Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Russell seeks free vote on independence referendum

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: 02 March 2009
MIKE Russell, the minister charged with delivering an independence referendum, made his first attempt to secure a parliamentary majority for the plans yesterday by appealing for a free vote on the issue.

Mr Russell, who was given responsibility for the Scottish Government's flagship referendum plans alongside his culture brief in last month's reshuffle, said he believed the bill could be passed, but only if all MSPs were allowed to vote as they wi
shed.

The Scottish Government intends to bring a bill paving the way for an independence referendum before the Scottish Parliament next year.

At the moment, the SNP only has the support of the Greens and independent MSP Margo MacDonald, giving it the votes of just 50 of the 129 MSPs. It will need another 15 to guarantee success.

Labour is opposed to a referendum – even though it flirted with the idea during Wendy Alexander's brief leadership last year – as are the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats.

But Mr Russell believes that some MSPs in those three parties might back the idea if they were given the chance to do so.

Mr Russell seized on remarks made by Liberal Democrat MSP John Farquhar Munro at the end of last week that he wanted the Scottish people to be given the democratic right to choose independence if they wanted.

The minister said: "It is quite clear that there are MSPs in other parties who want a referendum to take place.

"Tavish Scott (the Scottish Lib Dem leader], had previously indicated that he was 'not intuitively against' giving people that democratic choice.

"The vice-chairman of the Scottish Tories is on the record as saying that as many as five Conservative MSPs backed a referendum. And Labour's Holyrood group convenor, Duncan McNeil, last year pledged that they would 'not vote down any referendum bill that comes into the Parliament'."

Mr Russell added:

"There can be no doubt that a Holyrood majority exists for a referendum. And in these circumstances, instead of the London parties' whipping system standing in the way of that majority, a free vote would enable Scotland's democratic right to determine the nation's future to be respected."

But Michael McMahon, Scottish Labour's business manager, derided Mr Russell's call for a free vote on the issue.

He said: "This is another example of the SNP's lack of confidence in their flagship policy.

"They have never been able to obtain a majority for independence in any poll and now while everyone else in Scotland is concentrating on getting the country through the difficult economic times ahead, the nationalists are still fixated with their narrow separatist agenda.

"A vote on a referendum on independence is not a matter of conscience and is not one where Labour would support a free vote."

Scottish Tory leader Annabel Goldie said: "The SNP needs to stop chuntering on about its obsession with independence and concentrate on dealing with Labour's recession."





The full article contains 491 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 01 March 2009 9:26 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
  • Related Topics: Scottish independence
 
1

RufusT-Firefly,

01/03/2009 22:38:27
Dear oh Dear.

The SNP are getting more desperate by the hour.

A free vote indeed............................

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

The SNP should stick to what they are good at,like..................................................... AC/DC WE SALUTE YOU!

2

RufusT-Firefly,

01/03/2009 22:53:16
Mr Russell, who was given responsibility for the Scottish Government's flagship referendum plans alongside his culture brief in last month's reshuffle, said he believed the bill could be passed.
==================================================

Mr Russell also said he believed in.....

Father Christmas;

The Tooth Fairy;

and that the Moon is made of Green Cheese.
3

oh pedeStriaN laP sheep (anag),

02/03/2009 00:09:28
The SNP are finished, they were never more than a one issue party and even that issue is in a mess.

I say they've had their chance, they haven't delivered one promise and this country is in a worse than it was before they took charge.

Salmond said our banking system was strong. Yeah, right!

No LIT.

Where are the 1,000 police?

Student debt, don't get me started.

And now this mess. They are student politicians and should just quit and go and try doing some real wealth creating work rather than, like Salmond, fiddling the system to get two salaries.

The SNP will fail in their referendum "quest", everyone knows Scotland will vote no, so Mike Russell is charged with trying to lose it before it's presented as an excuse to dump their last remaining "pledge".
4

Rasco,

02/03/2009 00:10:23
Why not a free vote Rufus whats everyone afraid of,if the people don't want independence ok then but do remember we should be given the chance not like the vote we were promised by Broon on EU which he has done a U-TURN on or is it only the SNP who do U-TURNS.
5

Peter Curran,

Kirkliston 02/03/2009 00:11:40
The latest YouGov/Telegraph poll on headline voting intentions in Westminster elections shows that Labour is heading for extinction in the UK. The Scottish voters polled shows that 33% will vote SNP, 32% will vote Labour, 21% Tory, 8% LibDem and 6% will cast their votes for minority parties, excluding don't knows and won't votes.

This is a narrow, but significant margin for the SNP. and remember, this is a poll on voting intentions in Westminster and European elections - for election to the UK and European Parliaments. In other words, Scottish voters prefer a party committed to Scottish independence over any other single party to represent their interests in Westminster (while the UK lasts) and Europe. Of course, were there to be an election for the Holyrood Parliament tomorrow, the SNP would be returned with a higher working majority than at present.

The issue of the referendum should not be a party whipped vote in Holyrood, but a free vote. There can be no argument against such a vote that is not specious and self-serving.

http://moridura.blogspot.com
6

Jock Tamson,

Scotland, Caledonia, Alba 02/03/2009 00:13:07
The only thing free a unionist understands is a lunch.
7

Fifi la Bonbon,

02/03/2009 00:14:32
My political party is better than your political party and its representatives are more intelligent and honest, have better behaved children, and practice better personal hygiene, than the representatives of your political party.
8

,

02/03/2009 00:18:59
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
9

Peter Curran,

Kirkliston 02/03/2009 00:20:50
Fifi la Bonbon, how did you, a Frenchwoman know these things? A perfect description of my party, the SNP. You must have visited Holyrood. The Auld Alliance at work - Vive La France!
10

Westfield Bairns,

SNP - SCOTLANDS PARTY 02/03/2009 00:36:38
The simple truth is that the Unionist parties are running scared. Blocking the referendum is undemocratic and even then there WILL be some within their ranks who will vote for it, could be messy and quite embarassing for them. A vote winner for the SNP whatever happens
11

corrigenda,

Harpenden 02/03/2009 00:37:42
I hope all those who might come to be asked to vote in a referendum about Scottish Independece realise that the debts currently being incurred by Westminster to bail out the incompetent Scottish banks will simply pass for payment onto we newly independent Scots.
12

,

02/03/2009 00:41:51
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
13

Westfield Bairns,

SNP - SCOTLANDS PARTY 02/03/2009 00:44:37
12 corrigenda,

And why should Scotland pay for Westminsters mistakes. Scotland has already been bankrolling the Treasury for more than 30 years

14

Brian Hill,

02/03/2009 00:50:07
Mike Russell is clearly a major asset to the SNP. He is going to prove to be a big hitter this year and next as we march steadily towards the Independence Referendum.
Glen looked positively small when interviewing Mike today.

The great thing about this Tefal Coated SNP Government is they completely ignore the moans and groans of the opposition and simply move on with yet another initiative.

The poor old unionists stop barking for a minute, look up, see the show has moved on and run after it barking happily whilst generally being ignored by anyone with a working intelligence.

The YouGov poll #5 Peter Curran makes dismal reading for unionists. For Labour as saviours of the world to be trailing the SNP must be terrifying for them.

What will it be like when the recession descends into depression a year from now, or even sooner?

15

Newton_Invented_Gravity,

02/03/2009 01:00:54
The labour party talked tough last year and said 'bring it on'. If they voted down this bill they will look as if they are running scared.
16

Sanny,

Upwey 02/03/2009 01:03:16
The “Whipping System” in Parliament is a denial of democracy and should be abolished. The prime responsibility of any MP is to represent his constituents, not a party machine. It is to be hoped that in a Independent Democratic Scotland, Whipping Systems will be consigned to history.

Why are the Unionists so afraid of the democratic principle of asking the people for their view? We keep hearing from the unionists that there is no desire for Independence/Separation or more properly “Dissolution of the Act of Union of Parliaments. If they truly believe this, why are they afraid to put the question? If they are right that there is a 4: 1 majority in Scotland against Independence such a result would deal the SNP a severe blow and resolve the problem for a generation.

The current intransigence of the unionists in both Westminster and Holyrood is simply adding strength to the Nationalist cause. Given that Brown cannot delay the Westminster GE beyond the spring of next year and, short of a miracle, the Tory’s will be elected with a landslide majority in England. The thought of the hated Tory’s running the show will horrify the majority of Scots. With the Holyrood elections being held the following year and Labour exposed and disgraced, it is more than likely that the SNP will beat the system and return with a working majority.

Such a situation will raise interesting questions in the Council of Europe and the UN. It is possible that a Westminster approved referendum will not be required! For the next Holyrood election I feel we will need independent European monitors to ensure a fair and honest election process.
17

Sanny,

02/03/2009 01:06:48
10 Cynicus in Exile,02/03/2009 00:29:23
It is interesting that you say the opposition parties will look to their own collective interests! Do you not think that they should look to the interests of their constitutions before that of the party? Or do you simply not understand democracy?
18

,

02/03/2009 01:07:27
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
19

famous 15,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 02:28:59
Cyber Thug Unionists to the Left.Cyber thug Unionists to the Right. Into the valley of Death rode the Democratic SNP................see next week whether the people of Scotland will suffer the Anti Democrats to take over the world! Dan..Dan..De ..Dan ..Dan
20

redcliffe62,

02/03/2009 02:49:08
labour still at 31%, and will rise when fear is used in the campaign. so not too bad for them despite the fact they have screwed the entire country.
the monkey with a red rosette being voted in springs to mind.
unless they get to under 28% on the voting day, meaning 25% leading up to the campagin, then labour is still in with a chance.
21

G.Campbell,

02/03/2009 02:51:21
Our banks might be dodgy, but Scotland clearly has the best journalists. Step forward Lorraine Davidson of The Times.

http://tinyurl.com/bvgwdr

"Alex Salmond is under renewed pressure over his links with Sir George Mathewson, THE FORMER HBOS CHAIRMAN, after it emerged that Sir George's investment group's hedge fund is running businesses from the Cayman Islands."
22

redcliffe62,

02/03/2009 02:54:16
labour did not flirt with a referendum, it was policy and until advised differently by someone with authority i guess it remains so, or does it?
who knows, brown, gary, anyone asked them? has the scotsman even bothered to find out?

labour uk (scotland pretendy numpty division included) often say they want one to clonfirm their democratic principles, and renege when the vote looks like going against them. the 40% of people alive or dead on the roll voting in support rule on devolution, (which would incidentally stop every labour government being elected EVER,) and the eu vote are two classic examples of labour doublespeak.
23

redcliffe62,

02/03/2009 02:56:30
mr campbell, hands up all those westminster pollies with links to companies abroad?

perhaps it is harder to find those that are not!
24

TheScotsman,

Scottish Borders 02/03/2009 02:57:58
All parties should approve the referendum, so that the Scottish people can deliver the massive No vote our parliament needs. The "I" word can then be dropped from the SNP's manifesto, then some more competent politicians can join them and keep Scottish Labour out of government for good.
The SNP may have to consider a name change of course. Scottish Devolution Party?
25

redcliffe62,

02/03/2009 03:28:48
the apathetic, who do not care much one way or the other as long as they can pay their bills on this issue are probably now a smaller number than before as sides are taken.
the view may be changing to surely salmond cannot be any worse than those guys, instead of, we must stick with britain to be safe.
most people of all political persuasions do not feel secure in britain plc with brown and his cronies in charge. fera of the unknown does not seem quite so scary.
subtle change, but will swing a referendum vote significantly. expect the scaremongering to be ramped up a la blair in 2007, but it is increasingly falling on deaf ears as labour ha slittle credibility no matter which numpty is put in charge after brown.
26

KampungHighlander,

Jakarta 02/03/2009 03:32:41
What ever happened to "Bring it On"?

Are the Unionist parties afraid that there is enough support for a referendum amongst their MP's that it would pass?

Or are they afraid to put Scotlands constitutional future in the hands of the people of Scotland?

We all know that the Unionist preferred option to determine anything regarding Scotlands place in the UK is Committees like Calman which have so little credibility amongst even the Unionists that the LibDems and Tories don't even bother to make a submission.

