Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
"I was getting tired of ignorance from voters who didn't really know what they wanted or why but had so much passion."
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
All those No voters are seeing those promises disappear before their eyes.
Salmond resigns like a champ.
Scottish people betrayed by the media.
This is not the end!
Kind of looks like it is.
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
the poor who will suffer, and for Scotland when Westminster's empty promises turn out to be...empty.
Cameron can and will deliver on his promises of greater devolution. He wants to go the wghole hog and bring our devolution for all the UK including getting rid of the West Lothian question.
It was Salmond who could not deliver on his promises but made them anyway.
But for those Yes people still wanting to fight on, here's one of my favourite historical examples of never giving up: <snip>
Gong to put my foot down hard on this one
This is not 1776, not a colonial situation and TERRORISM IS NOT AN ANSWER.
The last thing anyone wants is for some braindead moron, whether you or someone else, deciding that if you cant win iScotland at the ballot box, try it with the gun.
FFS grow a brain before its too late.
I'm not going to resort to insults (probably because the mods will open up a can of whoop-ass on me )
and I apologise for the caps BUT I AM NOT ADVOCATING TERRORISM!!
I am disgusted by the insinuation. To be fair to you, you don't know me, and an internet forum is not the best place to convey a conversation, but I was using George Washington as a historical example of never giving up. I was not advocating violence.
We lost the argument. But that argument can only be won in a fair and democratic vote. That's what I've always believed in. Washington bounced back. My point is that the SNP/YES can also bounce back.
Also, you're wrong about the promise of extra powers. It's already unravelling. Miliband and Cameron are disagreeing already, and Tory backbenchers are murmouring discontent. Scotland was wrong to trust that bunch. Scotland will rue the day it voted no.
All those No voters are seeing those promises disappear before their eyes.
Salmond resigns like a champ.
Scottish people betrayed by the media.
This is not the end!
Kind of looks like it is.
Never! Never! Never!
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/19 17:14:59
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Now is it you're looking for absolute independence or something more akin to a state/federal system like the US?
-"Wait a minute.....who is that Frazz is talking to in the gallery? Hmmm something is going on here.....Oh.... it seems there is some dispute over video taping of some sort......Frazz is really upset now..........wait a minute......whats he go there.......is it? Can it be?....Frazz has just unleashed his hidden weiner dog from his mini bag, while quoting shakespeares "Let slip the dogs the war!!" GG
-"Don't mind Frazzled. He's just Dakka's crazy old dude locked in the attic. He's harmless. Mostly."
-TBone the Magnificent 1999-2014, Long Live the King!
Frazzled wrote: Now is it you're looking for absolute independence or something more akin to a state/federal system like the US?
My preference is total independence. A federal UK will happen on the same day America repeals the 2nd amendment, Texas declares Obama's birthday to be a state holiday, and Jimmy Hoffa's body is discovered
Westminster will kick the Scotland issue into the long grass for at least 10 years. Already Miliband (Labour leader) has back tracked on promises...and it's only been a day passed!
As I said to people, so long as Scotland threatened to vote Yes, it had a major bargaining chip. It's voted No, so it's like a poker player with no cards, a hostage taker with no hostages, a car with no petrol...you get the idea.
I'm thinking of emigrating. Maybe we could end up as neighbours?
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
1. Russel Brand is and always was a shock comic after free publicity, not public interest, and he doesnt care how much mischief he makes to get it.
There was a free and open vote, the police did their job and let scrutiny occur and the press to monitor freely.
Complaining against a democratic decision just after it was made, and raising contentious issues to do so is entirely counterproductive to the common good, and entirely Russel Brand.
'Westminster Fear' was in fact Spanish 'fear' - no EU membership, Bank of England 'fear' - no currency union. Both for good reasons.
Most of the rest was questioning Salmond's figures and claims, which an opposed view is expected to do.
As for media Bias, there was a lot of pro-Yes press even in UK papers. The Guardian was full of 'Yes' editorials.
The BBC was biased, but the BBC always is, it belongs to the Labour party.
