Probably not the start of a beautiful friendship
 |
| THE WINNER HANDS DOWN? Alex Salmond. Picture: Gordon Terris |
Of all the gin joints in all the subordinate legislative assemblies in all the world, she had to walk into his. But you know what they say: sooner or later, everybody comes to Eck's.
Recall the scene. The resistance leader cares naught for occupying goons. His gaze stern, his jaw set, the patriot approaches the band. "Play Flower of Scotland. Play it!"
The problems of two little politicians don't amount to a heap of neeps in this crazy, mixed-up world. It appears clear, however, that Ms Alexander's letters of transit are in order. Lisbon - or even Dunoon - is nice at this time of year. Still, they'll always have Holyrood.
We, on the other hand, are stuck in Casablanca-sur-Forth. We come to the capital and wait. And wait.
You get the idea. It's a souk, as they say in Leith. Would the leader of anyone who happened to be carrying a Labour card in the Holyrood basement yesterday morning risk all? Of course she would.
It was almost a metaphysical issue. For Wendy Alexander, it was the difference between "No choice" and "Really, no kidding, absolutely no (expletive) choice whatever". She had been cut adrift without a rudderless Prime Minister for a paddle.
Ms Alexander had to persist with the astonishing notion that the people
of Scotland should be encouraged to pick a future. Ironies were abounding, whatever that means.
She wants the government - and this Americanism will never be repeated while your sketchist draws breath - to "bring it on". To wit: put your independence referendum bill on the table, Monsieur Eck, or shut up.
On the face of it, that's reasonable. On the face of it, it's what numerous noisy Labour "sources" have demanded for months. But Big Broon has turned his face to the wall. Wendy is no longer on a mission from Gord.
You can probably find an overpaid idiot (no, not me) to tell you that this is a "high-risk strategy". Careers fizzle on such bonfires. But Ms Alexander actually said: "I'm giving him the opportunity to resolve this issue. Why won't he take it?"
For the record - not that anyone consults this legendary archive - no answer was forthcoming.
Instead, the First Minister referred us to pages eight and 15 of his party's manifesto. That would be the section entitled "When I'm Good and Ready". It turns out that the fate of Scotland is down the back of Sam's piano, or the current metaphorical equivalent.
Time, as it does, went by. Mr Salmond said: "Let me acknowledge the progress that Wendy Alexander has made over the past week." What he meant was this: (Expletive) me. She's giving us the keys to the safe, not to mention the right of this parliament to decide'."
She was, too. The First Minister can crow the way certain Alpine folk can yodel, but he is a sure judge. Ms Alexander says: let's settle this before we're all receiving personal care. He says: nothing.
The sketch counts that
as interesting. More interesting is the possibility that Labour Scotland, the mangy old mythical beast, could yet be roused by the Eck's triumphalism.
The Tories and the Liberals are at sixes, six-and-a-halfs and sevens. They don't know what Ms Alexander might be playing at. London Labour, infested with people who never work, also lacks a clue.
Yesterday, Nicol Stephen (Liberal) said: "Can the First Minister believe his luck?" The sketch says: Ms Alexander is smart. Never mind the vote, what does independence actually mean?
Louis, I think this could be the beginning of a beautiful constitutional argument.
© All rights reserved. Reproduction in whole or in part without
permission is prohibited.
Posted by: Vivas, Embra on 10:43pm Thu 8 May 08
C+
Posted by: Hugh Kerr, Edinburgh on 10:53pm Thu 8 May 08
Ian sometimes you can have too much irony, Wendy today was beyond irony more like tragedy.
Ian sometimes you can have too much irony, Wendy today was beyond irony more like tragedy.
Posted by: Strathturret, Montrose on 11:19pm Thu 8 May 08
malcolm Chisholm was doing his best on Newsnicht.
Brewer: 'would you agree that this has been a disasterous week for Labour?'
MC ; "Well obviously, I'm not going to admit it..."
A decent man doing his best. Better than Gray last night!
malcolm Chisholm was doing his best on Newsnicht.
Brewer: 'would you agree that this has been a disasterous week for Labour?'
MC ; "Well obviously, I'm not going to admit it..."
A decent man doing his best. Better than Gray last night!
Posted by: greenfinger, lothians on 11:35pm Thu 8 May 08
Yes Malcolm walked the tightrope with dignity. He'd make a good replacement for Bendy. Meanwhile Dougie is rescuing Burma, God help them! 40% of the rations will be disallowed!
Yes Malcolm walked the tightrope with dignity. He'd make a good replacement for Bendy. Meanwhile Dougie is rescuing Burma, God help them! 40% of the rations will be disallowed!
Posted by: Morag, Peeblesshire on 11:47pm Thu 8 May 08
[quote]She wants the government - and this Americanism will never be repeated while your sketchist draws breath - to "bring it on". To wit: put your independence referendum bill on the table, Monsieur Eck, or shut up.
