact.
Thats why there is poverty.

Sure there is corruption in some countries,but since we already account for 50% which is just plain promises which are designed purely for the purpose of propoganda ,it auto follows that your observation fades into insignificance by comparison.
Theres nothing worse than some idiot using corruption as a defence for lying!

57

Neil Mac,

Skye 06/04/2007 09:56:43

#61 AM2 I note that he does not respond to my criticism of his insistence that " alleged" be used when discussing the legality or otherwise of the Iraq war etc but does not accept that any such qualification is needed when he uses the phrase " anti English sentiment" when he criticises SNP views. If he will cite his sources for this accusation I will be pleased to look at them.

So the war was a misjudgement. There are many who are of the opinion that the war was illegal - that it was based on lies- allegedly. How does he propose that we "see it through" ?

58

Vlad Tepes,

Targoviste 06/04/2007 09:57:31

I reckon that Brown should take some critisism for not living up to promises, but those who sit on the political fence, promise nothing and take no action should be critisised more.

59

morris,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 10:00:40

61
The only body who could legitimise any crossing of any international boundary is United Nations.
Kofi Annan made it unequivocally clear that NO such authorisation had been given .THAT MEANS ITS ILLEGAL>It does not matter what some Weegies in Glesca Labour think! International ruling as determined by the UN says its illegal.End of Debate.

60

jmcd,

06/04/2007 10:32:01

I find it worrying that there is so much blatant idealism about the SNP in Scotland. KY makes a valid point based on common sense - as part of the United Kingdom we clearly have more influence and power internationally that we could ever have as an Independent Scottish government. Although like most I am disenchanted by Labour's foreign policy particularly in the Middle East at least we have the option of having a foreign policy without being tied irrevokably to the EU which is what would have to happen to have any kind of influence as an Independant Scotland. Further as a Scot, I am extremely concerned about the rise of nationalism in our country which only benefits from being part of Great Britain and the UK. The last thing Scotland needs is an SNP government in power.
As regards international aid more needs to be done in the area of international trade and developing economies in the 3rd world. This, rather than throwing money at the problem (which inevitably is wasted in administration) is the real solution.

61

Billboy,

Embra 06/04/2007 10:45:56

# 70

jmcd wrote "we clearly have more influence and power internationally that we could ever have as an Independent Scottish government"...what complete and utter mince

Never mind international power, we cannot even prevent nuclear weapons being dumped in our own country never mind abroad, and remind me how many Scots were clamouring to invade Iraq ?

62

doris d,

06/04/2007 10:48:13

Check out the photo in this article, then visit

http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=sjhoward

Someone in the New Labour spin dept really should alert Brown to the fact that he is visble to the electorate at all times!!!

63

Ocean11,

KEEP THE PRESSURE UP 06/04/2007 10:53:11

Fantastic and well done to all those who participated in this update event.

Without organised pressure the politicians will simply prevaricate.

Cardinal O'Brien is absolutely right - if we don't act how many countless people will be condemned to misery.

It's just not right that that Trident and the Olympics can be funded but we cant treat AIDS, poverty and plight in Africa and elsewhere.

KEEP THE PRESSURE UP

64

IainGlasgow,

Glasgow 06/04/2007 10:54:16

#1

If what you say of the SNP is true then really its no different (and less hypocritical) than the soundbites and piecemeal handouts from the G8. As far as I can see the G8 summit serves no other purpose than for the leaders of the most powerful nations to get together for a couple of days, kiss each others backsides and indulge in haute cuisine and fine wine.

The government speak of spending £25 billion (final price tag probably 3 times that) on replacing trident and around £20 billion (probably 3 fold again by its completion) on an ID card scheme which will achieve none of the things they claim as regards fighting terrorism.

We have much bigger issues facing the world. Global warming is a serious problem, depletion of fish stocks is a serious problem, acidification of the sea from excess atmospheric carbon dioxide is a serious problem and last but most important; third world poverty is an aberration and the whole world must hang our heads in shame for failing to tackle it. Its easy to just blame politicians but who voted for them?? In democracies we're all to blame. These are this issues governments must be focusing most of their attention on.

Yes there are rogue states who perhaps shouldn't be allowed to have weapons of mass destruction. If there is no much concern about nuclear power in Iran and North Korea then teams of UN supervisors should be placed at all their nuclear processing facilities. As a gesture of goodwill for co-operating, other nations that use nuclear power, including the USA, UK, France, etc should agree to have UN supervisors at their facilities and there should be an agreed timescale for all the nations of the world to phase out their nuclear weapons.

If the cost of trident and ID cards spiral out of control like the Scottish Parliament did or the London Olympics are doing we could be looking at an overall price tag as much as £200 billion plus long term operating costs.

Yes we need to deal with terrori

65

Royster,

06/04/2007 10:55:29

Dear Editor of the Scotsman. Please ban all copy which begins with 'It'.

66

Neil Mac,

Skye 06/04/2007 10:56:16

#70 jmcd

I fail to see how the power and influence the UK wields internationally can be lauded by jmcd when at the same time he is "disenchanted " by the UK government's Middle East policy. The present debacle in Iraq and the Middle East is the result of that power and influence of which he is so clearly in awe.
Quite how Scotland benefits from being part of the UK is lost on me- is he referring to the rise in child poverty over recent decades, to the decline in our economic status, to the fact that we are the only oil producing country to be poorer now than when the oil was discovered?