But are they really that afraid that they will get out the whips to avoid a free vote?


27

,

02/03/2009 03:55:03
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
28

redcliffe62,

02/03/2009 05:22:32
grahamski is getting a tad more rational recently. he actually accepted that someone else's opinion although different to his own may have validity.
as long as it is not too different!
29

Angleland Isover,

02/03/2009 06:37:55
Independence is now inevitable. The more desperate the unionists become trying to hold back the tide, the easier it will be for the less politically aware in our society to realise our country has been shafted far too long.
30

Jo'Burg Jock,

South Africa 02/03/2009 06:43:30
From the article above:-

"Labour is opposed to a referendum"

From The Labour Party manifesto 2005:-

"Labour remains committed to reviewing the experience of the new electoral systems – introduced for the devolved administrations, the European Parliament and the London Assembly. A referendum remains the right way to agree any change for Westminster."

Obviously this does not apply if the labour party does not like the potential result of a referendum.

Democracy????

Not if the labour party has anything to do with it!!

31

Peter Curran,

Kirkliston 02/03/2009 07:11:44
22 G.Campbell:

Was that Lorraine Davidson, former Labour spin doctor, author of Lucky Jack - Scotland's First Minister?(unlucky Lorraine, bad timing - the book went straight to the remainder shelf.)

Anyone who thinks that she is now a completely objective commentator on politics only has to read her artice of February 23rd in the 'Times' to have that impression vanish like snaw aff a dyke.
32

Angleland Isover,

02/03/2009 07:17:27
From the article above;-
Tavish Scott(the Scottish Lib Dem leader), had previously indicated "that he was not intuitively opposed to democracy".
33

Nevsky;,

Moscow 02/03/2009 07:30:43
Funny i thought all the unionists were half rabid when Wendy said 'bring it on'.

Have they all backed off now?
34

Ewan Randall,

02/03/2009 07:31:19
(#3) – (oh pedeStriaN laP sheep (anag)) – If the SNP were never more than a one issue party why did you list more than issue of theirs?

Though the SNP keeps getting themselves into a mess over a number of their issues would you not agree this is only the case due to them being a minority government?

Would you not concede the possibility that a failure to gain a referendum within the life of this parliament might not be the end of the possibility of a referendum in the next?

Are you sure that Scotland would vote no given the right set of circumstances?
35

brownlie,

02/03/2009 07:31:28
danielrober

Who caused the wars, who is failing to cope with recession, who is trying to stifle discussion and who has no alternative plans?
36

Ewan Randall,

02/03/2009 07:47:26
(#4) – (Rasco) – As we all knew that an independence referendum was being offered by one party at the last Scottish elections could it not be said that the most democratic of free votes has already been taken?

Could it not be said that if there is a belief there should be a referendum then the people of this country will have the same opportunity to voice their opinion at the next Scottish elections?
37

,

02/03/2009 08:07:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
38

paulr,

edinburgh 02/03/2009 08:16:25
Labour is opposed to a referendum------
Why?
Because they are scared of the results
39

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 02/03/2009 08:29:20
#42 "Go away and look up the difference between "delegate" and "representative"."

Since I'm sure you know that there is nowhere to "look up" this distinction in context, why don't you explain it for us, with reference to UK constitutional matters?

Oh, thought so. Just bumping your gums again.
40

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 02/03/2009 08:31:39
#43 Your comment ought to be the entire text of all such features like the one above. The Unionists tell us that uncertainty over Scotland's constitutional feature has dire economic repercussions. If Scotland is so sure to vote "No", then let it do so and remove all doubt for a generation or more.
41

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 08:32:53
42 sm753,02/03/2009 08:13:53

“No it won't, actually. Again, go away and look it up”

Have you looked up “Council Tax in Northern Ireland” yet?
42

Ewan Randall,

02/03/2009 08:39:55
Am I right in thinking that it is possible for MSP’s to vote for a referendum against the party whip if they so wished to?
43

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 08:40:52
#47
“On the other hand, your fears that England will always dominate could be solved by requiring unanimity on crucial matters, or three out of four if Ireland becomes involved or two out of three if not. Or something along these lines.”

On what basis would the Republic of Ireland wish to become involved in the internal politics of a foreign country?
44

Ewan Randall,

02/03/2009 08:57:47
Are there any disadvantages with a federalist system?

If there are disadvantages with a federalist system how would you resolve them?
45

tartangladbach,

edinburgh 02/03/2009 08:58:50
labour will not be in power at westminster or holyrood by spring 2010 FACT. lets see what happens then? with 6 months to a referendum! cameron will instruct the conservatives to vote for a referendum! labour's in fighting & defeat will have taken it's toll on the party's ability to organise, as the fat cats that have lost their jobs on board the westminster gravy train head north looking for a replacement! watch out mr gray, no progress with your profile will cost you that cushy position soon? jim murphy's brief spell at the scottish office will be over too! roll on 2010 i say!
46

tartangladbach,

edinburgh 02/03/2009 09:08:13
here's a poll i'd like to see!

who do you think would best represent the interests of scotland through holyrood if there was a conservative goverment in westminster?
(A)LABOUR
(B)CONSERVATIVES
(C)LIBERALS
(D)GREENS
(E)SNP
47

TWC,

02/03/2009 09:08:53
Voting against the referendum would be a big mistake, if they think it is not a problem they should abstain but no party should risk the wrath of the voters.
It will be seen as an attempt to stop us exercising our democratic right.
48

Linda,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 09:11:40
Lib Dems are neither Liberal or democratic if they oppose a referendum on independence.

Also why have the 12 Scottish Lib Dems failed to support the Commons Motion opposing the part privatising of the Royal Mail?
49

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 09:16:04
58 tartangladbach,edinburgh 02/03/2009 09:08:13

We had that poll in May 2007.

The SNP won it.
50

Gussie Fink-Nottle,

02/03/2009 09:16:20
"Let the people have their say on this matter"

Wendy Alexander.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ipd8JzfUr-E
51

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 09:22:00
Who was Wendy Alexander again?
52

Gussie Fink-Nottle,

02/03/2009 09:24:25
#64 Aoy hoy OCP.

"Business wants it, the people want it, Civic Scotland want their chance to have their say, they should be given it."

Wendy Alexander May '08
53

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 09:32:17
#69

Perhaps “demented meerkats” have a penchant for “giant hungry caterpillars”
54

Stan Butler,

02/03/2009 09:32:20


If Russell is such a big hitter, such a major asset to the SNP, why has he been kept on the back benches until now?

Does Fat N'Eck Salmond not like him?

55

Gussie Fink-Nottle,

02/03/2009 09:33:34
#71 Stan Butler. Why do you have such a stiffy for Mike Russell?
56

TWC,

02/03/2009 09:40:12
Dunky McNeil said that Labour would support a referendum, and if the Libdems vote against I think that will be the end of them.
The fact is we should get the opportunity, and that will end all the ambiguity. I have heard all the union parties say there is no appetite for Independence so lets get it confirmed.
The real reason for reticence is that none of them wants to define how far they will go with Devolution.
57

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 09:40:46
#71 Brown’s Butler

“If Russell is such a big hitter, such a major asset to the SNP, why has he been kept on the back benches until now”

Why would you think that the “Minister for the Environment”, (Mike Russell, May 2007-February 2009), equates to a “back-bench” position?
58

salmondella,

Uk 02/03/2009 09:49:45
Personally, Bring it on and then we can see the end of the NATS. But are the Scottish people really that interested in the issue of independence at the moment?

I doubt it -Of course the SNP would like a diversion away from the headlines of mismanagement, ill thought out policies and the failure to carry out election promises that is the tenure of the SNP in power.
59

Gussie Fink-Nottle,

02/03/2009 09:56:10
"bbbbhhhuubbbbbbbhhhhbbhhhbbbhhhhhhhhbbbhhhbbbhhhuubbbuttttt she did say that, that's correct"

Iain Gray May '08

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04AQe5AXxnU&NR=1

"In English none of this makes any sense."

Gordon Brewer May '08

"They're saying completely different things which are the are in fact the same?"

Gordon Brewer '08
60

Gussie Fink-Nottle,

02/03/2009 09:57:14
#80 Just for the visual context...


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04AQe5AXxnU&NR=1
61

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 02/03/2009 09:57:24
#78 "Yes there is, but if you're too thick to find it it's your problem."

Ah, the classic Unionist debating tactic: "What I say is true, and I can prove it, but, er, I choose not to because, um, I think that makes my case stronger."

ROFL!

MPs are elected to represent their constituents. End of.
62

Nikostratos,,

02/03/2009 10:02:37
#5 Peter Curran,

62% of voters support pro-union parties....Good news for the snp?
63

bill-alba,

fife 02/03/2009 10:10:15
#82 the information will be in a secret dossier held by the treachourous british.
64

TWC,

02/03/2009 10:10:51
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04AQe5AXxnU&NR=1

That is really funny, guys you have to look at this.

If Labour vote against this referendum the press will slaughter them
65

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 10:12:52
79 sm753,02/03/2009 09:55:42

Absolute drivel and the sad thing is that you do not realise this.

A small proportion of Local Authority income in Northern Ireland is gained from a levy based upon residential property values, not unlike the discredited and discarded “rates” system previously operated here in this country.

With property values in Northern Ireland, as elsewhere, falling through the floor during the current recession, the scope for increasing revenues from this source is accordingly somewhat diminished.

Therefore to equate the borrowing powers of the Northern Ireland Assembly, and the revenues gained by their Local Authorities from a property value based tax is patently absurd.

66

Royc,

London 02/03/2009 10:21:07
#40 do give us details of this Federalist Uk you seek Rulesbutnotrulers.
As in /USA where smallest state has same number of Senators as largest?
So we would have say 12 MPs from Scotland ,Northern Ireland , Wales and England all meeting in London to decide federal matters , or would your federation still have the majority eg England with majority of MPs ?
That being the case you do not solve the problem you merely give it a different name

Why would we copy the USA's senatorial system? Who said anything about a senate anyway, which is not a particularly British institution?

A federal system would have 12 or 13 states/nations, each with its state legislature looking after its own local affairs, and each would elect MPs to the British parliament. If you choose to see all the English as the same, fine, then they'd have a majority. Those who study or travel a bit will know there are considerable differences between the English regions. Many have more in common with Scotland than they do with London and the SouthEast. Stands to reason with Celts, Angles, Jutes, Saxons, Vikings et al settling different parts of the islands, it is as chequered a tapestry as the Scottish one.

Whichever, Federalism is a valid alternative to narrow nationalism or domination by the SouthEast, neither of which are particularly useful or productive and both of which have arguably passed their sell-by date.
67

Arfur,

02/03/2009 10:25:36
The unionist parties would be extremely thick to vote against a referendum. The SNP are in a win win situation.

Either they will get a referendum which there is a good chance they will win with

(1) it pretty much 40/40 with 20 undecided
(2) another year of Labour incompetence
(3) a Tory landslide at Westminster

Or the unionist parties will vote against it, Salmond and the SNP will heavily advertise that the other parties will not give us thick Scots the right to vote and the other parties will be crushed at the next election
68

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 02/03/2009 10:26:46
#83 "62% of voters support pro-union parties"

SNORE.

Yet when asked for an opinion on independence, just 41% of voters oppose it.

Over and over, day after day, month after month, year after year, you dodge the only question that matters:

"If the Scottish people are so vastly in favour of the Union, why not let them say so in a referendum, and end the debate?"

Answer: because you don't believe your own claims, and fear there's a possibility that you would lose. You're a liar, and that's why nobody gives any credibility to your opinion, and why there is a CONSISTENT trend of increase in support for both the SNP and independence. You can't hold back the tide forever.
69

Nikostratos,,

02/03/2009 10:30:51
#90 rude boy

As i agree with having a referendum(one question only Independence or not)
and the 62% indicates the snp will lose and lose big time
how does that make me a liar?
70

Nikostratos,,

02/03/2009 10:33:57
#84 Old Catholic Preacher,

Private and Confidential

Alex Salmond MP

Leader of the SNP

House of Commons

Westminster

London

SW1A 0AA

12 February 2007

Dear Mr Salmond,

Request for the return of confidential photographs and files from the SNP


http://nikostratosii.blogspot.com/
71

Peter Curran,

Kirkliston 02/03/2009 10:36:22
#83 and #84

If you don't know what's wrong with that argument, I can't help you.