On the face of it, that's reasonable.[/quote]Why is it reasonable? From any point of view but a partisan Labour one, that is?
Why should an elected government vary the timetable of its legislative programme for the panicked whim of an opposition member spinning out of control? When the clear aim of that demand is to run the referendum at a time the opposition judge will be more favourable to their desired result? Being in government means you get to choose to bring these things forward when you judge the time is right for you. Alex Salmond may yet miscalculate that. However, he does not deserve criticism for refusing to be railroaded against his better judgement.
She wants the government - and this Americanism will never be repeated while your sketchist draws breath - to "bring it on". To wit: put your independence referendum bill on the table, Monsieur Eck, or shut up.
On the face of it, that's reasonable.
Why is it reasonable? From any point of view but a partisan Labour one, that is?
Why should an elected government vary the timetable of its legislative programme for the panicked whim of an opposition member spinning out of control? When the clear aim of that demand is to run the referendum at a time the opposition judge will be more favourable to their desired result? Being in government means you get to choose to bring these things forward when you judge the time is right for you. Alex Salmond may yet miscalculate that. However, he does not deserve criticism for refusing to be railroaded against his better judgement.
Posted by: Los Angeles, Edinburgh on 11:56pm Thu 8 May 08
Bell on Alexander[quote]She wants the government ... to put ... their independence referendum bill on the table. On the face of it, that's reasonable.[/quote]It isn't reasonable at all, it 's not even sensible since the rules state clearly an opposition bill must attain the support of a minimum of 18 MSPs [bold]not[/bold] in the same party.
Had she known that she would never have made a suicide attack.
I cannot see which newspaper makes this rule evident when reporting the farrago. Yet, in her pig ignorance. Ms. Alexander has tripped over her mouth yet again.
That minimum was yet another Unionist tactic to stop the SNP ever attaining support for their own bills when in "perpetual" opposition, or at least, that is where Unionists concluded the SNP would be. Now we see a Unionist trap used against them very successfully.
In any event, clunky, corny [italic]Casablanca[/italic] manufactured analogies are a waste of tiime; there is no need to argue beyond that rule. The only question left to ask is:
[bold]From where did Ms.Alexander expect to get support for her bill?[/bold]
Bell on Alexander
She wants the government ... to put ... their independence referendum bill on the table. On the face of it, that's reasonable.
It isn't reasonable at all, it 's not even sensible since the rules state clearly an opposition bill must attain the support of a minimum of 18 MSPs
not in the same party.
Had she known that she would never have made a suicide attack.
I cannot see which newspaper makes this rule evident when reporting the farrago. Yet, in her pig ignorance. Ms. Alexander has tripped over her mouth yet again.
That minimum was yet another Unionist tactic to stop the SNP ever attaining support for their own bills when in "perpetual" opposition, or at least, that is where Unionists concluded the SNP would be. Now we see a Unionist trap used against them very successfully.
In any event, clunky, corny
Casablanca manufactured analogies are a waste of tiime; there is no need to argue beyond that rule. The only question left to ask is:
From where did Ms.Alexander expect to get support for her bill?
Posted by: Grassy Knollington on 11:56pm Thu 8 May 08
Problem is Morag, for reasons we have yet to uncover, Ian can't be fair or rational about Eck. He thinks he's a bogey man.
Problem is Morag, for reasons we have yet to uncover, Ian can't be fair or rational about Eck. He thinks he's a bogey man.
Posted by: Morag, Peeblesshire on 11:59pm Thu 8 May 08
Oh, hell and d*mnation. First the "Alexander under fire from all sides over referendum" article has comments enabled, then when I submitted a post the whole thing was gone, then it was back with a few posts, then it swallowed my retyped post. A third try was successful, but when I tried to post again the article was back, but with comments now absent and disabled.
I wish some people would make up their minds here.
Oh, hell and d*mnation. First the "Alexander under fire from all sides over referendum" article has comments enabled, then when I submitted a post the whole thing was gone, then it was back with a few posts, then it swallowed my retyped post. A third try was successful, but when I tried to post again the article was back, but with comments now absent and disabled.
I wish some people would make up their minds here.
Posted by: exile, far away on 11:59pm Thu 8 May 08
I notice there's no comments being allowed on Dougie Fraser's gutter press article claiming Alex Salmond has offered David Cameron a pact after the next Westminster election. The Sun would be proud of the headline, which is indeed a lie, as it says AS has offered Cameron an alliance at Westminster. Having just watched First Minister's Questions, to which Fraser refers in making his outrageous claim, and Salmond specifically declined Annabel Goldie's offer of an alliance.
Who is behind this disgusting headline, Michael Settle, Douglas Fraser, or some unnamed subeditor. Whoever it is, perhaps the SNP should sue them.
I notice there's no comments being allowed on Dougie Fraser's gutter press article claiming Alex Salmond has offered David Cameron a pact after the next Westminster election. The Sun would be proud of the headline, which is indeed a lie, as it says AS has offered Cameron an alliance at Westminster. Having just watched First Minister's Questions, to which Fraser refers in making his outrageous claim, and Salmond specifically declined Annabel Goldie's offer of an alliance.