2. "This is not the End."
I hope Frazzie is right and it is.
Your only option now is to pick up a gun, and rally fellow Scots to your 'cause'. I really hope after democracy has spoken in a ballot of all living in Scotland aged 16+ you will allow Democracy to have the fiknal word and accept the vote.
You can be damn sure if there was a Yes vote those who wanted Union would have no way back given to them either.
That being said you had your say yesterday, such a referendum should not and will not happen again for a long time. If you are disappointed with the result you have some sympathy from me. Were I a Scottish nationalist i would be bitter today also.
But despite mishandling by Better Together that were outmaneuvered on the issue, to which I have to credit Alex Salmond, the Saltire does not belong to the SNP. The Saltire was claimed by the Yes campaign, but it is not actually a Yes symbol, it belongs to Scotland and all in Scotland, both those who wanted Union and those who would be without.
You have every reason to be proud to be Scottish, and you need not love Westminster. Neither do I, and I do honestly believe that you will get your promised devolution, for a start it is the best way forward for everyone and there is support for Federalism south of the border too.
Things are changing for the better either way. The referendum has shaken London, and London needed shaking.
Had Devo Max been given as an option from the start it would have been overwhlemingly accepted. I am glad the referendum was Yers/No with Devo Max offered on the side, as it allows the question of independence to be put to you properly. Fair and square. This has been done.
I cannot say for certain that Scotland would have not been detter off independent, all I can say is that Salmond's promises did not add up. Under different leadership you may have had a better thought through campaign.
However I can say that rUK would have been finished. France was waiting for this was was Russia, and Argentina We would have lost the Falklands, remaining overseas oil assets and the clout coming from them, and very likely our seat in the UN Security Council and London's primacy in the Stock Exchange. All of which are cruciallyneeded for the nations economy, and looked at with envy by those who would pilfer them from us while we are weak. Thanks to the No vote we will still be the United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland and have the right to remain on the UN security council, and will now those benefits will still be there for the UK long after the North Sea oil runs out.
After all was said and done my homeland could have been ruined yesterday, and that ruin could not have been rweversed. No matter all the benefits or dangers for Scotland, for England it would have been the end.. Still for all those dangers I aand fellow Englishmen had no vote whatsoever on this issue. And frankly we were OK with that. But now with the storm passing it is proper for us to ask that you accept our offer of Unity, a fairer devolution for all in the UK, with devolution for England, Stormont and Cardiff also. And recognise that the privilege of the referendum agreed was run by Scottish Government according to their own timetable and was fair, free and FINAL.
This message was edited 3 times. Last update was at 2014/09/19 18:06:46
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Westminster will kick the Scotland issue into the long grass for at least 10 years. Already Miliband (Labour leader) has back tracked on promises...and it's only been a day passed!
Citation needed.
Not attacking you as such, I just have no idea what you're talking about. What specific promises have Cameron et al reneged on? Its been less than a day, isn't it too early to call whether or not those promises will be kept?
Orlanth wrote: 1. Russel Brand is a gobshite comic after free publicity, not public interest,
There was a free and open vote, the police did their job and let scruutiny occur and the press to monitor freely.
Complaing against a democratic decision just after it was made, and raising contentious issues to do so is entirely counterproductive to the common good, and entirely Russel Brand.
'Westminster Fear' was in fact Spanish 'fear' - no EU membership, Bank of England 'fear' - no currency union. Both for good reasons.
Most of the rest was questioning Salmond's figures and claims, which an opposed view is expected to do.
As for media Bias, there was a lot of pro-Yes press even in Uk papers. The Guardian was full of 'Yes' editorials.
The BBC was biased, but the BBC always is, it belongs to the Labour party.
2. "This is not the End."
I hope Frazzie is right and it is.
Your only option now is to pick up a gun, and rally fellow Scots to your 'cause'. I really hope after democracy has spoken in a ballot of all living in Scotland aged 16+ you will allow Democracy to have the fiknal word and accept the vote.