The scare mongering of the Unionists always succeeds in convincing the gullible - pair wee Scotland cannae manage on its own - needs help in the big bad world blah blah . Open your eyes - become an idealist - if you have the bottle.

67

Gill,

West Lothian 06/04/2007 11:00:30

71 - Billboy Embra

'and remind me how many Scots were clamouring to invade Iraq ?'

...well, Bliar, Brown, and McDonnell for 3!

Shameful.

68

Gill,

West Lothian 06/04/2007 11:03:30

FYI - had the local labour warmonger at the door this morning. Well seen it's election time as we haven't seen them since the last one.

His witty reply to my question about the ILLEGAL war? - 'Read your leaflet'.

Need I say more...

69

Robin,

06/04/2007 11:09:00

47 Stuart Tooley,
Sorry mate, but if Scotland even had half of the natural resources of Kazakhstan, we would be right up there as a world leader.
Kazakhstan has probably the vast majority of the remaining oil on the planet, (the one field that I worked on out there has the potential to be bigger than the entire North Sea), - and that's in addition to gold,silver,platinum,uranium,bauxite etc etc

70

Tom R,

06/04/2007 11:11:50

#43 AM2 & #1 KY

Get real AM2. Even your despised SNP cannot be wrong about EVERYTHING. Be a little more rational in your opposition to all things nationalist. Tell me what is wrong with this reported intention of Alex Salmonds-I am sure you will, being you :-). A lot better than the thousands whose lives have been destroyed by Iraq. In my view Brown and Blair should have followed the first law of the physician which I recall requires first and foremost that they do no harm.


""SNP leader Alex Salmond has pledged to double the amount of aid Scotland gives struggling countries.

Mr Salmond said he wanted Scotland to be a "force for good in the world and a voice for peace".

He vowed an SNP government would look to share Scotland's wealth by increasing the amount of money given to help poverty stricken nations.""

71

John S,

06/04/2007 11:24:54

#1 and 70, I am sure an independent Scotland could be a member of the UN, EEC (with veto power),NATO, the Olympic movement etc that means we clearly would have more influence and power internationally.

P.S. Monaco,San Marino,Liechtenstein and Andorra are all full members of the UN so they have a vote at the UN and they are also members of the Olympic movement.

72

Neil Mac,

Skye 06/04/2007 11:26:06

#78 AM2

Did I suggest that anti English sentiment was illegal? I was merely highlighting the poverty of your argument- on the one hand you insist that without hard evidence the Iraq war must not be described as illegal - yet on the other you are happy to ascribe certain honestly held views as being anti English without citing any evdience whatsoever for such an outrageous contention. Hide behind your moral equivalence as much as you like!

73

Robin,

06/04/2007 11:30:29

Sorry, I knwo this is digressing, but,
whether the Iraq war is 'illegal' or not has become irrelevant.
As I recall Saddam was told to get rid of his WMD, which Bush and Bkiar were convinced, existed. He was told to get rid or else, - and we all know what happened.
AND there were NO WMD.
Does that make invasion of Iraq 'legal'?
Sure Saddam had to brought to heel, but surely there was another way.
Bush and Bliar wanted this war, they couldn't back down or see reason, and now WE are paying for it with soldiers being killed, and our own security threatened.
Would there be a terrorist threat in UK but for this dreadful war which was unnecessary.

74

GRS,

London 06/04/2007 11:33:45

Blame Brown & Benn if you must but little would have happenned without them.

What has it got to do with Jack McConnell? Except, perhaps, for The Scotsman to do some more campaigning for the SNP.

The Editorial line in this paper has been so blatantly nationalist recently it is ridiculous. At least have The Editor should at least have the decency to declare that The Scotsman is in fact Pro Independence.

Even a story on International Development cannot be printed without blaming Scottish Labour for the worlds problems.

75

John S,

06/04/2007 11:40:00

#69 (Morris) your are correct about what Kofi Annan said.

Iraq war was illegal and breached UN charter, says Annan

Mr Annan said that the invasion was not sanctioned by the UN security council or in accordance with the UN's founding charter. In an interview with the BBC World Service broadcast last night, he was asked outright if the war was illegal. He replied: "Yes, if you wish."
He then added unequivocally: "I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view and from the charter point of view it was illegal."

Thursday September 16, 2004 - http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,1305709,00.html

and

16 September, 2004 - http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3661134.stm

76

CJO,

06/04/2007 11:55:31

#15 - look how China pulled themselves up... Are you serious? They exploit and repress their own people. Wages are kept artificially low so that they can win valuable exports. They exploit sub-Saharan Africa like no one else on the planet and you hold them up as an example for others to follow. Quite breath taking.

As for Kofi Annan, I wonder how his comfortable retirement is going? Hopefully the nest egg his son pilfered from the UN Iraq aid for oil scandal has at last percolated to where it was truly meant to arrive, Kofi's hipper. gosh there's a surprise an African politician on the take. Don't here about many of those, do you?

77

Steve,

Bo'ness 06/04/2007 12:02:48

The Scotsman slates Gordon Brown, so what do the resident Labour sheep do? Attack the SNP!