Who is behind this disgusting headline, Michael Settle, Douglas Fraser, or some unnamed subeditor. Whoever it is, perhaps the SNP should sue them.
Posted by: exile, far away on Fri 9 May 08
Have just watched...
Posted by: Wullie, Aberdeen on 12:01am Fri 9 May 08
Huzzah. We are allowed to comment.
Huzzah. We are allowed to comment.
Posted by: Wen D, Inversnecky on 12:07am Fri 9 May 08
latest (private) poll from beans constituency
Lab 22%
SNP 63%
Lib 6%
con 8%
Others 1%
No wonder the great snotgobbler is looking grimmer by the day!
the 22% is a bit worrying . I KNOW its Scotland, but surely even WE dont have such a high percentage of imbiciles??
latest (private) poll from beans constituency
Lab 22%
SNP 63%
Lib 6%
con 8%
Others 1%
No wonder the great snotgobbler is looking grimmer by the day!
the 22% is a bit worrying . I KNOW its Scotland, but surely even WE dont have such a high percentage of imbiciles??
Posted by: Wen D, Inversnecky on 12:08am Fri 9 May 08
latest (private) poll from beans constituency
Lab 22%
SNP 63%
Lib 6%
con 8%
Others 1%
No wonder the great snotgobbler is looking grimmer by the day!
the 22% is a bit worrying . I KNOW its Scotland, but surely even WE dont have such a high percentage of imbiciles??
latest (private) poll from beans constituency
Lab 22%
SNP 63%
Lib 6%
con 8%
Others 1%
No wonder the great snotgobbler is looking grimmer by the day!
the 22% is a bit worrying . I KNOW its Scotland, but surely even WE dont have such a high percentage of imbiciles??
Posted by: Duns Scotus, The Borders on 12:09am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Morag[/bold] wrote:
Oh, hell and d*mnation. First the "Alexander under fire from all sides over referendum" article has comments enabled, then when I submitted a post the whole thing was gone, then it was back with a few posts, then it swallowed my retyped post. A third try was successful, but when I tried to post again the article was back, but with comments now absent and disabled. I wish some people would make up their minds here. [/quote] I've suffered the same fate. Is there a nutter loose in The Herald building? Or is it a delberate policy.
We can comment on the Dunwoody funeral but not Bendy's death by a thousand [italic]faux pas[/italic] . Bizarre.
Morag wrote:
Oh, hell and d*mnation. First the "Alexander under fire from all sides over referendum" article has comments enabled, then when I submitted a post the whole thing was gone, then it was back with a few posts, then it swallowed my retyped post. A third try was successful, but when I tried to post again the article was back, but with comments now absent and disabled. I wish some people would make up their minds here.
I've suffered the same fate. Is there a nutter loose in The Herald building? Or is it a delberate policy.
We can comment on the Dunwoody funeral but not Bendy's death by a thousand
faux pas . Bizarre.
Posted by: Oscar on 12:15am Fri 9 May 08
Hmm Eck's Bar. Round up the usual suspects.
Jackie the Hutt is Sidney Greenstreet
Baron George Foulkes von Cumnock is Peter Lorre
Andy Kerr is Major Stresser, sorry Strasser
Bella G is Ingrid
Nicol Stevene is Sascha
and
The WENDY is Ronald Regan the original Rick...
Hmm Eck's Bar. Round up the usual suspects.
Jackie the Hutt is Sidney Greenstreet
Baron George Foulkes von Cumnock is Peter Lorre
Andy Kerr is Major Stresser, sorry Strasser
Bella G is Ingrid
Nicol Stevene is Sascha
and
The WENDY is Ronald Regan the original Rick...
Posted by: nouveauxscum on 12:20am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Duns Scotus[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Morag[/bold] wrote: Oh, hell and d*mnation. First the "Alexander under fire from all sides over referendum" article has comments enabled, then when I submitted a post the whole thing was gone, then it was back with a few posts, then it swallowed my retyped post. A third try was successful, but when I tried to post again the article was back, but with comments now absent and disabled. I wish some people would make up their minds here. [/quote] I've suffered the same fate. Is there a nutter loose in The Herald building? Or is it a delberate policy. We can comment on the Dunwoody funeral but not Bendy's death by a thousand [italic]faux pas[/italic] . Bizarre.[/quote] Must be their spanking new multi-media facility at work.
Pfft... we could be at this all year.....
Duns Scotus wrote:
Morag wrote: Oh, hell and d*mnation. First the "Alexander under fire from all sides over referendum" article has comments enabled, then when I submitted a post the whole thing was gone, then it was back with a few posts, then it swallowed my retyped post. A third try was successful, but when I tried to post again the article was back, but with comments now absent and disabled. I wish some people would make up their minds here.