But presumably you would be confident of the result of a referendum on Scottish independence, and therefore a free vote in Holyrood to test the matter?

http://moridura.blogspot.com
72

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 10:36:42
88 Royc,London 02/03/2009 10:21:07

On what basis do you claim that Scottish nationalism is “past its sell-by date”?

Do you also think, as a previous poster of your persuasion appears to do, that the Republic of Ireland should give up its independence to join this federalist panacea of the world’s ills?

Where does the future of Canada, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Estonia, Latvia, and Norway (to name but a few), lie should their “nationalism” be now past its sell-date?

73

Arfur,

02/03/2009 10:36:45
92 Nikostratos,, - ehhhhhh how do you figure that with the latest polls showing 40% for, 40% against and 20% undecided?

Oh of course you unionist just pick numbers and facts from your nose dont you. Related to that halfwit AM2 by any chance?
74

Sanny,

Upwey 02/03/2009 10:37:28
42 sm753,02/03/2009 08:13:53

No need; I am well aware of the meaning and the Alice-in-wonderland approach of Unionists and their portmanteau words. May I suggest you look up the TRUE meaning of Democracy going back to its original Greek origins?

You seem to be unaware of the Role of the Council of Europe or the UN in these matters. Are you unaware it was only as a result of pressure by the Council of Europe, concerned by the lack of Democracy in the Union, that Blair was forced to introduce Devolution as the minimum solution, to avoid Sanctions being imposed on Westminster Government? Read the Scottish-UN Committee papers lodged at the National Library in Edinburgh for your own enlightenment.

Whilst you try to improve your education (much needed) I would suggest you read the Charter of the UN; in particular the part on’ the people’s right of self determination’.

As for an independent Scotland ‘It's coming yet, for a' that,’!
75

Rev. S. Campbell,

02/03/2009 10:41:55
#92 "As i agree with having a referendum(one question only Independence or not)
and the 62% indicates the snp will lose and lose big time"

Er, no it doesn't, because the 62% was not a vote on independence. It indicates nothing, because the polls specifically on independence show that a considerable number of Labour, Lib Dem and Tory voters in fact support independence, but don't vote SNP for other reasons.

Glad to hear you're for a referendum, though. Interesting that the party you support isn't, which rather destroys your whole point - namely that people who vote for a party agree with everything it stands for.
76

TWC,

02/03/2009 10:41:58
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=04AQe5AXxnU&NR=1

This is much better than these Blogs, all Labour poodles should review this before writing anything
77

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 02/03/2009 10:42:41
#91 "Have you found somewhere to look up the difference yet?"

No, because in the context of the constitution of the UK there isn't one. If there was, you'd have posted it, wouldn't you?
78

Sanny,

02/03/2009 10:44:42
48 Ewan Randall,02/03/2009 08:39:55
Yes – but they would most likely be expelled from the party and therefore lose their place at the trough. In effect we are miss-led into believing that we for an individual when effectively we vote for a party; who in turn are controlled by a small unelected (by the people) cabal.
79

Luigiana,

Aberdeen 02/03/2009 10:50:30
Poor little Campbell was up to his usual tricks, but Mike Russell quickly put him in his place. Another great performance by an SNP big gun.

I wish Glen Campbell would apply to the BBC training budget to work on his mannerisms - I find his over-emphasis/expression (and leaning forward) on key sentence words rather crude and irritating (very similar to the wonderful Wendy Alexander's technique).
80

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 02/03/2009 10:51:26
#104 You mean you have no clue, and are rather bizarrely hoping that I'll find such evidence for you, and then present it here if I do to prove you right. That is, if I might say, a rather epically stupid piece of "teaching". Ungraded for you.
81

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 10:56:43
98 sm753

More drivel.

Your appear to refer to a paper written in 2003 and try to equate that with the current economic and political situation.

In case you have not noticed, the local government tax regime in Northern Ireland has changed somewhat since then, therefore all previous revenue assumptions are rendered invalid and irrelevant.

Come back when you know what you are talking about.
82

Sanny,

02/03/2009 10:58:11
71 Stan Butler,02/03/2009 09:32:20
Could it be that unlike the Labour Party, or indeed any of the Unionist Party’s, the SNP has such a wealth of talent they can afford to have first class people on the back benches.
83

European Scot,

02/03/2009 11:11:15
86 / 100 TWC

A good Youtube extract, pinpointing a politician struggling with an answer. Ian Gray certainly looks very uncomfortable.
A great reminder to everyone of Labour's 'united' position on a Referendum, and one to be well remembered.
The most noteworthy of Ian Gray's comments about a Referendum:-
" .... we won't stand in the way of the people having a say..... "

This extract should be referred to once again in the event that Labour ever tries to prevent a Referendum taking place.
It will be more than the Press that will crucify them.
84

ochone,

Sauchie, Clacks 02/03/2009 11:15:09
Strange how many unionists contributers seem to have memory lapses where this issue is concerned or maybe it's because most of the one's who do contribute to the Scotsman, are still at primary school, or they would recall that over the years the SNP has called for this more than once, even before we had Holyrood, and on every occasion the same unionist party's who assure us that they are certain of the outcome, have made some excuse or indeed several, to turn down the idea.

Although all of them at some time or another have also assured us that it would not only finish the independence question once and for all but finish the SNP for good.

Yet they still refuse, makes you wonder why.
85

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 11:15:23
108 Sanny,02/03/2009 10:58:11

Perhaps so, but has been pointed out previously, Mike Russell has never actually been a back-bencher in this Government.
86

ochone,

Sauchie, Clacks 02/03/2009 11:18:48
Erm, the Labour party had boasted that it supported devolution for about one hundred years.

Problem was they never got around to doing anything about it sooner.

Oop's forgot, there was the very dodgy first referendum that we are all supposed to forget about.
87

Rev. S. Campbell,

Bath 02/03/2009 11:27:38
#113 "A three way referendum is needed or else those of us who seek a Federal British Isles will be disenfranchised"

Since there are only five of you, we can probably live with that.
88

Morry,

Scotland 02/03/2009 11:28:38
Hahahahahaha!!!!
Are ye shakin in yer boots yet Gordy?
89

TWC,

02/03/2009 11:29:12
113 Rulesbutnotrulers

Yes but who will define the third option??

Is it Independence, Status quo and Full Fiscal Autonomy??
90

Porty Nat,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 11:31:11
SM753 - since I was the one who explained to you how the NI borrowing powers work, including the bit about Council Tax increases, perhaps you could explain for me why a topslicing of the Block Grant could not serve a similar function in Scotland for the purposes of repaying over time any additional borrowing arranged through the Treasury?

Take your time. No hurry.
91

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 02/03/2009 11:35:52
sm753

Labour are going to lose the next UK general election, they lost the 2007 Scottish election and will lose the 2011 scottish election.

I am going to watch their destruction on TV with a big back of popcorn.

So SM 753. Got it yet?
92

frank mcbride,

lusitania 02/03/2009 11:36:53
#104 & others, sm753.

To give any credence to the idea that Britain is a Representative Democracy show a remarkable lack of critical thinking.

The very fact that Parties can with their members, on pain of sanction, denies any notion of Representative Democracy.

As said, most famously, by Churchill, "Britain is an elected Dictatorship".
93

Stan Butler,

02/03/2009 11:41:59
119 frank mcbride


Your posts appear to be encrypted.

Is this intentional?

94

,

02/03/2009 11:45:48
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
95

john z,

edinburgh 02/03/2009 11:47:15
Labour and the Tories say they are confident of a NO vote, so why do they continually oppose the public of Scotland getting the chance to have their say in a referendum??

Surely if you believe in democracy, you would allow a referendum??

Let's have a referendum, and let the people of Scotland decide.

I just don't understand why Labour will not allow the people of Scotland to have a referendum on such an important matter. Is democracy no longer important to Scottish Labour????
96

Mr. Lachie Todd,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 11:47:41
Kent-born Mike Russell has himself publicly admitted that there is little support for Scotland leaving this unitary state.

However, it would indeed be ironic, IF an Englishman was responsible for arranging a referendum that led to an independent, sovereign Scottish State!
97

redcliffe62,

02/03/2009 11:51:45
40% say yes, 40% say no and 20% say they do not care as long as they get their benefit paid every week.
he who pays the benefit wins, so offer an extra 5 quid a week and your side will win the vote easily.
am i wrong?
98

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 11:51:48
112 ochone,Sauchie, Clacks 02/03/2009 11:18:48

“Oop's forgot, there was the very dodgy first referendum that we are all supposed to forget about.”

I’m sure that there are more than 100 of us who remain alive and remember the Devolution campaign in 1979.

Despite being reined up against the combined might of the British establishment including; The Labour Party, the Conservative and Unionist Party, the Liberal Party, the BBC, ITV and the Scottish print media, we actually achieved a majority of the vote.

It took almost another generation before Devolution (lite) was finally achieved, however, Unionists be warned, we did not go away then, and are not going away now that the end is in sight.
99

,

02/03/2009 11:53:17
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
100

Edward,

02/03/2009 11:55:38
If the Labour party, The Libdems and the Tories are so sure that the result of a referendum woul not go in favour of Independence, then why are they against it. what are they afraid of??
Let there be a truelly freevote in Holyrood and lets have a referendum
Then the Unionist parties can state there case to the electorate in a level headed,non partisan manner without resort to spin, scare stories and other stupiditythen let the people decide
101

brownlie,

02/03/2009 12:01:37
126 What happened to Aye we can?
102

,

02/03/2009 12:13:34
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
103

The west awake,

Argyll 02/03/2009 12:21:03
St George - Interesting you choose to call Russell a traitor. If you seriously regard him as such then I presume it is on the same basis that Edward 1 called Wallace a traitor.
If it is treason to want to secede then you presumably backed the Yugoslav Govt when it warred against its breakaway regions of Slovenia, Croatia etc? Perhaps you also regard the present US Govt in the same way?

The UK is the product of a so-called voluntary Union, since when is it treason to say the Union should now end?
104

walter,

02/03/2009 12:26:33
There is a lot being said reference a referendum and of coarse the SNP could have held it by now if they had jumped on Alexanders offer.
They intend to have it in 2011 and are calling for a free vote.
The nats (certainly on here) have always insisted that every one who voted for the SNP supports independence and they said before the election that they would hold one.
That being the case then can we assume that every one who voted Lab, Tory or Lib/Dems did so because they do not support independence and the party they voted for said before the election they would not hold a referendum.
Those MSPs whose party said they would not hold a referendum should then vote against it as that is what the party said they would do to be elected.
This is not a matter of a free vote this is a matter of voting the way they party said it would before the election.
That's democracy.
105

Gussie Fink-Nottle,

02/03/2009 12:26:49
#123 Lachie Todd

"However, it would indeed be ironic, IF an Englishman was responsible for arranging a referendum that led to an independent, sovereign Scottish State!"

Mike Russell, is only one small cog in this wheel. The man who will deliver Independence for Scotland is the MP for Kircaldy and Cowdenbeath, and current resident of Number Ten Downing Street, Gordon Brown.

106

The west awake,

Argyll 02/03/2009 13:01:05
Walter "That being the case then can we assume that every one who voted Lab, Tory or Lib/Dems did so because they do not support independence"

- No we can't. he fact is that SNP supporters and representatives are far more likely to be supportive of Independence than Lab/Lib/Tories are for the Union. It stands to reason after all. Anyone voting for the SNP must be aware it is their main principle and objective, however, many people vote Labour and Tory etc for differing reasons and there is real evidence that certain of them are warm to a referendum (how many is a very interesting question).
It is this fact which, above all others, will ensure Russell does not get his free vote. I would be astonished to see even 1 SNP MSP not voting for a referendum, but in the event of a genuinely free vote I am reasonably sure Russell would get his 15 converts - and more.
Anyway, I'm glad I support the Party not afraid of a free vote - it must be so troublesome to keep up the BS about not being needed, no mandate etc.
107

Boab1,

02/03/2009 13:07:25
Sadly, I believe that if a referendum came along it would be lost. The unionist propaganda machine would go into overdrive and scare too many people.
108

TWC,

02/03/2009 13:08:52
Well I want a referendum and I'm pretty sure most Libera;ls want a 3 question referendum
109

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 02/03/2009 13:18:25
140 It is an interesting question, will the Libdems vote against the bill with a third question of fiscal autonomy on the proposed ballot paper.