Good heavens. Welcome to "Labour world", where it's all the SNP's fault. Everything. World poverty, death, global warming, the lot! Pathetic.

78

Tom R,

06/04/2007 12:03:35

#85 GRS

You say"The Editorial line in this paper has been so blatantly nationalist recently it is ridiculous."

Every now and then someone makes an utterly ridiculous post and this is one of them.

79

ScotsLass58,

Red Ken's Toon 06/04/2007 12:25:46

ARGH! ma brain hurts!!!
Ooops! sorry I thought this was a caption competition:)

80

Who's Adam Smith?,

Fife 06/04/2007 12:30:43

#89 I think this is whats called 'reverse psychology' he means the antithesis, or the opposite of what he's written...pretty pathetic.

81

Lock,

06/04/2007 12:32:20

#85,

I have noticed the tone of The Scotsman still remains thoroughly anti SNP, but it is realising that Gordon Brown is not the man that will win the next General Election. Herein lies the problem with devolution - how do you make the Chancellor look bad yet still be positive about the Scottish Labour party at the same time?

They really are in a muddle at the moment.

82

Thistledhu,

Fife 06/04/2007 12:35:14

We can all jump up and down about who is giveing what to help the third world.

But as long as the UN in its present form is the main operator in provideing Aid the money will be squanderd.

Kofi Anan and his cohorts have grown rich presideing over what is an increasingly incompetent and corrupt organisation.

Billions have been poured into Africa yet the same problems arise again and again.

We cant keep on treating the symptoms we have to cure the disease. The UN is not a cure there only intrested in treatment.

83

Dod fae Orkney,

North Sea 06/04/2007 13:11:57

Sounds like Broon's dream of being PM is slowly but surely slipping from his grasping hands.
With his record of PFI rip-offs, pension thieving, pouring billions into unwanted wars, privatising the NHS and education, it looks like payback time is coming.
New Labour are no different from the 'wet' Tories of Maggie's day.
Time for a change
Time for the SNP.
Roll on May 3rd

84

ScotsLass58,

Red Ken's Toon 06/04/2007 13:29:48

#94
I agree that it looks like Broon's ultimate dream appears to be slipping from his hands. Unfortunately it is not slipping fast enough and from where I am there does not appear to be any believable alternative to him for "leader?" of New Labour. Whoever takes over from the current coniving, lying, cheating incumbant will still end up being labelled the same as Broon!

85

IWright,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 13:49:02

#46
AM2
If I see someone in the street attack someone else for no reason I know they have committed an offence i.e. something illegal, even if they have not been accused, arrested or charged never mind convicted. If I see a country attack another country for no reason other than a known lie I know they have done something illegal.
I also see that finding the Iraq war illegal is being "anti-English", does that apply to English people who find the war illegal, or are they being anti-Scottish?

86

IWright,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 13:59:25

#70
"as part of the United Kingdom we clearly have more influence and power internationally that we could ever have as an Independent Scottish government."

Can you give us an example?

87

robert SHIVAGO,

LIVINGSTON 06/04/2007 14:08:51

BILLIONS BROWN FULL OF PROMISES LIKE HE HAS BEEN DOING OVER THE LAST TEN YEARS.TEN YEARS OF HOT AIR AND NO SUBSTANCE.TAXED US UP TO THE EYEBALLS.SOUND ECONOMY-MY EYE-.ROBBED THE POOR TO FEED THE RICH.STOLE OUR PENSION FUNDS.HIS PENSION WILL NOT BE AFFECTED WHAT A PITY.

88

IWright,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 14:12:35

#101
AM2 - You are trying to tie every comment made by "nationalist" posters in this forum as driven by anti-English sentiment, it's not working. It was comment #1 that connected SNP/independence to this article, and I don't think it was accidental.
Having said that, if there weren't Labour drones in this forum we would have few posters to debate/argue with. Please carry on.

89

IWright,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 14:15:41

#101
"The subtext is that if we were divorced from England we would take better decisions. That is a large part of what I meant by "pandering to anti-English sentiment"
So thinking an independent Scotland would take better decisions is "pandering to anti-English sentiment"

I think this is your mission on this forum - to smear every opinion or comment from nationalist posters as in some way "anti-English". I hope you're getting well paid.

90

Neil Mac,

Skye 06/04/2007 14:21:58

#97 102 AM2
It is not a sub text - it is THE TEXT. AM's right wing Unionist prejudices do not allow him to admit that becoming an independent nation would free both Scotland and England from the shackles of the past, from a mistaken belief that the UK has some God given purpose in the world. Yes I believe Scotland acting as an independent nation would make better informed decisions about foreign policy - and we would certainly see the end of Trident polluting our shores. That is the text.

91

Blackie,

06/04/2007 14:23:06

It's survival of the fittest. If we help these 3rd world countries they will inherit the earth at our expence. They wanted their independence from the Empire, let them manage their own problems. Money can be better used improving the UK. Nationalists need a reality check.

92

Greig frae oz,

Sydney 06/04/2007 14:37:00

RE 1
Wake up and smell the roses sweetness
with control of our own finances we will be well able to contribute a great deal to the straving people of Africa.
With independence we will not have to give hand outs to 25 million London beggars, surely that must help.