I've suffered the same fate. Is there a nutter loose in The Herald building? Or is it a delberate policy. We can comment on the Dunwoody funeral but not Bendy's death by a thousand faux pas . Bizarre.
Must be their spanking new multi-media facility at work.
Pfft... we could be at this all year.....
Posted by: Im no really here, but over there on 12:31am Fri 9 May 08
Wendy has certainly galvanised opinion. The Times on-line poll on Independence has well over a thousand respondents (1169) and sits at 82.5% in favour of Scotland becoming an independent country.
http://www.timesonli
ne.co.uk/tol/news/uk
/scotland/article372
3966.ece
Click on "comment" in the blue area below the poll to see details of the poll results.
Wendy has certainly galvanised opinion. The Times on-line poll on Independence has well over a thousand respondents (1169) and sits at 82.5% in favour of Scotland becoming an independent country.
http://www.timesonli
ne.co.uk/tol/news/uk
/scotland/article372
3966.ece
Click on "comment" in the blue area below the poll to see details of the poll results.
Posted by: Im no really here, but over there on 12:42am Fri 9 May 08
[quote]exile, far away on 11:59pm [/quote]
Yep, looks like we're getting into bare knuckle time now. I believe Brown has called around and is trying to flood out the SNP with Editorials in the papers and BBC that are anti-SNP. The Herald has dutifully responded by not allowing comments on it's anti-SNP and Wendy articles.
exile, far away on 11:59pm
Yep, looks like we're getting into bare knuckle time now. I believe Brown has called around and is trying to flood out the SNP with Editorials in the papers and BBC that are anti-SNP. The Herald has dutifully responded by not allowing comments on it's anti-SNP and Wendy articles.
Posted by: Disgusted Dorothy, Glasgow on 12:44am Fri 9 May 08
I am getting really angry with the press and the media.
As far as I'm concerned, the SNP rightly, are sticking to their own timetable as stated in the manifesto ,and I have heard little or nothing from them on the issue of independence.
They said that they wished to prove their capability first and so far , so good.
For this upstart, come so recently to Damascus,to make demands for a referendum NOW is insulting theintelligence of the people.
Last weeks local election results are indicative of disenchantment with the New Labour experiment, it is highly likely that the Tory party will win the next general election.
Her blatant attempt to rescue her own job by diverting attention on to the "cowardly " SNP ,aided and abetted by BBC/ITV and the so called press ,is there for all to see.
Until I watched Politics Now ,I had'nt realised she would have such help in spinning this story as some sort of coup.
I am now of a mind to call Ofcom and ask them to investigate media bias in Scotland.
I am getting really angry with the press and the media.
As far as I'm concerned, the SNP rightly, are sticking to their own timetable as stated in the manifesto ,and I have heard little or nothing from them on the issue of independence.
They said that they wished to prove their capability first and so far , so good.
For this upstart, come so recently to Damascus,to make demands for a referendum NOW is insulting theintelligence of the people.
Last weeks local election results are indicative of disenchantment with the New Labour experiment, it is highly likely that the Tory party will win the next general election.
Her blatant attempt to rescue her own job by diverting attention on to the "cowardly " SNP ,aided and abetted by BBC/ITV and the so called press ,is there for all to see.
Until I watched Politics Now ,I had'nt realised she would have such help in spinning this story as some sort of coup.
I am now of a mind to call Ofcom and ask them to investigate media bias in Scotland.
Posted by: nouveauxscum on 12:45am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Im no really here[/bold] wrote:
Wendy has certainly galvanised opinion. The Times on-line poll on Independence has well over a thousand respondents (1169) and sits at 82.5% in favour of Scotland becoming an independent country. http://www.timesonli ne.co.uk/tol/news/uk /scotland/article372 3966.ece Click on "comment" in the blue area below the poll to see details of the poll results.[/quote] I's lzy
What is the demographic spread of yer average 'Times' poll?
Happenstance it's simply tabloid induced jock-bashing on the back of the subsidy myth.
Prolly
lol
Im no really here wrote:
Wendy has certainly galvanised opinion. The Times on-line poll on Independence has well over a thousand respondents (1169) and sits at 82.5% in favour of Scotland becoming an independent country. http://www.timesonli ne.co.uk/tol/news/uk /scotland/article372 3966.ece Click on "comment" in the blue area below the poll to see details of the poll results.
I's lzy
What is the demographic spread of yer average 'Times' poll?
Happenstance it's simply tabloid induced jock-bashing on the back of the subsidy myth.
Prolly
lol
Posted by: Brian Blessed, Glasgow on 12:47am Fri 9 May 08
This utter bilge on the front page:
"Salmond offers a Commons pact to Cameron"
Is, erm, utter bilge. No mention from Salmond about a pact with anyone. Just a straight regurgitation of what he said in last week's Herald and on the Politics Show on Sunday, which is that the SNP will support whatever measures benefit Scotland.