Surely that would be against liberal principles?
110

Ewan Randall,

02/03/2009 13:21:31
Why hasn’t there been a marked increase in people asking for a referendum on this site?

Why has it mainly been the same supporter of one party?

Why have they been trying to convince people that if MSP’s who are not SNP don’t vote for the referendum they will be in trouble?

Where is the support on this site from other party supporters?
111

The Strategist,

02/03/2009 13:33:42
Given the history of the UK economy over the past twenty or so years then anyone who still seriously believes that membership of the Union is important must presumably be a product of Labour's education system.
112

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 13:36:00
LOL #5 You think 32% SNP poll rating is good news for an independence referendum. So what if Labour are doing so poorly the Labour Party is not the Union, its a far bigger beast than that im afraid.

There will be no referendum in 2010, the timing is clearly rigged. Salmond can huff and puff all he likes but untill he gets a majority (and I wont hold my breath) thats his problem.
113

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 13:36:42
138 Rulesbutnotrulers,Federation, not separation 02/03/2009 13:04:20

Whereas I am prepared to accept that your views are sincerely held, albeit simplistic and poorly substantiated, can you point to any nation which has given up its national sovereignty to rejoin a federation such as you propose?

How many votes did the ”Ireland is really British” party achieve in the last election there?

I will tell you the answer, zero, nil, not any, that parrot is dead.
114

European Scot,

02/03/2009 13:39:38
138 Rules

Unionists continually promote the 'UK' as the model for Scotland to work around, pushing various examples from devolution 'max', with certain levels of autonomy, to this idea of some form of Federal arrangement.
All built around retaining a form of the 'UK'.
Federal, as has been pointed out to you on so many occasions, reduces Scotland's status from that of a country, to being a State, or Region.
No thank you.
The model to work around is much larger, that of the World, or of Europe, where individual countries of varying sizes, run themselves as countries, some within larger economic units.
Reducing Scotland to a State, or Region within your' UK' is hardly an improvement on its current voiceless, and invisible 'presence' on the International stage.
Your vision of a Scotland within a UK federal system, could hardly be described as ambitious.
Scotland needs to reassert its rightful position in the World as both a Country, and a Nation.
It will never achieve either constrained within a 'UK', federal or otherwise.
115

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 13:44:51
147, Scotland is probably the most influential small country in the world due to being a part of the UK. Look how many top Scots we have in positions of power. You really think anybody is going to give a shoot what the leader of an independent Scotland thinks?

Brown and Obama are busy designing a global economic blueprint to stave off a global recession, while Salmond is away prattling on about independence to a bunch of bemused yanks LOL.

116

Alasdair mac Alasdair Mór Mac an Righ,,

02/03/2009 13:49:04
142Ewan Randall, 02/03/2009 13:21:31
Why hasn’t there been a marked increase in people asking for a referendum on this site?

Why has it mainly been the same supporter of one party?

Why have they been trying to convince people that if MSP’s who are not SNP don’t vote for the referendum they will be in trouble?

Where is the support on this site from other party supporters?

==============================

Well wonders never cease, Ewan 'of the hundred questions' Randall has asked a question that does need answering.

"Where is the support on this site from other party supporters?"

Well Ewan there are plenty of SNP supporters active enough to login and say why they are happy with the performance of their representatives and why they feel the SNP are doing a good job.

The other camp could be described as "Unionists" they are unable to step out of the shadows and declare which party they do support.

Mostly Labour supporters totally unaware on what Labours policies are. The just take the Anti SNP position.

Shocking and a fine example of Westminster nonsense. We even Liberal Democrats opposed to democracy via referendums. Labour party rejecting the working family.

117

Tormod,

Auld Reekie 02/03/2009 13:49:38
148 Interesting criteria, using assasination as a method to measure how important or good your country is.

Forget about GDP, education attainment, health mortality rates.

Nope my country is better than yours because we shoot our leaders.
118

Geomac 1,

Scotland 02/03/2009 13:52:20
This appointment of Russell to an SNP party position (largely working on furthering SNP independence aim) is a gross misuse of taxpayer funds - no doubt there will also be civil servants (who are meant to be apolitical) involved in supporting Russell. Maybe they should ask Sir Sean to pay for his (and associated civil servants) salary
It's time opposition parties at Holyrood demanded a debate on this and kicked the expenditure associated with this into the coffers of the SNP.
119

Time to Show Courage,

02/03/2009 13:55:43
sm753, niko, rastus fire flee...

Simple questions for you...

Do you agree that a referendum is the correct democratic way of allowing the population the make their views known on imprtant consttutional matters? (yes or no)

Are you 100% confident (as you have often claimed) that the public would vote against independence? (Yes or no).

120

Geomac 1,

Scotland 02/03/2009 13:57:01
#43 Get Rid. I assume that when you say "Anyone who wants to be informed and have civilised debate would not touch this site with a barge pole.", you mean that the site should be restricted to nationalist activists and the like? Then you could have a nice cosy chat and agree about everything?? Amazing how those losing the argument don't want to play with others??
121

Alasdair mac Alasdair Mór Mac an Righ,,

02/03/2009 14:02:57
148The Smug One, 02/03/2009 13:44:51
147, Scotland is probably the most influential small country in the world due to being a part of the UK. Look how many top Scots we have in positions of power. You really think anybody is going to give a shoot what the leader of an independent Scotland thinks?

Brown and Obama are busy designing a global economic blueprint to stave off a global recession, while Salmond is away prattling on about independence to a bunch of bemused yanks LOL.

=======================

This is probably something that Smug One's like you do not get. I am truly non interested in world influence. I am interested in a PM who is looking after the domestic situation not travelling around the world pretending this little island is part of a big empire.

I would delighted to be out of the frame of Illegal wars, Nukes, grandstanding against Russia, Afghanistan, Iraq, G8, etc, etc.

I am a simple family man who just wants good education, health and economy and to live at peace with the neighbours.
122

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 14:03:59
151 Mike Russell and the SNP were elected to pursue a referendum, so your post is silly.

Why are unionists so scared of a referendum that they are thinking up ridiculous arguments like your one to try and prevent it from happening ? I would have thought from a unionist perspective you would be pushing to have one as quickly as possible but you're not.

Why is that.
123

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 14:05:43
152,

Yes and yes. However why is Salmond so desperate for it to be 2010? He thinks the Tories will win the GE and do poorly in Scotland (of which im not so sure now) and thinks he can get a yes on the back of this.

So why should the Unionist parties who have a large majority of the seats in Parliament agree to this timing for a referendum, when it is clearly designed to give the SNP as supposedly big an advantage as possible? They're hardly going to be so naive and irresponsible with something as important as this.
124

St.George,

02/03/2009 14:06:56
It's quite amazing how the nats seized on this,they are in total desperation,but yet again will be disappointed! oh dear how sad.
125

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 14:09:58
154, We'll the poster I was replying to clearly was given he had just posted about Scotland's voice on the worldstage. Thats up to you though if you favour the 'ach we're just poor we put upon Scots what can we dae aboot it anyway' approach.

That kind of grand and noble thinking would have seen us taking a neutral stance in WW2 no doubt and left it to others to defeat fascism.
126

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 14:10:50
148 The Smug One,02/03/2009 Top of Form

Brown and Obama are busy designing a global economic blueprint to stave off a global recession, while Salmond is away prattling on about independence to a bunch of bemused yanks LOL.

Would this be what you were trying to refer to:

The team behind Barack Obama’s online campaign network has joined the fight against the privatisation of Royal Mail, The Times has learnt.
Campaigners say that they have gathered 30,000 e-mail addresses in a grassroots movement dedicated to defeating Lord Mandelson’s plan to sell off part of Royal Mail.
.
The Communication Workers Union (CWU), which represents postal workers, will reveal this week that its grassroots campaign is run by Blue State Digital, whose managing partner Thomas Gensemer oversaw Mr Obama’s slick online campaign. The move will pit the company, whose campaign has been praised widely by ministers, directly against the most senior figures in the Labour Party.

Blue State Digital has been asked to increase the e-mail database, to gather supporters at rallies and protests and to encourage them to write to their MPs and other members of government.

127

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 14:14:20
157 Presumably he wants the referendum in 2010 as the SNP were elected in 2007. I really don't think that the SNP can organise Labour's defeat at the polls(which will be self-inflicted) and the Tories return to Westminster rule to co-incide with the referendum do you ? These are simultaneous but unrelated events. I think you are naive if you expect the Tories fortunes to revive in Scotland. If that influences people's thinking, ie they don't want to be governed by a Party they don't like and didn't vote for, then they are more likely to vote yes, I agree. But you see that is kind of the point in being independent isn't it, so you can hardly complain about it.
128

Peter Curran,

Kirkliston 02/03/2009 14:17:35
Mike Russell was born in Kent, of Scottish parents, was educated in Scotland, lives in Scotland and works in Scotland. That Mr. Lachie Todd (#123) chooses to single out his place of birth for comments, rather than his career in Scotland and his published works says more about Mr. Lachie Todd than it does about Mike Russell.

In any case, since the SNP welcomes anyone who lives and works, or indeed, retires to Scotland as a full and equal citizen of our Scottish nation and as a member of the Scottish National Party, should they so choose, there would be no irony whatsoever in their campaigning for, and contributing to an independent Scotland.

Bashir Ahmad MSP died in Glasgow on 6 February 2009, aged 68. He came to Glasgow in 1961, made his life in Scotland, and made a notable contribution to our nation during that life.

Only a very mean spirit indeed could take the view that it is "ironic" that those born outside of Scotland work for its freedom. What is really ironic is that native-born Scots fail to support the argument for that independence and campaign against it.

http://moridura.blogspot.com
129

Geomac 1,

Scotland 02/03/2009 14:17:51
# 155 and 156
Why is it that when you claim to want civilised debate, you immediately use personal insulting terms to challenge perfectly reasonable points/questions?
I thought that this was the Scostman site and not an SNP one - but it surely loks like it has been taken over for partisan and questionable politics!!
130

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 14:18:25
163, No you're absolutely right the timing is purely coincidental LOL. It doesn't take a genius or a great amount of foreplanning to figure out what is likely to happen at the next election.

I think there should be a referendum to put this matter to bed, but not one timed to best suit the SNP's agenda. If they want it that way they'd better win a majority of seats next time out.
131

Sanny,

02/03/2009 14:22:31
111 bully wee alba,Edinburgh 02/03/2009 11:15:23
Thank you! I stand corrected. Nonetheless the sentiment remains valid.
132

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 14:24:12
159 sm753,02/03/2009 14:09:04

Try again balloon, when was the last time the Northern Ireland local government tax revenue last revised and reformed?

What effect do you think thank that projections made in 2003 may have altered since then?

Do you realise the effect of the recession upon property values?

Can you count?
133

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 14:26:55
167, We shall see how things go in Eire over the next few years its not looking to rosy though at the moment though.

No point really, just always wondered why you Scottish discredited and backward political ideology Party stooges are so keen for Scotland to be more like Eire. Didn't the Scottish discredit and backward political ideology Party make overtures to the Nazi's in WW2?
134

,

02/03/2009 14:27:43
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
135

ochone,

Sauchie, Clacks 02/03/2009 14:28:59
Even more interesting than what unionists put in their posts nowadays, (yes I know anything would be, but stick with me), is what they leave out.

Once again we have the usual unionists suspects sounding off, this time on the subject of a referendum, yet none of them mention, (and not for the first time), that there is nothing to prevent westminster holding a referendum any tine it wanted to, it could even rigg, er, choose the question/s to be asked.

So could one of them, some of them or even a committee of them tell us why that hasn't happened and also explain why it is not going to happen, what does westminster fear it might lose?