93

Alistair Stewart,

www.dont-vote-labour.co.uk 06/04/2007 14:37:02

New Picture of Gordon Brown in his England Strip

www.dont-vote-labour.co.uk

94

Greig frae oz,

Sydney 06/04/2007 14:40:19

Dinnae ken any anti English mah antis Scottish mah uncles Ostralyan
Wheas antis English cause ah hivnae a clue

95

Sedov,

Scotland 06/04/2007 14:43:05

Church leaders like the Rev Mcdonald are among the most niave people on the planet. I attended the Make Poverty History demo a few years ago and it was obvious to me that the churches and their leaders had adopted the historic compromise position of the church by not wishing to challenge the system that creates poverty with their liberal slogans pleading to world leaders to grant the poor some crumbs off the bosses table - Yes, there has been some gestures toward impoverished countries but until the absurd system that creates the monstrous inequality throughout the world is smashed, all the demos and pious pleading from the liberal bourgeoise will not make poverty history this side of the 21st century.

96

AllyFraeEmbra,

Near the Castle 06/04/2007 14:55:13

#107 Blackie - Such inane post-colonial drivel is not even worth giving you the type of reaction that you are no doubt trying to provoke. The sun set of your empire over a hundred years ago - get with the present, and try and help those worse off than yourself.

97

IWright,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 15:07:46

#114
"The English have a lot of positive qualities"
Yes, that's really vicious anti-English sentiment!

And the fact you drag up a post of mine from weeks ago does seem a bit strange, if not sinister.

98

IainGlasgow,

Glasgow 06/04/2007 15:10:33

#87

To add to your comment, China is building a new coal power plant EVERY WEEK and the plan to continue doing so fo about 4-7 years or so I think. Other developing nations are doing likewise since coal is a cheap and easy source of energy. That's the biggest threat of all in terms of global warming.

99

morris,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 15:20:25

85

There are two possibilities here.
1) You are talking about a different paper.
2) you dont know what your talking about.

Bearing in mind NONE of the press are pro SNP what does that make you?

100

morris,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 15:32:45

88

The best part is New Labour are in power .

The SNP have never been in power!
Its not even within the bounds of possibility never mind likely that what he claims is correct!
Gives you an insight into what your average Labour voter has between his ears. Sweet Francis Adams !

101

IWright,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 15:47:01

#119
AM2 - I don't have to google anything, all I have to do is scroll up to #101.

What is the relevance of all those quotes, part from the fact you can provide them all?

102

Robin,

06/04/2007 15:47:08

97
OK , let me rephrase,
Would the terrorist threat to UK be as serious as we understand it to be, but for this dreadful unnecessary Iraq war?
I think not personally.

103

,

06/04/2007 16:01:22
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
104

Tom R,

06/04/2007 16:03:19

# AM2

You are exaggerating the element of anti-English sentiment associated with the SNP. You should not be basing serious opposition to Scottish independence on this line of attack.

People know enough about the SNP to know it is not true-this includes English people in Scotland some of whom will vote SNP on 3 May.

105

Neil Mac,

Skye 06/04/2007 16:07:04

#119 AM2
There are fools and knaves in all walks of life and political parties are not immune. Glass houses and motes in eyes spring to mind. It would not be difficult to produce quotes from Unionists and their fellow travellers of equally disgraceful sentiments as those AM2 has chosen as being representative of opinion in the SNP- but I refrain - it is likely that AM2 is a paid propagandist of the British/English Unionist government - I use the two descriptions advisedly - the British/English establishment has always been unable to differentiate the one from the other, just as AM2 is unable to distinguish blind prejudice from reasoned political debate.

106

IWright,

Edinburgh 06/04/2007 16:11:52

#122
AM2 - This is my last reply, not only is your argument tedious but if you keep digging in that hole you're in you're going to meet Robbie in NZ.

The reason we respond to your claims of anti-English sentiment with criticism of you is because your claims have no foundation in what people are actually saying. We won't accept being smeared by you.

107

Neil Mac,

Skye 06/04/2007 16:34:21

~130 AM2

I refer you to my comments posted 126.

No longer is AM's attack aimed at the SNP but at nationalism. My vision (and that of the SNP) is independence not a narrow philosophy of quasi fascist nationalism - and certainly not one of Unionism at all costs to which AM subscribe.

108

,

06/04/2007 16:35:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
109

Miss Jean Brodie,

06/04/2007 16:41:18

Make poverty history ? was that when all them fascists frae London came up and removed their PC numbers from their uniforms and started bullying aw c*nt!

Make Broon and the Union History!

110

Tom R,

06/04/2007 16:52:06

#131 AM2

You ask "So how would you describe the actual extent of anti-English sentiment associated with the SNP?"

Minimal (I live in the real world and therefore cannot say zero).

Now your turn AM2, how would YOU describe the actual extent of anti-foreigner sentiment associated with the Conservatives (whom you plan to vote for, at least on the regional list)?


On your other points, it rather depends what you mean:
Re "anti-British". Pretty much 100% if you mean not wanting to be ruled by the decisions of a British state headquartered in London. Happy with the idea of a Council of the British Isles particularly as this could also involve the Irish Republic.

Re "anti-unionist". 100% if you mean opposed to the union of parliaments enacted in 1707 which has only been partly reversed.