So why are Fraser and the BritClique desperate to smear Alex and the SNP with the Tory brush? Panicking as soon as their beloved Wendy misfires the starting gun, or speaking to Lord Alfie of Young to get Gordie's lines for the next phase of Operation Bawsup?
The Herald is disallowing comment on said story. [italic]I can only wonder why.[/italic]
(I will refrain from mentioning James Purnell's woeful defence of his boss on Question Time Thursday night. The poor lad.)
This utter bilge on the front page:
"Salmond offers a Commons pact to Cameron"
Is, erm, utter bilge. No mention from Salmond about a pact with anyone. Just a straight regurgitation of what he said in last week's Herald and on the Politics Show on Sunday, which is that the SNP will support whatever measures benefit Scotland.
So why are Fraser and the BritClique desperate to smear Alex and the SNP with the Tory brush? Panicking as soon as their beloved Wendy misfires the starting gun, or speaking to Lord Alfie of Young to get Gordie's lines for the next phase of Operation Bawsup?
The Herald is disallowing comment on said story.
I can only wonder why.
(I will refrain from mentioning James Purnell's woeful defence of his boss on Question Time Thursday night. The poor lad.)
Posted by: Morag, Peeblesshire on 12:47am Fri 9 May 08
Vivas, thanks. I've just read it. Priceless.
Vivas, thanks. I've just read it. Priceless.
Posted by: Ronald, Glasgow on 12:57am Fri 9 May 08
One expects little from the likes of Douglas Fraser, but by Christ he
never fails to disapoint ! Methinks its time that this NEW LABOUR
flunky and lickspittle got his marching orders.
One expects little from the likes of Douglas Fraser, but by Christ he
never fails to disapoint ! Methinks its time that this NEW LABOUR
flunky and lickspittle got his marching orders.
Posted by: Im no really here, but over there on 12:57am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]nouveauxscum[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Im no really here[/bold] wrote: Wendy has certainly galvanised opinion. The Times on-line poll on Independence has well over a thousand respondents (1169) and sits at 82.5% in favour of Scotland becoming an independent country. http://www.timesonli ne.co.uk/tol/news/uk /scotland/article372 3966.ece Click on "comment" in the blue area below the poll to see details of the poll results.[/quote] I's lzy What is the demographic spread of yer average 'Times' poll? Happenstance it's simply tabloid induced jock-bashing on the back of the subsidy myth. Prolly lol[/quote] Try clicking on the "comments" link in the blue area at the bottom of the poll and you can see a map of just where the votes (last 600) are coming from, and you will see that a great number from England are voting for Independence. Votes coming in from all over the world.
nouveauxscum wrote:
Im no really here wrote: Wendy has certainly galvanised opinion. The Times on-line poll on Independence has well over a thousand respondents (1169) and sits at 82.5% in favour of Scotland becoming an independent country. http://www.timesonli ne.co.uk/tol/news/uk /scotland/article372 3966.ece Click on "comment" in the blue area below the poll to see details of the poll results.
I's lzy What is the demographic spread of yer average 'Times' poll? Happenstance it's simply tabloid induced jock-bashing on the back of the subsidy myth. Prolly lol
Try clicking on the "comments" link in the blue area at the bottom of the poll and you can see a map of just where the votes (last 600) are coming from, and you will see that a great number from England are voting for Independence. Votes coming in from all over the world.
Posted by: Big Boy Did It, And Ran Away on 1:08am Fri 9 May 08
[quote]"Salmond offers a Commons pact to Cameron"[/quote]
Yes, tedious isn't it. As exile put, the Sun would be proud. And then the article utterly contradicts the headline - support when applicable to the interests of Scotland.
Oh, yeah. And no comments.
I just had a sideways look at the Daily Record forum for the first time. Well informed opinions getting posted there by the Labour faithful. Give me strength.
"Salmond offers a Commons pact to Cameron"
Yes, tedious isn't it. As exile put, the Sun would be proud. And then the article utterly contradicts the headline - support when applicable to the interests of Scotland.
Oh, yeah. And no comments.
I just had a sideways look at the Daily Record forum for the first time. Well informed opinions getting posted there by the Labour faithful. Give me strength.
Posted by: nouveauxscum on 1:13am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Im no really here[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]nouveauxscum[/bold] wrote: [quote][bold]Im no really here[/bold] wrote: Wendy has certainly galvanised opinion. The Times on-line poll on Independence has well over a thousand respondents (1169) and sits at 82.5% in favour of Scotland becoming an independent country. http://www.timesonli ne.co.uk/tol/news/uk /scotland/article372 3966.ece Click on "comment" in the blue area below the poll to see details of the poll results.[/quote] I's lzy What is the demographic spread of yer average 'Times' poll? Happenstance it's simply tabloid induced jock-bashing on the back of the subsidy myth. Prolly lol[/quote] Try clicking on the "comments" link in the blue area at the bottom of the poll and you can see a map of just where the votes (last 600) are coming from, and you will see that a great number from England are voting for Independence. Votes coming in from all over the world.[/quote] Just as I thought then - not many of that 82.5% are actually allowed a vote in Scotland?