You can be damn sure if there was a Yes vote those who wanted Union would have no way back given to them either.
That being said you had your say yesterday, such a referendum should not and will not happen again for a long time. If you are disappointed with the result you have some sympathy from me. Were I a Scottish nationalist i would be bitter today also.
But despite mishandling by Better Together that were outmaneuvered on the issue, to which I have to credit Alex Salmond, the Saltire does not belong to the SNP. The Saltire was claimed by the Yes campaign, but it is not actually a Yes symbol, it belongs to Scotland and all in Scotland, both those who wanted Union and those who would be without.
You have every reason to be proud to be Scottish, and you need not love Westminster. Neither do I, and I do honestly believe that you will get your promised devolution, for a start it is the best way forward for everyone and there is support for Federalism south of the border too.
Things are changing for the better either way. The referendum has shaken London, and London needed shaking.
Had Devo Max been given as an option from the start it would have been overwhlemingly accepted. I am glad the referendum was Yers/No with Devo Max offered on the side, as it allows the question of independence to be put to you properly. Fair and square. This has been done.
I cannot say for certain that Scotland would have not been detter off independent, all I can say is that Salmond's promises did not add up. Under different leadership you may have had a better thought through campaign.
However I can say that rUK would have been finished. France was waiting for this was was Russia, and Argentina We would have lost the Falklands, remaining overseas oil assets and the clout coming from them, and very likely our seat in the UN Security Council and London's primacy in the Stock Exchange. All of which are cruciallyneeded for the nations economy, and looked at with envy by those who would pilfer them from us while we are weak. Thanks to the No vote we will still be the United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland and have the right to remain on the UN security council, and will now those benefits will still be there for the UK long after the North Sea oil runs out.
After all was said and done my homeland could have been ruined yesterday, and that ruin could not have been rweversed. No matter all the benefits or dangers for Scotland, for England it would have been the end.. Still for all those dangers I aand fellow Englishmen had no vote whatsoever on this issue. And frankly we were OK with that. But now with the storm passing it is proper for us to ask that you accept our offer of Unity, a fairer devolution for all in the UK, with devolution for England, Stormont and Cardiff also. And recognise that the privilege of the referendum agreed was run by Scottish Government according to their own timetable and was fair, free and FINAL.
I disagree with 99% of what you've been saying about the referendum, but I do agree with you on this: I would NEVER pick up a gun, or encourage others to do so, for Scottish independence. Never...
I will continue to campaign peacefully and democratically for Scottish independence for as long as I live. You may think or hope, the independence question is dead for years, but I hope and will push, for another referendum ASAP It's my democratic right to campaign for that, as it is yours to campaign against it. At least we're agreed on something
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Milliband said that he can't support the pledge to give more power to Scotland because the issue of giving more power to England should take the forefront (or something to that effect). Alex Salmond responded by rubbing his hands and saying "told you". The whole notion of "powers" came across as rather vague and last minute to start with, with the three parties backing it in a rather ad hoc manner. As nothing was written in stone, rather the whole thing was just a way of attracting people to the No campaign, there's nothing stopping Westminster from retracting this pledge bar the Scottish electorate (and those in N Ireland and Wales who also are asking for similar powers). Even if these powers were to be granted the extent of them is rather vague, so Westminster can do as they please and still say they held up their end of the bargain (though like I said, like hell that won't piss off a load of people).
Still go ahead and screw over Scotland all you like. Salmond's successor has every right to hold another referendum at their discretion, and maybe a couple of years under a Conservative/UKIP government will swing more people to the Yes side. Expect for the smear campaign of the media, and general back handedness of Westminster to carry on then though (any notion of inquiries into press ethics during this campaign, particularly on the part of the BBC, are going to be swept under the rug naturally).
Westminster will kick the Scotland issue into the long grass for at least 10 years. Already Miliband (Labour leader) has back tracked on promises...and it's only been a day passed!
Citation needed.
Not attacking you as such, I just have no idea what you're talking about. What specific promises have Cameron et al reneged on? Its been less than a day, isn't it too early to call whether or not those promises will be kept?