111

The Strategist,

06/04/2007 17:29:08

AM2 ....

You really don't get it do you.

Richard Lambert - the Director General of the CBI said this week "In today's rapidly changing economic world order, we must create more global enterprises if we want the UK to remain in the top tier of world economies. Yet in the past 20 years the number we have built from scratch has been low."

So the head of one of the organisations at the heart of the British establishment is essentially saying both the Labour and Tory Westminster Governments have let the entire UK down by failing to provide the conditions for creating global businesses.

Here's one of your own admitting the country is in a mess and you still insist that Labour economic statistics are correct and that we shouldn't even consider the idea of either electing an SNP Govt to Hollyrood or independence.

You do have to be kidding don't you.

112

Ken Rogers,

Wivenhoe, Essex 06/04/2007 17:57:33

A unlawful war in Iraq costing millions and many lives and injuring thousands of innocent women and children. Now Trident costing further millions. Without consulting the UK public - an absolute disgrace - the government should feel deeply ashamed when this expense could have saved millions from a life of poverty.

Members of parliament are supposedly representative of the people!

113

Malky's Back,

06/04/2007 18:02:10

#51 - AM2 - are you sure about that?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4263648.stm

114

Malky's Back,

06/04/2007 18:04:49

Further to my #139 - the BBC had originally reported that the 2 brit soldiers dressed as arabs ahd a significant weapons cache in their vehicle and that is why they resisted arrest according to the iraqi's who detained them.

AM2 - things just ain't what they seem.

115

Displaced Scot,

SE England 06/04/2007 20:20:23

Does this man not realise that he and his kind are on the way out. How dare he tax people's pensions and trys making a name on the world stage with other peoples money.
He wil not be a good Prime Minister, he will go down in history as a pension thief and nothing else.
I am all for helping the third world provided it is done in a sensible way.

116

Upbeat,

06/04/2007 20:36:06

138 Ken Rogers
"Now Trident costing further millions. Without consulting the UK public - an absolute disgrace - the government should feel deeply ashamed when this expense could have saved millions from a life of poverty."

This is not the first time that the recent renewal of the commitment to Trident has been used in this way. The message that Trident today is an avoidable expense is very misleading; although the the plea that Trident in the future could be abandoned has a bit more validity.

When the government voted to begin the long process towards the replacement of the Vanguard submarines that carry Trident they were doing what all Governments of the day have as their prime duty..."Defence of the realm".

Due to the very complicate design process the lead in time to providing a replacement for the trident submarine fleet starts now.

No government can bind it's successors to any policy or legislation. This matter will return to be redebated several times in thedecade top come ..there is no doubt...before contracts to commence construction of the first replacement submarine would be placed in approx 12 years time.

The sum of money you hope could be spent on other social agendas, cannot to be saved starting today. It is actually some future spending commitment. Cancelling the replacement of Trident altogether would have no effect on defence budgets in the next decade. The treasury dividend could not occur until 10 - 15 years time at the very least.

This subject is drawn into these boards day after day. But it has little relevance to things that affect Scotland today, except that the decision to maintain the Trident force does ensure continuity of employment and stable contracts for future defence support services within Scotland.

117

Upbeat,

06/04/2007 20:39:26

139

The link is from 2005. You do realise that do you ?

118

Gemma Ravenscroft,

the island 06/04/2007 21:43:41

okay, I haven't read through the zillion posts here, so maybe someone has mentioned it already: it doesn't matter how much money or debt relief you throw at Africa--without good governence in place the money goes directly into the coffers of corrupt leaders who care nothing for their people. Insist on good governence, otherwise it is a waste of effort.

119

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta , California 06/04/2007 22:48:10

#4 Scullion

You are as unbiased as a hungry African Lion stalking a young gazzelle.

Be honest Don't lie.

Galactic cannibal

120

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta , California 06/04/2007 22:51:30

AM 2 Glasgow

Do you live in the Gorbels?

And is this thread your day job?. Do you drink scotch to relax?

As you an ex convict?

Galactic cannibal

121

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta , California 06/04/2007 22:55:56

The leaders of the world's richest nations lined up in front of the Gleneagles Hotel in Perthshire to announce a set of bold pledges: poverty would be eradicated, debt would be dropped and trade would be fair.


What an ambitious but unreal goal. Who are these men kidding. the stupid morons who elected them.

Galactic Cannibal

122

connaughtboy,

06/04/2007 22:56:25

I just hope the Herald poll is wrong

123

The Strategist,

06/04/2007 23:01:24

#149 It is...

124

The Strategist,

06/04/2007 23:04:27

#143 Upbeat...

That's not correct. In fact the design process has already started which is why the Govt wanted to win that recent vote.

So money is already being spent or will shortly begin to be spent.

125

GalacticCannibal,

06/04/2007 23:14:40

#143

Upbeat, are you the twin of downbeat.?
Galactic cannibal

126

Faye,

Scotland 06/04/2007 23:51:52

Lots of money has been given to combat Aids in Africa but the programme so far hasn't been as successful as some people would have wished.

The physical means - condoms - to prevent Aids is available, but few use them. Why?

Because many African women don't have the economic power or status to negotiate over sex.

Women are now being infected with Aids at six times the rate of men. Only by making women more equal partners will Aids be tackled.