Had a quick shifty at the comments. Here's the last one:
" Please don't break up our Union. Three hundred years of history and tradition by the way side, I can't believe it's really happening to the country that I love so much, I love being British and I want to stay that way."
Pretty much sums up yer average Unionist - What 'I want' is more important than what is better for an entire nation.
I almost wept.
Im no really here wrote:
nouveauxscum wrote: Im no really here wrote: Wendy has certainly galvanised opinion. The Times on-line poll on Independence has well over a thousand respondents (1169) and sits at 82.5% in favour of Scotland becoming an independent country. http://www.timesonli ne.co.uk/tol/news/uk /scotland/article372 3966.ece Click on "comment" in the blue area below the poll to see details of the poll results.
I's lzy What is the demographic spread of yer average 'Times' poll? Happenstance it's simply tabloid induced jock-bashing on the back of the subsidy myth. Prolly lol
Try clicking on the "comments" link in the blue area at the bottom of the poll and you can see a map of just where the votes (last 600) are coming from, and you will see that a great number from England are voting for Independence. Votes coming in from all over the world.
Just as I thought then - not many of that 82.5% are actually allowed a vote in Scotland?
Had a quick shifty at the comments. Here's the last one:
" Please don't break up our Union. Three hundred years of history and tradition by the way side, I can't believe it's really happening to the country that I love so much, I love being British and I want to stay that way."
Pretty much sums up yer average Unionist - What 'I want' is more important than what is better for an entire nation.
I almost wept.
Posted by: Brian Blessed, Glasgow on 1:16am Fri 9 May 08
Grassy Knollington @ 11:56pm
Ian has been in the huff with Salmond since '96, when SNP National Council decided to back Alex on the question of an independence referendum following the election of an SNP government. Previous to that the policy was majority of seats/votes for Westminster = independence negotiations.
Bell's position is basically centered around parliamentary sovereignty and the folly of referend(a/dums). I can see his point but think things have moved on since then.
Incidentally Newsnight Scotland:
tinyurl.com/4go9vk
was actually very good tonight and showed some decent debate and points being raised - even from Ross Finnie. Though Malky boy was rather hamstrung by The Wendy's U-U-U-U-turn.
Grassy Knollington @ 11:56pm
Ian has been in the huff with Salmond since '96, when SNP National Council decided to back Alex on the question of an independence referendum following the election of an SNP government. Previous to that the policy was majority of seats/votes for Westminster = independence negotiations.
Bell's position is basically centered around parliamentary sovereignty and the folly of referend(a/dums). I can see his point but think things have moved on since then.
Incidentally Newsnight Scotland:
tinyurl.com/4go9vk
was actually very good tonight and showed some decent debate and points being raised - even from Ross Finnie. Though Malky boy was rather hamstrung by The Wendy's U-U-U-U-turn.
Posted by: Morag, Peeblesshire on 1:18am Fri 9 May 08
Well, this article is the only game in town tonight unless I want to go and sign up for the Hootsmon.
I listened to "Scotland at Ten". James Mitchell was quite interesting. (I met the guy once, in London. Let's just say he is one egghead who doesn't habitually bleed red.)
First, he defied current opinion by saying he still doesn't think there will be a referendum. He thinks Wendy will get the bum's rush in due course and the next leader will reverse the u-turn. He named his pick for the new leader but it was a name I didn't recognise.
This is an interesting point of view. Of course he said Labour will get stick for it, but they'll take the stick rather than concede the referendum (the one they're so confident of winning). I'd been wondering the same myself, but now I wonder how it would play beyind that. Such blatant self-serving disregard for the opinion of the Scottish people could rebound very badly after the events of this week. It could get the SNP back in with a bigger majority in 2011, and a mandate to force a referendum bill through in their second term. After that it gets a bit out of focus in my crystal ball.
The other point made was that it's inconceivable that Brown can resign and a new Prime Minister simply take over. They've done the anointed new leader bit already. In the commentator's opinion, they simply couldn't get away with it again and they'd be forced to go to the country if Brown stepped down.
Now Brown is a holy disaster. I'm really quite shocked how incompetent he is. I honestly hadn't expected that. I gather the Crewe and Nantwich by-election is looking like a lost cause. Can he really hang on for another two years, whether or not Wendy goes soon?
Now, pretty please and I'll be in my usual pew on Sunday, can we have Brown forced to resign sometime in the next year? Followed by the inevitable trashing of Labour in the subsequent general election? Not that one part of me would wish Tory rule on my worst enemy, and the English people are certainly not that (most of my best friends are English), but the other part of me wouldn't deny my worst enemy self-determination.