Well, on the 19th, parliament was supposed to meet and pass a motion on it. It's printed all over the leaflets the NO camp published for their extra powers timetable.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Westminster will kick the Scotland issue into the long grass for at least 10 years. Already Miliband (Labour leader) has back tracked on promises...and it's only been a day passed!
Citation needed.
Not attacking you as such, I just have no idea what you're talking about. What specific promises have Cameron et al reneged on? Its been less than a day, isn't it too early to call whether or not those promises will be kept?
Labour hasn't back tracked on promises, they were outmaneuvered by Cameron (a Tory first since before Blair came to power). They do NOT want English devolution (symbolised by having only English MP's able to vote on issues relating to England only.) This is entirely fair, MP's from all over the Uk will vote on UK issues, but Scots get their devo max, as will Wales and Northern Ireland. However there is no need for an English parliament, instead the House of Commons remains an English parliament, but on days discussing laws that are for England only and devolved out to the rest of the UK it is only right and proper that only English MP's get to vote on them.
This prevents the much reviled 'West Lothian question', symbolised when Scottish MP's could vote to give Scotland a benefit and at the same time save money by denying the English the right to the same benefit. There were MP's who voted for free tuition in Scotland but against for England and Wales, because there was no point in allowing the spending as it wasn't benefiting Scots.
Labour however are against this because they rely on Scottish MP's to press through issues not relating to Scottish MP's. By having those MP's voting rights reduced to only covering Uk interests and those not devolved to Scotland Labour will have to try a lot harder to force legislation on the English by pressing Scottish MP's to do the job for them. And that was something Blair did a lot of.
English devolution is fair for the English, its balanced as devolution for all makes sense and will make society fairer. Instead of Westminster alone power will be shared at a national level from Stormont, Holyrood, Cardiff and Westminster for each component with UK issues foreign policy and international issues dealt with as normal by Westminster but with full representation of Welsh Scottish and Irish MP's who may indeed be the ones in charge ass we don't discriminate on these grounds. I have no problems seeing a Scot in 10 Downing Street, that that Scot will have FAR more power nationally and internationally than an iScotland President would.
Labour are caught in a loop as they talk about making society fairer, yet want to abort devolution for England. And this is after Labour agreed to Devo Max (this was why Cameron waited to get Clegg and Miliband on board it now seems) then hit them with a whammy which means that England gets devolution too. I didn't see this coming, and it appears Miliband didn't either.
Clegg has already agreed to back Devo Max for the whole UK. So Cameron has enough votes to force the issue now, especially if he links all the Devo Max elements together in one bill and uses the PM Veto to force the vote to a ballot so that Labour cannot talk it out* Cameron even has authority to do so as he has a time relevant promise to Scotland to keep and if Labour talks it out he can blame Milliband for breaking his promise to Scotland.
This has severely outmaneuvered Labour, if they disagree they break their promise to Scotland and look like control freaks to the English. If they let the vote pass Labour will have to pas English laws with Englsh MP's and that will be difficult even if they win a landslide like in 1997 as no matter how well they do they can't fully replace the Tory rural vote.
*Known elsewhere as a filibuster.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2014/09/19 18:00:42
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Westminster will kick the Scotland issue into the long grass for at least 10 years. Already Miliband (Labour leader) has back tracked on promises...and it's only been a day passed!
Citation needed.
Not attacking you as such, I just have no idea what you're talking about. What specific promises have Cameron et al reneged on? Its been less than a day, isn't it too early to call whether or not those promises will be kept?
Labour hasn't back tracked on promises, they were outmaneuvered by Cameron (a Tory first since before Blair came to power). They do NOT want English devolution (symbolised by having only English MP's able to vote on issues relating to England only.) This is entirely fair, MP's from all over the Uk will vote on UK issues, but Scots get their devo max, as will Wales and Northern Ireland. However there is no need for an English parliament, instead the House of Commons remains an English parliament, but on days discussing laws that are for England only and devolved out to the rest of the UK it is only right and proper that only English MP's get to vote on them.