After all they have experience in rigging, er sorry, running Scottish referendums.
136

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 14:29:34
166 so did the SNP deliberately not win previous elections to the Scottish Parliament so they could wait for the Tories to get back in ?
137

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 14:32:11
174, no they didn't win previous elections because Labour wasn't so shockingly unpopular as they are now.
138

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 14:34:50
174, though maybe you're right because I don't recall them pulling the 'Alex Salmond for first minister' stunt the last time he was leader LOL.
139

Sanny,

02/03/2009 14:34:58
113 Rulesbutnotrulers,Federation, not separation 02/03/2009 11:26:47

You keep waffling on about a Federation but, apart from you, no-one else seems interested. Is there a political movement calling for this? If not you should start your own party “The UK Federation Party” then you would have some justification for beating your gums on the subject in these columns. You could even stand for election, along with the Monster Raving Loony Party! Personally I think such a party would comprise you and a couple of other brain dead Anarchists.

Now give us peace an shut up about Federations!
140

ochone,

Sauchie, Clacks 02/03/2009 14:36:12
The SNP didn't make overtures to the nazis at anytime, although they (the Nazis), did have some support from the likes of some of the'higher classes' who were presumibly tory voters and also from the ex labour party member Oswald Mosley.

Nat's did get invloved in the war fighting against Hitler though. just like many unionists and folk of all party's and those who subscribed to no party at all!

Surprising that there are people who still don't know that.
141

Geoff,

sa 02/03/2009 14:53:03
177-Sanny- a Federal solution is a viable alternative to the present impasse and if the idea for such a structure were explained and diseminated widely I am quite sure it would attract considearble support. I am certain there are many Scots who would be happy with devolution max - retaining the historic links with their brothers and sisters in britain and ireland, in a Federal UK in which Defence,Foreign Affairs and other matters of mutual interest are handled by the fed government.
On the subject, as a Unionist I would support a referendum. This issue is not going to go away-the sooner opinion is tested publicly, the better. Also in general terms-not all Lab,Lib and Con supporters are necessaril diehard unionists and there are some SNP supporters who would support the nats to run scotland but dont necessarily back full independence. Little can be gleaned from polls generally, especially those testing Party support.
142

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 14:59:05
178,

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4161/is_20010513/ai_n14528553

Thats a bit embarressing!

Still maybe back then the more ugly sides of backward and discredited political ideologies such as Nationalism were less apparent. Good to see the SNP has put these alliances behind them.
143

Porty Nat,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 15:05:50
SM753 - you're tying yourself in knots.

"If my contract is actually with the Treasury, then what I've got is actually a Gilt. So why not just buy a Gilt and miss out all the mucking around with the Scottish bit?"

It's how you get the proceeds of that gilt sale to Scotland that people are talking about...

"So anything as you propose simply boils down to forcing the Treasury into even more borrowing..."

Of course it does. Unless the borrowing was to be done in the name of a Scottish Finance Ministry.

"If the Scottish Executive tries to sell me a "Scotbond" who is my contract with? If it's with them I'm not too interested, as they have no external revenues I can rely on."

It's a pretty safe bet that for so long as the present block grant system of funding remains (speed the day that it doesn't), then there's going to be a Treasury block grant coming to Scotland. Potential lenders can see the size of the block grant and compare it with the repayments needed.

A seperate revenue stream is clearly preferable, but is by no means necessary. Fiscal independence would deliver that, but there's no reason why a special borrowing facility financed using the topslicing mechanism couldn't work just fine.

"...with no long-term binding commitment that the Treasury would be able to recover that from Scotland."

The clue is in the word 'topslice'. Since the Treasury controls the block grant, it could also deduct such payments as it saw fit for the repayments of gilts obtained on behalf of the Scottish Government - unless you're suggesting that somehow, the Treasury isn't actually in control of monies it has yet to distribute?
144

Luigiana,

Aberdeen 02/03/2009 15:13:52
Michael McMahon: "A vote on a referendum on independence is not a matter of conscience and is not one where Labour would support a free vote."

MIND CONTROL?
145

Luigiana,

Aberdeen 02/03/2009 15:18:47
I'm not sure how the politics work hewre, but if the government offers a free vote, and Labour party refuse to allow their MSPs to "vote freely", then it is up to those members who feel strongly about this issue to defy the Labour whips. I wonder how much whip Labour would feel necessary to impose?

How about the LibDems - would Tavish Scott reign in his MSPs also? So much for freedom of thought.

Contrary to Michael McMahon's opinion, a vote on a referendum is a matter of conscience. It is a very important matter of conscience.
146

Sanny,

02/03/2009 15:23:41
First let me clarify my position; I am not a supporter of the SNP but I do support the drive to an Independent Scotland and the SEP policies are more to my liking.

For Scotland it is my opinion Federation would have been a viable option 300 years ago but not today. Scottish enterprise was badly and deliberately abused by England in cohort with Spain in order to force the Union upon us. This was done to protect England's back against an attack by the French, not for any financial reason.

In the UK today I cannot see how a Federation could work. If all four nation have an equal say then England would be justifiably aggrieved as the three smaller nations would have a combined wealth and population several times smaller than England. Any other arrangement would simply be a revamped Westminster system.

Far better to have four individual nations that recognise their interdependence and make multi or bi-lateral agreements between them as independent nations.

As I indicated previously that unlike both the Unionist and the Nationalist causes, there is no demand for a federal solution. So far as I am aware it does not figure in any of the political policies of any party.
147

ochone,

Sauchie, clacks 02/03/2009 15:40:01
Oh dear, how the mighty, (well in their own imaginations anyway), have fallen.

You always know that when any of our unionists chums starts to trot out SNP/nazi links rubbish, they are getting desperate.

Arthur Donaldson, whom those bastions of truth and justice, the special branch. 'alledged', (great word that). had hidden weapons in his house, was imprisoned, during a time of war for, now wait for it, six weeks!

Others of course have been shot for less.

Then there were the allegations, (does that make unionists alligators?) about other Nats of the time in talks with supporters of Hitlers regime.

No mention of course about who contacted whom first, although the cited article did also mention those well know hard line nationilists, The Church Of Scotland.

Alleged this, alleged that, well it was mentioned in a book, one of the problems here is that this would have requiered some type of conspirecy and we all know what we have been told by unionists about them, they don't exist.

So was anyone talking to the Nazi'z and making offers, well there are those who alledge that Mr Chamberline, even before the war began, was willing to offer Hitler such goodies as Malta etc, to prevent war, but there, it's all just allegations again.

What is certain of course is that Nat's like those of other party's died fighting Hitler, but why let a little thing like the truth get in the way of allegations.

Perhaps now some unionist/s who think they are clever will attempt to answer the question I raised earlier, they could even try another allegation if they liked.

148

European Scot,

02/03/2009 15:41:37
148 Smug

" Brown and Obama are busy designing a global economic blueprint to stave off a global recession.....

Who said Unionists live in their own little World ?!
If you seriously believe that Obama would want to taint the success of his start to the US Presidency by having his name linked closely with that of an unpopular, outgoing loser such as Brown, then your judgement, unlike Obama's, is seriously flawed.

184 Smug

" Still maybe back then the more ugly sides of backward and discredited political ideologies such as Nationalism were less apparent. "

British Nationalism, however is evidently quite acceptable, as people such as yourself continue to prove by supporting it.

Regarding your post, the word is embarrassing.
149

Masterpiece,

02/03/2009 15:44:24
I have never understood why anyone would be surprised at the SNP wanting to push for an Independence Referendum, indeed for them to do anything else and at the appropriate time would seem rather odd.

The main aim of the Unionist Parties is to stop this happening and as this is their stated aim why would they be expected to do anything else.

We realise that all parties play games with the electorate to try and show their supporters that they are in control and all the unionist parties are doing is to try and show how clever they are in this endeavour.
150

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 02/03/2009 15:45:41
The unionists have so little faith in Scots and Scotland. Deep down, they are terrified by independence, and why?

Because they think we are incapable, useless, too small. And they will attempt to scare the wits out of the scottish people, by playing to their worst fears. We must fight tooth and nail such a scaremongering shower of rogues.
151

Eve,

Scotland 02/03/2009 15:46:02
I wonder what my chances are, if I was to write to my nearst Labour MSP and ask them what their thoughts are on the subject matter and what way they would intend to vote. Also ask if there was any chances of them supporting the bill so we can have our Referdom. I wonder what kind of reply I would get!!!!


#58 tartangladbach: Whats the "Liberals"? Was unware such a party still existed!!!
152

Nevsky;,

Moscow 02/03/2009 15:58:05
Where is the 'bring it on' attitude of the unionsist from a few months ago?

I don't remember one unionist then being aginst the idea..now not one of them seems to be for it???

153

Nevsky;,

Moscow 02/03/2009 15:59:54
Does Wendy still want one?
154

St.George,

02/03/2009 16:02:26
194. We've still got it, unlike comrade salmond!
155

Eve,

Scotland 02/03/2009 16:04:08
"Labour is opposed to a referendum – even though it flirted with the idea during Wendy Alexander's brief leadership last year – as are the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats."

Is it just me how is sturggleing to get the sence out of the "-as are the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats"

Does it mean they are now flirted with the idea of the referdum or they were when Wendy was Labour's lead at holyrood!!!
156

Stan Butler,

02/03/2009 16:04:59

If indupondince is such a good idea why delay the referendum?

Why deny freedumb for the Scottish people? Good Scottish patriots will have gone to their graves in the time the SNP have been in office. Why prevent them from attaining their lifelong dream?

The referendum should have been held already. It should have been held within the first week of this parliament.


157

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 16:06:11
194, I think when they saw the bullying tone and anger in Salmond's voice 'you wouldn't dare etc' the day he was getting slated for dropping his local income tax promise was the final nail in the coffin. He forms a government on the back of 18% of the electorate voting SNP and he thinks he can bully the rest of Parliament into doing what he wants. How silly. The mask really slipped that day.

158

Eve,

Scotland 02/03/2009 16:06:14
#195 Nevsky;: She been very quite lately.

It's very likely she's like Jack sitting on the fence untill London Labour tells her what to say or do.
159

Sanny,

02/03/2009 16:06:45
183 Geoff,sa 02/03/2009 14:53:03

Sorry, my post at 188 was in response to your post captioned above.
160

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 16:08:46
198, Totally agree, if it wasn't about tactical advantage and trickery they'd have gone ahead and tried for a referendum as soon as they got elected. Why the wait?
161

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 16:11:43
192, thats a brilliant psyco-analysis you are of course completely correct. Every Unionist is exactly all the things you said there, sh*t scared of the dynamic visionary SNP with their 18% of the electorate backing!!
162

Sanny,

02/03/2009 16:15:09
May I remind Unionist posters and in particular the Socialist s in the Labour Party (if there are any left), That until 1955 when the Welsh Pratt Kinnock removed it, "Home Rule for Scotland" was a principle policy of the Scottish Branch of the Labour Party. In contrast the Tory's have always bee opposed and were at that time known as the Conservative and UNIONIST Party. Today it has become very difficult to tell the difference between these two parties except that the Labour party are no as clever at hiding their corruption.
163

Thomas79,

Ayrsahire 02/03/2009 16:16:02
The Smug One

You keep going on about 18% and how dare the Scottish Government(SNP) want to implement their policies. That 18%, if thats true, just happens to be more than any other party got.

You see in a democracy the largest party forms the government. You seem to think the opposition parties should run the country because if you join them all up, they form a majority. Madness.
164

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 16:16:25
190, The British Nationalist Party are a tiny sect with minimal support UK wide. BNP, SNP, Sinn Fein are the only real nationalist parties in the UK.
165

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 16:19:23
205, it is true im afraid, 32.7% of the vote and little over 50% turnout. The point is if you form a government on the basis of that you have to compromise to get policy through. You can't take grandstanding bullying tones and expect everyone else to do your bidding.
166

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 02/03/2009 16:27:32
The Smug One

I agree, and the SNP have compromised and worked closely with the reasonable Tories at Holyrood.

How can the SNP compromise with a party that changes its policies every month, we back a referendum, no wait a moment Wendy Alexander is mad, we don't actually back that.