America failed to help those poor New Orleans folks who suffered in their own rich country.

What chance has the G8 got in other countries?

The G8 has spectacularly failed, that's because many of their "we will" statements are unrealistic

127

,

07/04/2007 01:11:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
128

missing home,

07/04/2007 01:44:29

#13, scullion, laughed out loud, a first when reading these forums / fora

129

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta , California 07/04/2007 01:49:02

#152

Galactic cannibal

hey man are you some kind of a free spirit?

GC

130

Heilan laddie,

Vilnius 07/04/2007 05:49:43

Why, why is everybody so concerned about spending or should I say wasting millions or billions on Africa?
All you are doing there is making a president and his hangers on richer. This money and even other aid never reaches the right people.
Someone name me one of the dictator presidents in Africa that is not a multi-million heir if not billion heir. You should be concentrating on freezing their assets and using that to re-distribute to the people.
All the aid in the world is going to change nothing. The rich just carry on becoming richer with that money and the poor continue to become poorer.

131

murren59,

Isle of Arran 07/04/2007 06:18:06

#119 AM2
Good murrenin' everyone! Thank you AM2 for #119 - Touche! I have still to see you on The Telegraph boards denouncing this anti-Scot rhetoric...

"...whereby the Commons would no longer be able to dictate on various matters to Scotland and Wales, but members with Scottish and Welsh seats could conspire to PERSECUTE the English with measures from which their own constituents would be exempt..."

"The people who elected him i.e Scot’s are just smiling to themselves because it does not effect them. Oh! I forgot. The Scot’s also got another Billion from their fellow countryman yesterday."

"Gordon Brown as Prime Minister will just complete the present strangle-hold by the Scottish over England. To illustrate the point, even new English £20 bank notes bear the portrait of yet another Scotsman."

"The English will have their say, get over it, and get over the fact that Scotland doesn't really figure in our minds much. As far as we are concerned you already are a seperate country, the Union died in English hearts when Scotland set up a seperate Government."

"The last person I would want as the next Prime Minister is Mr Brown or for that matter any Scottish or Welsh MP. England for the English please."

"I make clear to anyone who will listen that there is no logical reason for England to be in a union with Scotland and that we should wave the ungrateful, sclerotic, subsidy-junkie nation goodbye."

"I want to know why a Scot, whose country now has its own Parliament and whom we English cannot unelect, can tell the English what taxes we must pay."

"Besides, he's Scottish which should in itself rule him out to English voters after years of misrule by this incompetent Government of Anglophobes of which 'Broon' has always been a part."

"How can the English allow a Scot to strip them of £34Bn of assets? How can the English allo

132

Graham Simpson,

Vancouver and Edinburgh 07/04/2007 06:21:01

Why do we independentists waste so much time responding to the often insulting but always depreciating and hostile rants against Scotland's future as an independent country.

Posters like Royster, AM1,2,3 or whatever, Upbeat, and now KY..possibly all the same people, who are probably neither Scottish nor really interested in the future of our country... except as a vassal state.
I have omitted Media 1 from this group beacuse he she or it, has at least had the decency to promise never to return to Scotland if we became independent.

Today we had the opportunity to discuss among those of us who care, what role an independent Scotland might play in international aid. Small as it might be. We did not choose to do this and instead futilely tried to persuade the above gang... of the merits and promise of a New Scotland.

It is far more important that our discussions and dialogue represent the enormous and attractive posibilities that independence will bring. We are a diverse, articulate and positive group that can contribute fresh and exciting ideas in stark contrast to the tired, cynical and dishonest practices of a fading empire.

Why don't we just ignore all these anonymous ranters who don't have one good word for Scotland. Without an audience, they have no role. To them we are just a target to hurl abuse apon!

More important is, that many casual and non posting readers who may be sitting on the fence, do scan this forum. If they think that this is just a verbal punch up without contributary ideas, it is not in the best interests of our cause.

So let's try to talk to each other on what we can do to forge a successful future beyond May 3rd.

133

murren59,

Isle of Arran 07/04/2007 06:22:38

Dear Unionists,

Did you read the above comments???

ENGLAND DOESN'T WANT YOU...!!!
ENGLAND DOESN'T WANT YOU...!!!
ENGLAND DOESN'T WANT YOU...!!!

DO YOU GET IT...???

ENGLAND DOESN'T F*CK*N WANT YOU...!!!


59% OF ENGLISH VOTERS FAVOUR INDEPENDENCE FOR SCOTLAND!

68% OF ENGLISH VOTERS FAVOUR HOME RULE FOR ENGLAND!


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=03L...

http://www.justiceforengland.com/campaign%20aims.htm


Support the May 1, Justice for England march!

End this unequal Union!

Independence for Scotland!


IT'S TIME!

134

murren59,

Isle of Arran 07/04/2007 06:45:17

#161 Graham Simpson

Good post auld son, but I'm afraid that the Anxious Alices, Cowardly Charlies, Docile Danas, Feart Freddies, Nervous Nellies, Scared Sengas, Timorous Tams, Waverin' Willaminas, etc., etc....will betray our country.

135

Upbeat,

07/04/2007 08:22:27

151 Dick

You first say I'm wrong, then you repeat one part ...exactly the message that I laid out. Very strange.