This prevents the much reviled 'West Lothian question', symbolised when Scottish MP's could vote to give Scotland a benefit and at the same time save money by denying the English the right to the same benefit. There were MP's who voted for free tuition in Scotland but against for England and Wales, because there was no point in allowing the spending as it wasn't benefiting Scots.
Labour however are against this because they rely on Scottish MP's to press through issues not relating to Scottish MP's. By having those MP's voting rights reduced to only covering Uk interests and those not devolved to Scotland Labour will have to try a lot harder to force legislation on the English by pressing Scottish MP's to do the job for them. And that was something Blair did a lot of.
English devolution is fair for the English, its balanced as devolution for all makes sense and will make society fairer. Instead of Westminster alone power will be shared at a national level from Stormont, Holyrood, Cardiff and Westminster for each component with UK issues foreign policy and international issues dealt with as normal by Westminster but with full representation of Welsh Scottish and Irish MP's who may indeed be the ones in charge ass we don't discriminate on these grounds. I have no problems seeing a Scot in 10 Downing Street, that that Scot will have FAR more power nationally and internationally than an iScotland President would.
Labour are caught in a loop as they talk about making society fairer, yet want to abort devolution for England. And this is after Labour agreed to Devo Max (this was why Cameron waited to get Clegg and Miliband on board it now seems) then hit them with a whammy which means that England gets devolution too. I didn't see this coming, and it appears Miliband didn't either.
Clegg has already agreed to back Devo Max for the whole UK. So Cameron has enough votes to force the issue now, especially if he links all the Devo Max elements together in one bill and uses the PM Veto to force the vote to a ballot so that Labour cannot talk it out* Cameron even has authority to do so as he has a time relevant promise to Scotland to keep and if Labour talks it out he can blame Milliband for breaking his promise to Scotland.
This has severely outmaneuvered Labour, if they disagree they break their promise to Scotland and look like control freaks to the English. If they let the vote pass Labour will have to pas English laws with Englsh MP's and that will be difficult even if they win a landslide like in 1997 as no matter how well they do they can't fully replace the Tory rural vote.
*Known elsewhere as a filibuster.
Not all Scottish MPs vote on English matters. SNPMPs don't as a matter of principal.
I think you're being naïve about more devolution for Scotland. Scotland said no, Westminster doesn't care about it anymore. The possibility of a YES vote was their only ace - they threw it away. They have nothing to threaten Westminster with, anymore. As for Westminster, they've got bigger fish to fry with UKIP, EU referendum, and Boris Johnson! Scotland will be forgotten about, left to die of neglect. It happened during the 1980s. History will repeat itself...
As for Labour, I think they are finished in Scotland.
"Our crops will wither, our children will die piteous
deaths and the sun will be swept from the sky. But is it true?" - Tom Kirby, CEO, Games Workshop Ltd
Well I was harassed by a pair of skinheads (WTF is with neo-nazis in the UK and adopting American neo-nazi symbols. 88's are so last year) riding a car covered in Union Flags last week. =P
Heh, but its not as if there aren't Fascists all over the place in the UK. One of the former student representatives at my college was even called "Nazi Paul" (why's he called Nazi Paul?" Uh, because he's a nazi and nobody can take him seriously...).
The possibility of a YES vote was their only ace - they threw it away. They have nothing to threaten Westminster with, anymore. As for Westminster, they've got bigger fish to fry with UKIP, EU referendum, and Boris Johnson! Scotland will be forgotten about, left to die of neglect. It happened during the 1980s. History will repeat itself...
....However it is in Camerions interest to fulfil his promise, Emnglisgh deolution is important to the Tories and Lib Dems.
Even if it wasnt it would be a monumentally stupid thing to renege on the pledge now. As Camerion promised Devo Max to Scotland during the referendum campaign, if he fails to deliver on this one promise that will be cause to forfeit the result of the campaign. I can see the demand: 'Cameron didn't offer what he promised Scots in the referendum therefore we demand another referendum!"