Labour's only constant policy is reject everything the SNP proposes, and don't even bother suggesting alternatives.

As I said earlier, madness, but that probably explains why you back them.
167

TWC,

02/03/2009 16:31:23
142 Ewan Randall,
Why do you assume they Nats are the only people who want the referendum.
Aren't there a lot of us who want the referendum because it will include a far Stronger devolution.
Isn't it fare to let the people decide
168

TWC,

02/03/2009 16:31:55
fair I mean
169

Gussie Fink-Nottle,

02/03/2009 16:34:29
As many of our Unionist chums are fond of telling us now is not the time for a referendum we should stop wasting public money on such frippery. Do they agree that if this is case then they too must stop the Calman commission?
170

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 16:38:35
209,

The Labour Party is a joke, I don't back them. Why do all you nats assume every Unionist is a Labour supporter, its like the Labour Party is the big beast that must be slayed then the promised land will be reached is this drilled into you all or something?

The Labour Party is not the Union, even less than 18% of the electorate voted for them!

Labour is the main opposition I guess so they are likely to object to alot of SNP policy, but you don't need the Labour Party to get legislation through, you just need a majority.
171

European Scot,

02/03/2009 16:39:02
208 Smug

" The point is if you form a government on the basis of that you have to compromise to get policy through. You can't take grandstanding bullying tones and expect everyone else to do your bidding. "

Presumably that would also apply to setting out a timetable for a Referendum.
After all the SNP shouldn't be expected to bring forward their announced plans by 'the grandstanding bullying tones' of other Political groups expecting them to do their bidding.
172

Eve,

Scotland 02/03/2009 16:41:07
#204 Sanny: Thats all part of the brilantness of the internet. I belive.

It's a wonderful thing!!!
173

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 02/03/2009 16:44:10
213 The Smug One

Again I agree with you, the SNP absolutely need a majority.

After 2011, hopefully we will have one.
174

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 16:47:57
214 Who said they should bring it forward? Im not a Labour supporter and Im not bothered about defending the rantings of Wendy Alexander.

Setting out a timetable is fair enough but people are entitled to be sceptical of the timing and they are entitled to vote it down if they think it is sinister. Labour, Conservatives and Lib Dems did not promise a referendum in their manifesto's so they have no reason to vote for it.
175

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 16:49:09
216, good luck with that...
176

frank mcbride,

lusitania 02/03/2009 16:52:12
#170, Smog.

Wasn't it the Brit Royal Family, Ex-Labour ministers & Brit aristocracy that made overtures to Herr Hitler?

Or, am I mistaken???
177

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 16:53:58
217 Why should people be sceptical of the timing ? That was determined by the timing of the SNP's election. Your conspiracy theory is daft. And what is ''sinister'' about doing what you were elected to do ?

The unionist parties didn't promise a referendum and they would be entitled to vote against it, but the eelctorate would want to know why. Especially as all parties now agree that the constitutional position needs to be re-visited. So far, for all your posts, you haven't explained that one away.
178

pwd,

Borders 02/03/2009 16:53:59
# Thomas79

"You see in a democracy the largest party forms the government"

Perhaps, but 18% is hardly a mandate for independence, is it? It's not even a mandate for a referendum. In the last 'referendum' in 2007 the other 80% of the electorate showed no interest in independence.
179

The west awake,

Argyll 02/03/2009 16:54:23
Rules 138 - "One wonders why some people ARE so feart of including the Federal option? Even discussing it brings them out in hives."
I'm not wondering. Because for the Tories and Labour its almost as bad as Independence, which is why they must be jubilant that they managed to dupe the Libs into Calman, thereby effectively boxing the Libs and Federalism into a dark corner.
For the Natioanists, like me, its because its the one option which could beat Independence in a referendum.
Given the above, what baffles me is why the Libs have allowed this crazy situation to come into being. They have possibly the option most favoured by most Scots, yet what do they do to ensure the Scots get to have their say?
- Team up with Calman!!!

Go figure
180

Eve,

Scotland 02/03/2009 16:57:00
#208 The Smug One: Oh come on most of the people who don't use their vote don't care one way or the other cause if they did they would vote!!

The messeage is clear!!! Wither it's down to a lack of understandation or some other reason. They just don't care at that pertitcular moment in time.

Unless your adminting that you don't vote!!! And want to clarfy the reasons why you don't vote!!!

I'm aware that their has been a few people in the past who have had trobles acessing their vote due to lack of mobilty or other genune reasons BUT most just simple don't care.
181

Sanny,

02/03/2009 17:01:47
198 Stan Butler,02/03/2009 16:04:59

Obviously you didn’t read the SNP Manifesto wherein is was clearly stated that, rather than ask the country to risk an untried government with independence, the SNP said they would demonstrate their ability for a full term of the Parliament before asking the people to vote on the independence issue. Despite all the siren calls they have, quite rightly, stuck to their promise and now having shown promise in government they feel they can now go to the people at the end of this parliament and ask for the referendum.

Had the unionists been clever they would have shot the SNP fox by putting the referendum to the people during their last term of office. At that time the people had no knowledge of how an SNP might perform and may have been reluctant to take the chance. Now after a successful first term in government it will be more difficult to work the usual scare tactics.

The SNP have shown that they not only out perform the other parties in government they have also outperformed them on strategy.

For the record, whilst I support the drive towards independence I am not an SNP supporter.
182

TWC,

02/03/2009 17:02:53
221 pwd

This denial will help nobody, let's have the referendum and see what the people really think. Personally I like Fiscal Autonomy but if thta's not on offer I'll vote with the Nats. I certainly don't want another 50 Yeasr of Labour and living on pocket money.
I actually don't understand Labour, they have no chance of power in Westminster so with Fiscal Power in Scotland they could at least drive some socialist policies.
183

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 02/03/2009 17:03:19
221 pwd

The most recent poll would seem to disagree with your analysis, with 38% for and 40% against, thats hardly 80% against as you suggest.

Also, the referendum will ask about devolution max or even status quo. A lot of people are interested in further devolution short of independence.

The minority opinion in scotland is for the status quo, the question is how far does Scotland want to go. We won't know until the unionists get their finger out.
184

Stan Butler,

02/03/2009 17:07:32
#224 Sanny

That argument only makes sense if the Gnats plan for an indopindunt Scotland is a one party state governed by the SNP.

Otherwise of what relevance is an SNP administration in a devolved Holyrood?

What bearing does that have on how an indapundont Scotland would be governed?

185

Porty Nat,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 17:10:43
SM753 -

Where can they "see" it[the size of the block grant]?

The size of the spending allocation to Scotland is a matter of public record.

"Which clause of the Scotland Act defines the size of the grant, and what does it say?"

There isn't one. However, since Barnett allocates Scottish spending as a reducing proportion of equivalent spending in England, unless there were to be a drastic reduction in English spending, quantum of Scottish spending is always going to be reasonably predictable. It's certainly going to be many times in excess of any repayments required.

"Answer: it's section 64, and all it says is The Secretary of State shall from time to time make payments into the Fund out of money provided by Parliament of such amounts as he may determine.

How much reliance can a lender put on that?"

You're talking about the consolidated fund. If you're topslicing, the money which otherwise would have gone to the SoS simply stays at the Treasury, and isn't paid into the fund.

[Cont...]
186

Porty Nat,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 17:11:28
[...cont]

"And how would the commitment to make such deductions be made binding from one UK administration to the next?

Answer: it can't."

Binding schminding - the Treasury is in control of the funds going to Scotland, so can therefore deduct anything from the Scottish block grant that it sees fit, whether Holyrood likes it or not. That's what's 'binding' about it.

"And in any case, why should the Treasury allow the precedent of a subordinate administration forcing additional borrowing at UK level? If Edinburgh could do it, why not Cardiff, Belfast, London and Rutland?"

Why not indeed. I believe that Barnett council was considering a bond issue last year, and many local authorities already have prudential borrowing powers.

"The principle is that borrowing powers require independent revenues as a pre-requisite. Holyrood could be borrowing right now if it had exercised the SVR. Why not?"

Because it may see the SVR power as regressive, and may prefer to repay any capital lump sum by forgoing future expenditures, as you might with debt interest?

"In any case, I would bet that Calman will recommend a degree of revenue control. In that case some borrowing capability will follow naturally."

You may well be right. But there's nothing which says a topslicing arrangement can't be done, except for the the sort of mindset that says nothing must ever be done if its for the first time.
187

frank mcbride,

lusitania 02/03/2009 17:11:47
# AM2/sm753/Smog.

Why are you complaining about the SG's electoral mandate?

2005 - NuLab, 26.5% - Maj. 160+

NuLab FORCE through, and impose their policies on the majority.


2010 - ????????? - Maj. ?????????

But the same will apply, as 2005; a minority vote will dictate to the majority.

Why must you be so dishonest? Is it because, "the truth will set you free!!!".
188

Stan Butler,

02/03/2009 17:14:54
#204 Sanny


'until 1955 when the Welsh Pratt Kinnock removed it, "Home Rule for Scotland" was a principle policy of the Scottish Branch of the Labour Party.'


Kinnock looks well for his age. According to that he must be about 103.

What does 'Home Rule For Scotland' mean?

Does it mean

(a) Devolution or

(b) Indapindunce?

(Here's a wee clue to help you. The correct answer is (a) Devolution.)

Now either you didn't know that, it which case you're ignorant. Or you did, in which case you're dishonest.

So which is it?

Are you ignorant or dishonest?
189

Sanny,

02/03/2009 17:18:12
215 Eve,Scotland 02/03/2009 16:41:07

Yes Eve; the Internet is, as you say, Brilliant! I firmly believe it was crucial in getting the nationalist message across despite the best efforts of a hostile media to suppress them.

It is becoming more difficult for politicians to lie and get away with it. That is why politicians in all countries are trying to find ways of controlling the net and monitoring its users. It is becoming obvious that some Western countries including the UK envy the control exercised by China.

May I take this opportunity to congratulate you on your continued and much improved contributions? As I recall you were studying for higher qualification, I hope all went well.

Sanny
190

pwd,

Borders 02/03/2009 17:23:11
# 225 TWC

Agreed, I too don't want Labour, but I don't want to give up being British either.

#226 Thomas79

I'm talking about independence, not fiddling here and there with devolution. Nowhere at any time has any poll (which are not votes) or actual vote indicated anything other than a small minority in favour independence. SNP supporters will face this fact sometime I'm sure.

Meanwhile goodnight, I'm off to play bridge.
191

IainGlasgow,

02/03/2009 17:26:58
#14

It should be a bargaining point in any independence negotiations that the remainder of the UK inherit the UK debt if Scotland waives their right to claw back any oil revenue from the last 30 years.

In a sense tt would actually be a good deal for David Cameron (who will probably be PM by then) as the tories would be able to pin the blame for the country's (i.e. the remainder of the UK's) debt on the Labour party and keep them out of the running for a generation.
192

Arfur,

02/03/2009 17:27:09
#217 The Smug One - 'sceptical of the timing'???????? You do realise that the manifesto that the SNP put together for the 2007 election had this date in it. I.e. it was written about 2 years ago. Are you now saying that Alex Salmond can see the future and could tell that Brown and Labour would be so incompetent and useless and that the Tories would win in what like to be a land slide?
193

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 17:28:30
235 Nobody has asked the electorate directly whether they are in favour of independence, so none of us can state with any certainty what the outcome of any referendum would be. All we can do is speculate. But supporters of indpendence seem confident, and unionists do not. Read into that what you wish.
194

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 17:30:26
237 that does appear to be his argument, that Salmond had a cunning plan presumably based upon being able to tell the future. Given that is a remarkably stupid argument, you have to wonder what he thinks he has to be smug about.
195

Sanny,

02/03/2009 17:32:11
227 Stan Butler,02/03/2009 17:07:32

I’m sorry but your comment makes me wonder if you have any political nous at all!
Let me try to put this simply: - Should the Nationalist cause (not necessarily SNP only) win the day and Scotland becomes an independent country then all the EXISTING parties would still be standing for election to an Independent Scottish Parliament.