From the 1970s, the fates seemed to have a special spite at Scotland. The 40% rule, which according to a Radio 4 alternate futures programme all by itself prevented Scotland becoming independent during the Thatcher years. The Thatcher years, and the inability of Scots to make their votes count. The squandering of our children's inheritance. The refusal of Labour to allow an independence option in the 1997 referendum (which now looks like special providence). The moving of the maritime boundary. The ludicrous shenanigans over the Holyrood building. The succession of tenth-rate numpty toon cooncillors voted in to that building. Reports that the Scots were falling out of love with devolution (due to incompetent antics of said numpties).
And during this time we witness convoys of cars heading into West Germany, as the Czech border is opened. The Berlin wall is torn down. The Baltic states regain their independence. (In the 1970s the London Branch SNP met in premises belonging to the Estonian Society. At that time, the Estonians in exile expressed their envy of the Scots, whom they thought had a chance of making it, while Estonia had none. In 1995 a friend remarked to me, "Who's have ever thought they'd get there first?") Slovakia gains independence.
Everything down to "events". But I took some heart from the realisation of how fast things could move when the tipping point is reached. And the knowledge that sometimes the tipping point is something not under your control, which allows the rest to follow.
We've a bit of karma to catch up on here. How about it?
Well, this article is the only game in town tonight unless I want to go and sign up for the Hootsmon.
I listened to "Scotland at Ten". James Mitchell was quite interesting. (I met the guy once, in London. Let's just say he is one egghead who doesn't habitually bleed red.)
First, he defied current opinion by saying he still doesn't think there will be a referendum. He thinks Wendy will get the bum's rush in due course and the next leader will reverse the u-turn. He named his pick for the new leader but it was a name I didn't recognise.
This is an interesting point of view. Of course he said Labour will get stick for it, but they'll take the stick rather than concede the referendum (the one they're so confident of winning). I'd been wondering the same myself, but now I wonder how it would play beyind that. Such blatant self-serving disregard for the opinion of the Scottish people could rebound very badly after the events of this week. It could get the SNP back in with a bigger majority in 2011, and a mandate to force a referendum bill through in their second term. After that it gets a bit out of focus in my crystal ball.
The other point made was that it's inconceivable that Brown can resign and a new Prime Minister simply take over. They've done the anointed new leader bit already. In the commentator's opinion, they simply couldn't get away with it again and they'd be forced to go to the country if Brown stepped down.
Now Brown is a holy disaster. I'm really quite shocked how incompetent he is. I honestly hadn't expected that. I gather the Crewe and Nantwich by-election is looking like a lost cause. Can he really hang on for another two years, whether or not Wendy goes soon?
Now, pretty please and I'll be in my usual pew on Sunday, can we have Brown forced to resign sometime in the next year? Followed by the inevitable trashing of Labour in the subsequent general election? Not that one part of me would wish Tory rule on my worst enemy, and the English people are certainly not that (most of my best friends are English), but the other part of me wouldn't deny my worst enemy self-determination.
From the 1970s, the fates seemed to have a special spite at Scotland. The 40% rule, which according to a Radio 4 alternate futures programme all by itself prevented Scotland becoming independent during the Thatcher years. The Thatcher years, and the inability of Scots to make their votes count. The squandering of our children's inheritance. The refusal of Labour to allow an independence option in the 1997 referendum (which now looks like special providence). The moving of the maritime boundary. The ludicrous shenanigans over the Holyrood building. The succession of tenth-rate numpty toon cooncillors voted in to that building. Reports that the Scots were falling out of love with devolution (due to incompetent antics of said numpties).
And during this time we witness convoys of cars heading into West Germany, as the Czech border is opened. The Berlin wall is torn down. The Baltic states regain their independence. (In the 1970s the London Branch SNP met in premises belonging to the Estonian Society. At that time, the Estonians in exile expressed their envy of the Scots, whom they thought had a chance of making it, while Estonia had none. In 1995 a friend remarked to me, "Who's have ever thought they'd get there first?") Slovakia gains independence.
Everything down to "events". But I took some heart from the realisation of how fast things could move when the tipping point is reached. And the knowledge that sometimes the tipping point is something not under your control, which allows the rest to follow.
We've a bit of karma to catch up on here. How about it?
Posted by: rob4i, Scottish Borders on 1:22am Fri 9 May 08
The deadline for a referendum on independence was clearly defined
in the Government's manifesto over a year ago.
The Scottish Government is clearly not going to dance to a totally discredited, panicking New Labour jig, end of story.
Wendy, do your party a favour and give up politics and become a full time mum to your rugrats.
On second thoughts, do our Government a favour and remain the leader of the oppostion until we have ripped ourselves from the Union and become independent, then you can see what it will be like to be a normal country in the world.
The deadline for a referendum on independence was clearly defined
in the Government's manifesto over a year ago.
The Scottish Government is clearly not going to dance to a totally discredited, panicking New Labour jig, end of story.
Wendy, do your party a favour and give up politics and become a full time mum to your rugrats.
On second thoughts, do our Government a favour and remain the leader of the oppostion until we have ripped ourselves from the Union and become independent, then you can see what it will be like to be a normal country in the world.