While the SNP will demand referenda anyway that can be written off as just the Loons talking, it will be an annual event. Westminster has largely butted out of the process, and made only one promise to Scotland related to the referendum, they made the promise freely and all three parties signed it. It would be colossally stupid to back out now.
Put it another way, if the Tories through short sightedness (and admittedly all the parties are they are greedy and short sighted) it will destabilise a now stable system. If one poll could cause a huge dip in the pound and a panic in the Square Mile. What would a new referenda based on a broken deal do. For a start Yes would likely win and second the City will lose a LOT of money very quickly, and more as foregn govenmenrt smell blood in the water and take what we have got.
Those people in the City don't like to lose money and both Labour and Tory are beholden to them, for better or worse. And while politicians may be short sighted, these investors are not.
On a point of real politik even if we assumed that the MPs are greedy (which is true), short sighted (usually true) and idiotic (sometimes true) they like thier own jobs enough and the people in the City like London's wealth enough that realpolitik will force the issue: Scotland will get its election promise, Cameron's own financial backers will demand it.
Believe that not because the politicans say so (its wise of you not to) believe it because the future of the UK economy requires it, and the City millionaires that account for the vast majority of the economic clout this nation has got (Scottish oil being a distant second) will demand it.
You may not like this, noone likes the Fat Cats. But the truth is the Fat Cat's have two homes: New York and London. Even Tokyo cannot muscle in on this, and if London loses the cattery bang goes the economy. The City of London largely pays for the lifestyle the average Briton takes forgranted. I hope you now see the economic severity of our recent position.
The good news for Scotland is that Scots will still be plugged into London long after the North Sea has given up its bounty. Generationally, it was a shred choice.
As for Labour, I think they are finished in Scotland.
They will bounce back. Gordon Brown was a joke of a politician but he did a good job in the referndfum contest. Labour will be seen as th best option to keep Tories out and the SNP will be a wasted vote. With Devo Max tory government policy wont hurt so much anymore. Scotland can set its own Tax and benefits and spending on things that matter to people. The UK will only really exist for emergency measures, running the highest courts of apeeal (discounting the EU) foreign policy, national debt handling and anything military, and in all of those issues a Scot has a fair chance of being the person in charge.
Labour needs Scotland, especially with English devolution imminent, and Scotland needs Labour. Anyone Scottish wanting real power in a poltiical career has a good chance of becoming a Minister or even Prime Minister if they join Labour and move up the party to the top. They could also serve as MSP's.
I can see Labour gaining ground from SNP in the next Scottish parliament election.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/19 18:33:17
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Salmond's greatest success is making the yes supporters believe they are a victim....a victim who receive greater governmental funds per head than the rest of the UK, who use and cost the NHS more than any other region, and who also receive free higher education.
I'm glad the majority of Scots saw sense, for whilst the dream of an independent Scottish nation may be attractive, the practicality of doing so in the current political and economic environment would have been tantamount to regional suicide.
I've been reading stories all week about pro Independence thugs intimating others, vandalizing cars and houses that display Union flags/No campaign stickers, leaving graffiti saying "Vote Yes or else!" outside polling booths, attacking Sky News reporters/cameramen...
I just assumed they were a vocal disruptive minority not to be taken seriously as they do not represent the Yes campaign as a whole. In essence, I gave the Yes campaign the benefit of the doubt (and by extension, you guys).
Are you two doing the opposite with regards to the No Campaign and its own vocal minority of thugs?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/19 18:26:20
Well considering I was in that square on Wednesday and the feeling of that Yes event was a relaxed party atmosphere. No Voters turn up on the day of their victory and use that square to shout at others and make Nazi salutes.
Are you two doing the opposite with regards to the No Campaign and its own vocal minority of thugs?
Seems to be the case.
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
Where did that happen, and what proof of it happening?
Not to say some fething idiots who use Hitler salutes are representative of the No side as a whole.
What Shadow said above, AGAIN.