The SNP would initially continue, but I would think they would either change their name to, say the Scottish Democratic Party (or similar) or they would break up into their constituent parts. Remember the SNP contains elements from right across the political spectrum but with a common cause of seeing our country Independent.
196

Stan Butler,

02/03/2009 17:32:57
#189 ochone

A rather sanitised version of how the second world was was viewed by a significant minority of Scot Gnats.

Tell us about the Scottish Neutrality League and United Scotland.

Tell us about the gnats who refused to join up 'to fight for England'.

197

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 17:33:14
227 I doubt that the SNP plan a one-party state, given that they are democrats. But congragulations for working that in, based on the flimsiest of cues.
198

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 17:35:37
241 Have I stumbled into a history class by accident ? Why don't you comment on the story Stan instead of setting up diversionary sideline arguments.
199

arc of insolvency,

02/03/2009 17:36:00
The SNP are on your side? So instead of focusing on helping Scotland during these times(what they were elected to do) they pursue this self fulfiling exercise - independence referendum.

If the SNP want a mandate for this get more vote at the Scottish elections simple as. When are the people who vote against this rabble(by far the majority) wishes be respected to remain British?

Pursuing this just shows the SNP are only interested in themsleves.
200

Stan Butler,

02/03/2009 17:37:37
#240 Sanny


So an SNP administration at Holyrood is no indication of how an indepundint Scotland would be run.

Therefore the reason stated for delaying the referendum (to show what an indapindint Scotland would be like) is spurious.

So what's the real reason to delay the referendum?

201

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 17:39:22
237 - Yes I think he could guess that the Tories would regain power by then and probably that very year, not rocket science did anybody but the most blinkered Labour supporter think any differently. I have heard countless comentators predict this.
202

Stan Butler,

02/03/2009 17:43:08
#243 Observer

I am merely correcting a cyber gnat's attempt to airbrush history.

There has always been a sinister element within Scottish nationalism (like all nationalist movements). The period of the second world war was no exception as can be seen from how a significant minority of nationalists behaved.

The gnats denial of this aspect of their heritage should be of concern to everyone.
203

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 17:43:08
244 A remarkably silly post, you unionists are not having a good day.

The SNP were elected to pursue Scottish independence, so that is what they are doing. They would be remiss if they didn't pursue independence, as that is the contract they made with those of us who voted for them.
204

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 17:47:59
247 I don't believe the air-brushed version of WW2 history myself. There were lots of people for whom a close examination of their attitudes and behaviour would reveal certain very uncomfortable truths. I don't however assign any significance to that when examining the SNP as a modern European centre-left democratic party in the year 2009.
205

Sanny,

02/03/2009 17:51:01
233 Stan Butler,02/03/2009 17:14:54
Correction : - Memory failure
March 1956
Hugh Gaitskell declares that the Labour Party is opposed to home rule for Scotland. From the time if Keir Hardie until then, Home Rule had been part of the Labour Party manifesto.

Kinnock was a member but not leader of the Labour Party. I’m afraid Stan your arithmetic is as bad as your spelling!
206

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 17:51:20
219, The British establishment and people stood as one on this, bar a couple of misguided outcasts.

It is the SNP who had the rather more ambivalent position in relation to the Nazi's and fascism, 'England's weakness Scotland's opportunity' was not an uncommon position as im sure you know. It is a part of your history no point denying it.
207

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 17:53:13
247 Stan Butler02/03/2009 17:43:08


“I am merely correcting a cyber gnat's attempt to airbrush history.”

In that case would you care to revise how long you think Mike Russell has been on the back benches?
208

,

02/03/2009 17:56:00
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
209

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 17:56:08
250, SNP not a nationalist party then? Strange as they seem very fixated on concepts of nationhood, Scottish nation etc and there supporters come out with some very strange talk about 'english settlers' and are very antagostic to their political opponents to the extent of labelling them traitors/quislings etc. All seems very nationalistic to me...
210

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 02/03/2009 17:58:17
arc of insolvency

What about the scottish people? The vast majority in every poll shows they want their say, whether that be for the status quo, further devolution, or independance. They want a referendum.
But your telling them they can't because the SNP does not have a majority, in other words, they cant because the unionists will not let them.

Who supports a referendum - Scottish People, SNP
Who doesnt want the people to have their say - Labour, Tory, Lib Dems.

211

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 17:58:36
254, Where does implementing your manifesto promises come into this grand plan that is coming to fruition LOL??

You think that might be a problem at the next election?
212

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 17:59:56
256 it is a tribute to the great leader of Scotland!!
213

Sanny,

Upwey 02/03/2009 18:00:38
245 Stan Butler,02/03/2009 17:37:37

Stan I give up! It is obvious that your comprehension of the written word is as bad, if not worse, than your arithmetic and spelling; both subject which my 8 year old g/grandson could give you lessons.

I suppose given your poor educational standard and your lack of comprehension makes it difficult for you to understand the history of politics or indeed much else.
Bye
Sanny

214

Gussie Fink-Nottle,

02/03/2009 18:00:51
#247 Stan Butler

"There has always been a sinister element within Scottish nationalism."

I suppose you could say there has also been a Stalinist element in the Labour party, a Fascist element in the Tory party and a murderous element in the Liberal party. Strangely enough all three are still present in today's New New Labour party...
215

Stan Butler,

02/03/2009 18:00:54
#251 Sanny

Are you as really as stupid as you appear to be?

Home Rule means Devolution, D E V O L U T I O N, not Indapindunce.
216

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 18:01:48
255 If you could just post the section of the SNP's manifesto that talks about quislings and traitors and English settlers ?

You really can't make assumptions about a political party because of comments made on annewspaper web-site - no matter how hard you and others try.

217

Stan Butler,

02/03/2009 18:04:00
#250 Observer

Well so long as you don't object to me pointing out the truth about how a significant minority of gnats behaved during the second world war.



218

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 18:07:44
265 I think the key word in your post is minority Stan. But I have never objected to the truth being told, as long as it is set in context.
219

,

02/03/2009 18:08:15
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
220

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 18:14:57
263, the sheer amount of people that come out with it shows how many of you think that way.

264, They raison d'etre is nationalism just like the SNP. Horrible, ugly, warts and all nationalism.

Yes I get it, your a socialist/republican/nationalist/ all of the above who has a big chip on your shoulder about 'the Brits' and is about to make some gross moral inversion no doubt and tell us how evil and oppressive the big bad criminal/terrorist Brits are.

Your next post will be a cracker im sure...
221

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 18:16:18
266 LOL I knew it!
222

,

02/03/2009 18:17:45
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
223

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 18:18:12
269, And now the groundless 'bigot' slur! Whats next up your sleave!
224

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 18:20:58
266 Im well and truly baffled as to what the hell has the UVF got to do with any of this. I think you have sectarian issues.
225

St.George,

02/03/2009 18:22:09
The scots are anti English,the welsh are anti English,reason;they can't measure up,so they bring on the vile racsist cr=p! Let me tell you,England is so great because of her people,we work hard,take a whole load of cr=p from north of the border and still manage to put a smile on our faces!
226

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 18:23:45
278 - I have told you their raison d'etre is nationalism. There's nothing else to elaborate on.
227

,

02/03/2009 18:25:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
228

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 18:25:55
282, Only some Scots and Welsh are anti-English St George. There is not an anti-English bone in my body.
229

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 18:26:52
286, sleeve!
230

,

02/03/2009 18:27:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
231

,

02/03/2009 18:28:58
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
232

St.George,

02/03/2009 18:29:54
285. LOL, if the snp were the last political party on earth i wouldn't join such a billious party!
233

TWC,

02/03/2009 18:30:13
Just give us control of all our own revenues snd we'll run Scotland from Holyrood.
234

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 18:30:39
290, not greatly interested in the affairs of Northern Ireland, if a majority want to be British good for them.
235

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 18:31:28
292, plenty of Scots blood thanks.
236

,

02/03/2009 18:35:39
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
237

,

02/03/2009 18:36:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
238

,

02/03/2009 18:38:01
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
239

,

02/03/2009 18:38:41
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
240

,

02/03/2009 18:39:52
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
241

Sanny,

02/03/2009 18:40:58
252 The Smug One,02/03/2009 17:51:20

As someone who, in his youth, fought for “King and Country” although not in WWII I take the strongest possible exception to the words of this Cretin. He’s not Smug he’s and ar$ehole. I’m certain there are many Scots, who like my self lost friends and relatives fighting the Nazi menace, would like a quiet word with him.

You can stop this nonsense now. The actions you imply would have been considered as treason and in those non-PC days retribution would have been swift.


242

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 18:42:51
301, A fair number of Catholics support the Union I believe. Aren't the birth rates converging with the Catholic population growth slowing down somewhat to the extent that is may actually level off below the Protestant population?

Anyway, its up to the majority to decide what they want there, hopefully it remains peaceful.

LOL why am I a troll btw? Because i disagree with you? Is this an SNP board?
243

St.George,

02/03/2009 18:44:26
302. Are you a comedian! we spend billions on you each year, we save your sorry a=ses, we need you like a hole in the head! But,some one has to save you from your own incompetence.
244

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 18:45:41
309, There was a significant strand of the SNP who backed the nazi's accept it and the keyboard hardman act is absolutely pathetic.
245

,

02/03/2009 18:47:18
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
246

St.George,

02/03/2009 18:47:44
314. Because you do!
247

,

02/03/2009 18:49:46
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
248

,

02/03/2009 18:52:33
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
249

,

02/03/2009 18:58:11
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
250

,

02/03/2009 18:59:26
Comment Removed By Administrator
Reason:
251

St.George,

02/03/2009 19:00:48
319. Who!
252

St.George,

02/03/2009 19:04:28
330. Are you a twonker!
253

St.George,

02/03/2009 19:05:33
331. And that would be my problem how!
254

Ewan Randall,

02/03/2009 19:21:09
(#149) – (Alasdair mac Alasdair Mór Mac an Righ) – Didn’t you realize my question on where was the support on this site from other party supporters was to do with their support for a referendum?

Do you not feel as I do that as the SNP wish to hold a referendum on independence that they should agree on an interim set of proposals for a possible future constitution, so to give the Scottish people a clearer understanding of on what basis Scotland would be run?
255

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 19:22:13
330 LMFAO racist words!! Pathetic groundless slur! Whats racist about plastic paddy LOL? Why do you nats always resort to these racist/bigot slurs, I think its because you yourselves are these very things. Its a kind of accidental self awareness thing that erupts when you get angry.

Pathetic and very amusing see ya!
256

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 19:27:02
273 So in other words you can't, Smug. No surprise there then, you are obviously another one of these ''nationalism is wrong in any context so there'' posters, who in the absence of any rational argument to define your position resorts to making things up, based on comments on a newspaper web-site. Have you got a blog ?
257

Ewan Randall,

02/03/2009 19:30:52
(#210) – (TWC) – Why do you assume that I assume the nationalists are the only people who want the referendum?

What makes you believe a referendum would make a far stronger devolution?

Why would a referendum make a far stronger devolution?

Isn’t the reason why we are having this discussion on it being fair to let the people decide because not enough people decided to vote for the party who would have pushed a referendum through on their own?

Didn’t the people already decide?
258

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 19:32:33
335 Don't you think it would be up to the Scottish people to decide these things, not the SNP before there has even been a referendum ? But it would be nice to sidetrack them down that road wouldn't it. Let's see what other impediments to a referendum you could introduce - how about Scotland's future role in Europe, NATO, the future of the monarchy ? Except don't bother as these are things which can be decided democratically when we are running the show ourselves.
259

Grahamski,

Falkirk 02/03/2009 19:35:26
I voted Labour at the last Holyrood election and would be very disappointed if the Labour Party supported squandering public funds on a constitutional issue I regard as irrelevanrt. I suspect most Tory and Libdem voters feel the same way.
I have nothing more to add. It's just not that important to me.
260

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 19:36:39
338 Paddy is most definitely a racist word, to attach plastic to it is to add insult to injury by questioning the person's personal integrity. I have known fights to break out for less. Smug should be more careful in his use of racist and insulting language.
261

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 19:37:32
338, I believe the Irish themselves (thats people actally from Ireland) coined the term plastic paddy and frequently use it as a great source of amusement to themselves to describe those more Irish than the Irish types.