The Financial didvdend from cancelling the replacement of Trident is well in the future.

The cost of the present Trident is ongoing.

The costs associated with the design work of the replacements for the Vanguard fleet are a very small part of the equation , at present ,and are mainly costs that would be incurred anyway, as the Navy has an entire division that is committed to research and modernisation anyway.

So , please realise that it's one thing to claim someone has something wrong ..but in the absense of contradictory facts such a sweeping assertion requires you to explain exactly what you think was wrong.

136

Upbeat,

07/04/2007 08:42:35

161 Graham Simpson

Instead of simply tarring everyone you think you might disagree with with the same brush, you should perhaps have a look at teh differences that each of us bring to these boards.

My own view which I express from time to time, has been so frequently ignored on these boards , that you feel can get away with an accusation of my being anti Scotland, "...possibly all the same people, who are probably neither Scottish nor really interested in the future of our country... except as a vassal state"

With a confirmed genealogy within Scotland running back to the 11th Century you couldn't be more wrong about my background. The fact that I live here, and chose to return after several career spells overseas gives me insights into other ways that things can be run here, which can be shared with everybody.

It is the sharing of good ideas that will bring the greatest suvccess for Scotland. You should at the very least appreciate that.

Then you said :

"We are a diverse, articulate and positive group that can contribute fresh and exciting ideas in stark contrast to the tired, cynical and dishonest practices of a fading empire."

This desciption applies equally to many who visit these boards. But in my experience the inability to debate properly is concentrated within the ranks of the SNP particularly among those who wish to insult and ridicule anyone who disagrees with their tidy and insular dream for Scotland.

It seems sad and a bit sinister when your post leaves the impression that you would like only those who agree with you to post and discuss issues here.

What a sorry attitude to democracy you display wiith that attitude. Isolating and demonising perceived opposition has very unfortunate repercussions throughout history. ...a very bad model for future prosperity in Scotland.

"So let's try to talk to each other on what we can do to forge a successful future beyond May 3

137

Tom R,

07/04/2007 09:52:42

#165 AM2

You quote re #160 Murren that "Your transparent efforts to sow/cultivate dischord between Scots and English, by scurrying back and forth between the two forums telling each that the other doesn't want them, are simply beneath contempt."

Sad to say a cursory glance at responses to Cochrane at the Telegraph does reveal anti-Scottish diatribes on a scale and to an extent that is in a different league to any anti-English sentiments that sometimes appear on the Scotsman's sites. Not surprisingly much of this has been caused by the Labour Party due to:

* Failure to deal with the West Lothian question and therefore treating England unfairly

*Portraying Scots as being subsidy junkies-they have not quite succeeded in persuading the Scots of this but they have certainly persuaded the English.

Not entirely without precedent, I seem still to be waiting for your response to my reply to you at #136. If I have missed it, please give me the reference.

#136

138

Andrew Allan,

07/04/2007 09:59:48

The good people of Gordon, what you are about to read may not be pretty, and you may, or may not, of wanted to find this out, but if you wish to be enlightened on a grave injustice to our country, you will wish to follow this link. Be warned though, this revelation being disclosed due to its monumental implications, may very well change your outlook on things you thought certain.

http://www.scottishenterpriseparty.org/the-great-deceptio...

139

,

07/04/2007 10:29:35
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
140

murren59,

Isle of Arran 07/04/2007 13:54:29

165. AM2,
#160 murren59
"Your transparent efforts to sow/cultivate dischord between Scots and English, by scurrying back and forth between the two forums telling each that the other doesn't want them, are simply beneath contempt."

Dear AM2, Great! The truth shall set us free! By the way, have you not realised that...

ENGLAND DOESN'T WANT YOU...!!!
ENGLAND DOESN'T WANT YOU...!!!
ENGLAND DOESN'T WANT YOU...!!!

DO YOU GET IT...???

ENGLAND DOESN'T F*CK*N WANT YOU...!!!


59% OF ENGLISH VOTERS FAVOUR INDEPENDENCE FOR SCOTLAND!

68% OF ENGLISH VOTERS FAVOUR HOME RULE FOR ENGLAND!


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml;jsessionid=03L...

http://www.justiceforengland.com/campaign%20aims.htm


Support the May 1, Justice for England march!

End this unequal Union!

Independence for Scotland!


IT'S TIME!

141

Croman mac Nessa,

07/04/2007 13:59:37

To #148, well, yeah. See, charity begins at home. Until the G8 can free their own people from poverty, which they aren't even attempting to do, they can't really hope to get anyone else's house in order. But by making public proclamations that they're going to engage in "foreign aid," they think that their own poor are going to be less inclined to agitate for justice back home. Then, of course, they never have to actually follow through, as long as they just toss a few token quid or dollars or yen at the "problem," as if that will make it go away (but they don't really care that it doesn't make it go away).

142

GalacticCannibal,

Murrieta , California 07/04/2007 16:17:08

Attention all you Squawkers

The G8 mob are like the UN mob. they both make promises they cannot keep.

And they both spend boat loads of taxpayers money on boondoggle meetings.

Its cost £660 ($1300) per night for a room at Geneagles Hotel.
Imagine the cost of that G8 meeting for room, food , booze, security, and R & R.