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
George Square transformed by Nazi saluting Unionists.
Does this mean we can legitimately call No voters Quislings?
No. Just because BNP types 'supporting' Better Together by voting No, doesn't mean they are welcome. And they do like to fly the Union Flag; forgetting that the Union Flag flag, more than any other, represented opposition to the ideology behind the Nazi salute.
To put the boot on the other foot. The IRA were hoping for a Yes vote. At interview Martin McGuiness was visibly disappointed today for the missed opportunity. Northern Ireland was another place that would have been stirred up and brought to fresh misery if a Yes vote had prevailed.
Nevertheless despite the IRA's encouragement nobody is accusing the Yes Scotland as being in league with the IRA.
I am sorry that Fascists tried to ruin your street party. They do not speak for Better Together, they do not speak for the Union and they don't speak for pro Union support elsewhere in the UK.
n'oublie jamais - It appears I now have to highlight this again.
It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion. By the juice of the brew my thoughts aquire speed, my mind becomes strained, the strain becomes a warning. It is by tea alone I set my mind in motion.
Even if it is true, what Shadow said still applies, so whatever.
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
Hey there's idiots, or at least people willing to go outside the bounds of social norm, on the side of any political campaign. You have Greens climbing oil rigs, Budhists attacking Muslims, etc. So it'd be short sighted to ignore that both sides of the referendum had those willing to participate in such acts (heh, though I'll say the BBC did very well to ignore all the cap that No campaign supporters did). Walk down a street in Glasgow and you'll see walls plastered in posters and stickers for the Yes campaign. Slogans written over every surface and well, plenty of splattered red paint too. Hell I even read "Stay in the UK or we'll slash you" (not the best slogan). The same goes for the other side too. Yes choose to portray itself as a social movement about change and making the country better. No was about the status quo. In the media this was changed to Yes being a band of bleary eyed idealists who cared more about screwing over the UK and propping up their own country. No was about security and patriotism. Of course both statements are probably true, but its easy to play up the negatives of either side.
So yeah, its not as if there wasn't those who didn't conduct themselves properly. Its not as if plenty of Orange Order folks didn't come over here and start belligerently protesting either, nor nationalists from England either. Nor is it the case that their isn't any right wing nationalists who supported Yes or those who adopted the referendum for their own xenophobic ends. The way the media played up the Yes campaign as being folks just out for trouble (look at this week's 2000AD cover...) was sheer propaganda however, as its easy enough to pick a minority of the No campaign as well and point out that they were looking to antagonise people.
The point I made about the dumbass skinheads (who are so detached from the original movement and neo-nazism that they decided to tattoo American prison symbols on themselves) was a joke. Like I said, there's fascists all over in the UK, and no doubt ones who were in support of the Yes campaign (heh, I remember hearing something along the lines of turning Scotland into a one race state once those foreigner loving English quit interfering). I'll reiterate though that the media's coverage of the campaign was biased as hell and did whatever it could to put down the Yes campaign. If it wasn't all the lies (seriously the BBC were still saying during Salmond's resignation that the banks were moving to London. ) it was just the sheer disregard for reporting on the story with a shred of integrity in regards for presenting the issue in a non biased manner. When there's only one major newspaper in the country which didn't go into full on anti-independence mode (one of whom was a paper which stands up for independence movements throughout the world, but yet not one on its doorstop) it just displays that the whole sector here in the UK (not so much in the rest of the world given that foreign media was much more balanced in their reporting, well bar in those countries which also had a stake in the result) is just a tool for the status quo. =P
Well yeah, did you see what happened in Austrailia to get that feth Abbot in? All the newspapers were pretty much Right Wing shill sockpuppets of Murdoch who pretty much put the opposition out as baby eaters.
Having not really seen any news regarding the campaigns, I can still readily believe that there was a huge amount of bias going on.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2014/09/19 18:48:47
Prestor Jon wrote: Because children don't have any legal rights until they're adults. A minor is the responsiblity of the parent and has no legal rights except through his/her legal guardian or parent.
)