So you are talking utter jobby and are also lying, as I didn't call anyone a 'paddy' which is completely different and used as a mocking term for the Irish.
262

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 19:40:03
342, More slanderous rubbish from a nationalist, I see a trend here!

You're clearly an anti-English racist/bigot.

263

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 19:40:41
341 Grahamski says ''it's just not that important to me''. You could have fooled me ! But if you have got ''nothing more to add'', then goodbye and have a nice life.
264

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 19:43:24
344 Come off it you know fine well that ''plastic paddy'' is an insult, it suggests the person is a phoney, I wasn't joking I have known fights to break out about it's use. Would you call someone you'd never met that to their face in a bar ? You wouldn't be so smug if you did.
265

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 19:43:57
341, Unfortunately the rabid obsessive nationalists wont be able to relate to that at all im afraid. They don't realise they are really a quite small section of the electorate.
266

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 19:44:46
346 Another keyboard hardman what a loser!
267

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 19:46:13
346 An insult possibly but NOT racist or bigoted. Nice backtracking there...
268

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 19:52:39
349 you said ''perhaps you are one of those plastic paddy Irish nationalist types'' which qualifies as racist in my view (you assume the poster is Irish) and also insulting. But re-reading your posts I don't think you actually know what ''plastic paddy'' means.
269

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 19:57:06
344 On what basis do you assume that I am anti-English ? Don't you think you are being rather bigoted making that statement ?
270

bully wee alba,

Edinburgh 02/03/2009 20:13:43
I have asked this question before, but as yet have never received an intelligent answer.

Why are there no Unionists on here capable of coherent, rational, or at least semi-intelligent defence of their position?

Time after time they put up spurious reasons as to why they dislike Scotland, its institutions and its aspirations.

They tell us that after 300 years of Unionist rule, we are too poor, too stupid, too insular, have no industry and have no culture worth having,

And yet they defend this situation as something they regard as somehow being acceptable.

This is why we are chasing these clowns.

271

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 02/03/2009 20:15:46
No one seems to care what the people want, and they have made their views quite clear. They want a referendum.

The scottish government want one, the people want one. Why must we be held ransom by unionist dogma.

272

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 20:19:13
352 You ignore the somewhat salient point Smee that Gordon Brown has single-handedly been in charge at the Treasury since 1997. And as the man is a well known Stalinist control freak he had his hands on the driving wheel for the entire ride. It might suit some to assume a collective responsibility for this depression, but the reality is that he was the guy in charge and the buck stops with him.
273

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 20:21:50
356 to qualify that post, Brown is not of course responsible for the economic depression, but he is responsible for removing the brakes which were supposed to control the worst effects. Not Alex Salmond, not David Cameron, not whoever the Liberal guy is can't remember his name, but Brown and only Brown.
274

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 20:23:52
351, The same way you assume I am some kind of bigot/racist because I am a unionist, despite not saying anything that could remotely be described as such. I thought Id operate at your level to see how you felt about it!
275

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 20:25:54
350, Absolute rubbish! As the poster kept making strange posts about NI Unionists I suggested he may be one of these Scots who are very keen on Irish nationalist politics. I wasn't insinuating he was Irish, quite the opposite in fact!
276

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 20:31:39
359 ????? OK I was pulling your leg about the paddy thing, although not about it being an insult. I thought you would've guessed that. But I don't assume you are a racist or a bigot just because you're a unionist, I just think you are mistaken in your views. There is a temptation to fall into tribal lines here and just throw ridiculous insults at each other in lieu of argument. I think that's pretty boring really.
277

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 20:34:29
355, If the people are so desperate for a referendum then why didn't they vote in greater numbers for the party that was offering exactly that?

The SNP cares about what the SNP and its supporters want, you only need to look at the way Unionists are derided on sites like this to see that they couldn't give a monkeys what most Scots want.

For the party thats supposed to care about Scotland and the Scottish people the most, their supporters seem to have a major problems with the majority of their own countrymen because they don't happen to share their politics. Very strange.
278

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 20:35:20
361 It depends on the context really. If the use of the word is aimed at demeaning the person it is being applied to then all three can be racist.
279

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 02/03/2009 20:38:39
Cynicus in Exile

'Is it the case that you want to give the people what they want when their views coincide with your own?'

The people might reject independence, I still want them to have the referendum. So No, I dont just want to give them a say when they agree with me, but in all cases (unlike you).

As for my referendum policy, you should only have one when the constitution is effected, not judicial matters. I beleive this is also Tory/Labour policy on such things.








280

Hen Mc Stoorie,

Port William 02/03/2009 20:40:01
SM at 352

How much is the Calman commission costing?
281

Hugh Roscombe,

02/03/2009 20:53:09
I'd be happy for a referendum and bury this discussion for a generation whatever the result.

I'd also be happy (as in independista) for the SNP to drop the ludicrous alcohol nonsense. Yes there is a problem, but to go down this road is madness.

Yours, in his cups, Hugh.
xxx
282

Hugh Roscombe,

02/03/2009 20:54:06
sm (am)

Mellowing are we?
283

Hen Mc Stoorie,

Port William 02/03/2009 20:55:15
368


See story in Herald about PPP PFI (school playing fields)
284

Hugh Roscombe,

02/03/2009 21:01:04
I googled "You tube" earlier, but just keyed in "Tube." There was a reference to Red Tube. I wrongly assumed it was a socialist web site, so paid a call. It's filthy! Pure unadulterated porny stuff. I recommend you don't go there.

If however you do, be sure to delete your cookies.
285

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 02/03/2009 21:01:23
373 Cynicus in Exile

Sorry, I assumed by your question you were against. If you support one, happy to hear it, welcome to the club.

If not, my remark stands.

286

Thomas79,

Ayrshire 02/03/2009 21:06:07
374 Cynicus in Exile

One individual can not set up a referendum, it needs to be a government policy (either proposed by the governing party or forced upon them by the opposition parties). So No.
287

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 21:07:55
374 Personally Cynicus, I just want to get the situation sorted.

We have the Calman Commission, the national conversation, the debate over borrowing powers, Westminster grumbling about the Barnett formula, an imminent change of UK govt, and a depression looming that will rival 1929. I think we need some clarity here. Although my position is clearly in favour of independence I say let's just do it, have the referendum, accept the outcome, then we all know where we stand and can make plans accordingly for how we get outselves out of this horrible mess.
288

Hugh Roscombe,

02/03/2009 21:10:48
Back as Hugh. Evening all.
289

Hugh Roscombe,

02/03/2009 21:11:12
Night all.
290

Observer,,

Glasgow 02/03/2009 21:12:48
377 I would support including a question on ''do you think the moon is made of cheese'' if it gets us the referendum. Let's just get it.
291

Hugh Roscombe,

02/03/2009 21:17:44
Where's sam (Fake Melanthios Falkirk) [both bold]?
Hope he's not dead or worse.
292

G.Campbell,

02/03/2009 21:19:08
24 redcliffe62 & 33 Peter Curran, i'll have another go.

Our banks might be dodgy, but [sarcasm]Scotland clearly has the best journalists. Step forward Lorraine Davidson of The Times.[/sarcasm]

http://tinyurl.com/bvgwdr

"Alex Salmond is under renewed pressure over his links with Sir George Mathewson, [look closely]THE FORMER HBOS CHAIRMAN[/look closely]."
293

brownlie,

02/03/2009 21:33:52
279 sm753

Interested in your post saying that AM2 "seems" to post under his own name. "seems" would appear to be the operative word. Considering how devoutly unionist AM2's posts are it is difficult to see some-one so opinionated only giving us the benefit of his wisdom a few times over the past month. I notice that a lot of "new" posters on here seem to know a lot about the old lags who retain their own monikers throughout.

Incidentally I note that the Times on-line reports that the CBI are backing SFT.
294

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 21:46:49
Observer: ' But I don't assume you are a racist or a bigot just because you're a unionist, I just think you are mistaken in your views.'

And therein lies the difference. Such astounding arrogance. I don't automatically assume you are mistaken because you support Scottish independence. You could well be misguided in your beliefs but I don't assume that either, I just assume that is your preference which is up to you.

But the nationalists never afford Unionists the same, we are always brainwashed/traitorous/stupid/misguided/bigoted/WRONG and so on. It really does you nats no credit whatsoever, and I imagine it turns off alot of neutrals who are undecided on the constitutional question.
295

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 21:54:20
384

LOL I know you alot of nationalists really struggle to accept that so many people are unionist and like to indulge in denial and conspiracy theorising to explain it, but to assume that all Unionist posters are the one person is hilarious. I have been accused of being AM2 several times today I have no idea who this is!
296

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 21:56:43
Well done Spook you got my post removed your a real hero!
297

brownlie,

02/03/2009 21:57:58
386 The Spook

I've booked an optician's appointment for your mum.

AM2's blog only gets a few sycophantic comments nowaday - it's all a trifle sad how down-hill things have gone since the halcyon days of Alfred E and Highland Mighty.
298

brownlie,

02/03/2009 21:59:29
390 Smug

No, that's not the way it works - if YOU post offensively then it gets removed.
299

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 22:01:13
You're the only one who thinks it is racist lol. I don't wish to converse with a horrible bigot such as yourself. You're full of hate and bitterness, its ugly and quite sad. Night, night!
300

brownlie,

02/03/2009 22:02:52
388 Smug

If you're as new as your name suggests what makes you think I'm a nationalist and not a neutral observer?
301

brownlie,

02/03/2009 22:05:53
393 The Spook

Will you stop that swearing or I'll tell your mum!!
302

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 22:09:05
395 The paranoid, conspiratorial nature of your post is a big giveaway!
303

brownlie,

02/03/2009 22:11:24
399 The Smug One
Don't let silly postings like that over-ride valid points you may have to make.
304

The Smug One,

02/03/2009 22:13:34
398, Good I am most glad. Night losers!
305

RufusT-Firefly,

02/03/2009 22:28:00
I wonder if Observer has beaten up anyone today yet?

Probably not or she would be on here boasting about it.
306

RufusT-Firefly,

02/03/2009 22:34:08
Not bad.

Been busy at work so was unable to provide my normal intelligent political insight to these pages.

Looking at the quality above, I can see I have been badly missed.

;-)
307

RufusT-Firefly,

02/03/2009 22:44:47
Spook, did you see Barcelona game on Sky yesterday?

Followed by Villareal?

They showed Scottish football up for what it really is..............absolute dross.
308

brownlie,

02/03/2009 22:45:00
407 Rufus

Greetings, Rufus, - "normal, intelligent political insight"? - who has been faking you for the past few months then??

Are you feeling yourself, again?
309

brownlie,

02/03/2009 22:46:05
410 Rufus

You go to the wrong games - come to think of it, so do I!
310

RufusT-Firefly,

02/03/2009 22:51:19
Spook, we even lost the Elephant Polo recently!

The elephants were depressed because Alex Salmond was giving them a bad name.
311

brownlie,

02/03/2009 22:52:16
Now that SM753 has retired to his blog, a gloomy, dark and lonely place, I'm away as well.

Oidche mhath, girls!
312

RufusT-Firefly,

02/03/2009 22:53:57
Good Evening Brownlie.

I have Sky, Setanta (Blueray haha) you name it.

I watch a lot of the games.

Scottish football is worst. English not far behind it for entertainment.

Spanish football wipes the floor with both of them.

2 games last night and 11 goals.

Mainly top notch goals as well.

313

RufusT-Firefly,

02/03/2009 22:56:28
You are easily shocked then.
314

RufusT-Firefly,

02/03/2009 23:06:40
Spook

Yes German football is superb as well.

I am normally out on a Friday though.

What about HoffenHeim?
315

RufusT-Firefly,

02/03/2009 23:15:23
Spook, yes I know the football forum you are on.

http://hotscotsfc.com/
316

RufusT-Firefly,

02/03/2009 23:33:37
Spook, aye exactly.

On the 29th of March they are playing the Brighton Bandits.

Once Wardog hears about that he will be camping out for tickets!

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
 
  

 
 


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.