Its scandalous when 1 billion people in the world live at subsistance and below.

So all you high moral Squawkers and political know-all put that in your pipe and smoke it.

Me I smoke Hawaiian Cannibas

Galactic cannibal

143

Graham Simpson,

Vancouver and Edinburgh 07/04/2007 18:42:54

#166 Upbeat...

Although I have suggested otherwise I would like to respond to some of your comments.

It is important for me to say that despite our differences of opinion in the future of Scotland I acknowledge your right to express those opinions and I recognize your ability to do so with clarity and sincerity . However it is also important for me to say the differences are so fundamental and have been expressed so often ad nauseum across this board that it is fruitless to further dialogue with entrenched unionists. Those of us who wish for an independent Scotland have a great deal of work to do and many powerful forces overt and otherwise are opposed to us. It is much more fruitful and necessary for us to now start discussing the nature of the New Scotland, how to define, manage and distribute our resources and to begin to resolve the many serious problems that face our country.

Fundamentally we believe that we can never do this without self determination and that remaining within the UK prescribes us as a 'vassal state'. You do not believe this and are committed to Scotland remaining within the UK. This is the fundamental chasm that separates us and can never be crossed. Most of us find it almost impossible to understand why a fellow Scot would voluntarily surrender the right to full nationhood. You are obviously a man of experience, well travelled and exposed to the successes of the world's smaller nations and this makes it even more mystifying that you would not choose independence.

So there is nothing sinister about why I would suggest to my fellow independentists that we should spend our valuable time discussing the future than locked in endless combat with those who would deny us the opportunity. If you were to comment on how Scotland can improve it's affairs with or without the adjunct of independence then I would be the first to welcome you.

This Scotsman forum is one of the few that is wide reaching and reflects the pro

144

murren59,

Isle of Arran 07/04/2007 19:29:34

165. AM2,
#160 murren59
"Your transparent efforts to sow/cultivate dischord between Scots and English, by scurrying back and forth between the two forums telling each that the other doesn't want them, are simply beneath contempt."

Having been scolded so by AM2, I paid the young lad next door to Google and find all of my posts in The Telegraph. It seems that I have a grand total of 15 posts with the following 10 being independence related.

1.
Alan Cochrane's last sentence says...
"By such political chicanery could the future of the United Kingdom be decided."
He really should have added, "As it began...so it shall end."
Posted by murren59 on March 31, 2007 2:34 PM

2.
Independence for Scotland!
Independence for England!
Both countries need it...
Both countries want it...
IT'S TIME!
Posted by murren59 on March 27, 2007 6:47 AM

3.
Independence for Scotland!
Independence for England!
IT'S TIME!
Posted by murren59 on March 26, 2007 4:10 PM

4.
Ben 9:25 a.m., You accuse / confuse me as someone who wants to prevent England becoming independent? No sir, you are wrong-wrong-wrong!
My suggestion to you and the other anti-Scottish posters is to vent your outrage in The Scotsman and The Herald so that your splendid rhetoric will hopefully sway the Unionists & Fainthearts, of whom we have plenty, to vote SNP.
"Home Rule For Scotland! Home Rule For England!"
Posted by murren59 on March 22, 2007 9:37 PM

5.
"Ben-Lickyalips-Rupert et al,
Please don't waste your rage, resentment and frankly racist comments on this site.
Go to The Herald or The Scotsman and post. That will help us all achieve the union divorce that we want."
Posted by murren59 on March 21, 2007 5:57 PM

6.
Braveheart...
Bliarheart...
Broonheart...
BReidheart...

145

murren59,

07/04/2007 19:30:04

#175 contd.

8.
"This has to stop….this man was not elected by the English electorate majority…The people who elected him i.e Scot’s are just smiling to themselves because it does not effect them. Oh! I forgot. The Scot’s also got another Billion from their fellow countryman yesterday."
Just arrived back from Florida after a wonderful long holiday payed out of my unemployment giro. Didn't bother to get anything in Duty Free as - thanks Gordie - whisky is soooo cheap up here in Jockland. Would y'all [picked that up in Florida] quit whining so loudly as I'm about to have my siesta [picked that up on my Cancun holiday in December] before heading out for a few no tax hike Scottish pints. Aaaaaaah life is good!
Posted by murren59 on March 22, 2007 2:09 PM

9.
Alan Cochrane's last sentence says...
"By such political chicanery could the future of the United Kingdom be decided."
He really should have added, "As it began...so it shall end."
Posted by murren59 on March 31, 2007 2:34 PM

10.
I sincerely believe that independent nation status for England, Scotland and Wales will be a great thing for all concerned.
Part of the amicable divorce settlement must be that England retains the Royal Family, who in turn must renounce such title claims as Queen of Scots / Scotland, Prince of Wales, Duke of Edinburgh etc., etc.
Posted by murren59 on November 28, 2006 1:42 AM
-------------------------------------------
Sooooooooooooo, anything particularly inflamatory or divisive in any of the above posts? I think not, particularly given the level of ant-Scottish vitriol in The Telegraph forums.
A delicious irony in this little exercise. The neighbours lad who did the search for me is English. I think scrolling through all of the racist, anti-Scottish posts opened his eyes up to the hard reality of the independence question on both sides of the border.


 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 

Featured Advertising



Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.