Posted by: Im no really here, but over there on 1:28am Fri 9 May 08
[quote]nouveauxscum on 1:13am
Just as I thought then - not many of that 82.5% are actually allowed a vote in Scotland?[/quote] One consequence of a wide-spread awareness and support for Independence will be a greater readiness to deal with the Scottish Governemt directly, rather than through Westminster, and perhaps a greater willingness to Trade and Invest in Scotland specifically.
One of the things that SIr Ek has said is that he will raise Scotland's profile throghout the world. He certainly seems to be doing that nicely. A bit more successfully than "the greatest wee nation" idea.
And that comment you quoted came from Nairn, would you believe.
nouveauxscum on 1:13am
Just as I thought then - not many of that 82.5% are actually allowed a vote in Scotland?
One consequence of a wide-spread awareness and support for Independence will be a greater readiness to deal with the Scottish Governemt directly, rather than through Westminster, and perhaps a greater willingness to Trade and Invest in Scotland specifically.
One of the things that SIr Ek has said is that he will raise Scotland's profile throghout the world. He certainly seems to be doing that nicely. A bit more successfully than "the greatest wee nation" idea.
And that comment you quoted came from Nairn, would you believe.
Posted by: nouveauxscum on 1:44am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Im no really here[/bold] wrote:
[quote]nouveauxscum on 1:13am Just as I thought then - not many of that 82.5% are actually allowed a vote in Scotland?[/quote] One consequence of a wide-spread awareness and support for Independence will be a greater readiness to deal with the Scottish Governemt directly, rather than through Westminster, and perhaps a greater willingness to Trade and Invest in Scotland specifically. One of the things that SIr Ek has said is that he will raise Scotland's profile throghout the world. He certainly seems to be doing that nicely. A bit more successfully than "the greatest wee nation" idea. And that comment you quoted came from Nairn, would you believe.[/quote] Precisely.
Unquestionably, our friends around the world would be queuing up to do business with Scotland.
So, whatever the sentiments of the voters in the Times poll - they are to be welcomed.
As for Nairn? It's all me with them....er. us for us.. naw I for me..
lol
Im no really here wrote:
nouveauxscum on 1:13am Just as I thought then - not many of that 82.5% are actually allowed a vote in Scotland?
One consequence of a wide-spread awareness and support for Independence will be a greater readiness to deal with the Scottish Governemt directly, rather than through Westminster, and perhaps a greater willingness to Trade and Invest in Scotland specifically. One of the things that SIr Ek has said is that he will raise Scotland's profile throghout the world. He certainly seems to be doing that nicely. A bit more successfully than "the greatest wee nation" idea. And that comment you quoted came from Nairn, would you believe.
Precisely.
Unquestionably, our friends around the world would be queuing up to do business with Scotland.
So, whatever the sentiments of the voters in the Times poll - they are to be welcomed.
As for Nairn? It's all me with them....er. us for us.. naw I for me..
lol
Posted by: Brian Blessed, Glasgow on 1:44am Fri 9 May 08
[bold]Big Boy Did It, And Ran Away @ 1:08am[/bold]
I had a look at the Record forums based on your recommendation :D
Dear God in Govan! I apologise for quoting at length but an actual self-declared Labour member there writes of his proposal to Number Ten:
"Our suggestion is that Westminster takes all decisions on foreign policy (treaties, wars etc.) while Holyrood decides on the use of the Trident missiles on her territory (where and when to strike). Scotland would then be a nuclear power within the framework of Great Britain."
[bold]
"So far we have had no reply but it's early days."[/bold]
Where you do you even start with this mob? I reckon basic vowel sounds, but the primary teaching girlfriend could do without the extra work.
Big Boy Did It, And Ran Away @ 1:08am
I had a look at the Record forums based on your recommendation :D
Dear God in Govan! I apologise for quoting at length but an actual self-declared Labour member there writes of his proposal to Number Ten:
"Our suggestion is that Westminster takes all decisions on foreign policy (treaties, wars etc.) while Holyrood decides on the use of the Trident missiles on her territory (where and when to strike). Scotland would then be a nuclear power within the framework of Great Britain."
"So far we have had no reply but it's early days."
Where you do you even start with this mob? I reckon basic vowel sounds, but the primary teaching girlfriend could do without the extra work.
Posted by: Morag, Peeblesshire on 1:55am Fri 9 May 08
Brian, respect. I couldn't go there on a bet. Feel free to convey any similar pearls of wisdom for our delectation though.
Brian, respect. I couldn't go there on a bet. Feel free to convey any similar pearls of wisdom for our delectation though.
Posted by: nouveauxscum on 1:58am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Brian Blessed[/bold] wrote:
[bold]Big Boy Did It, And Ran Away @ 1:08am[/bold] I had a look at the Record forums based on your recommendation :D Dear God in Govan! I apologise for quoting at length but an actual self-declared Labour member there writes of his proposal to Number Ten: "Our suggestion is that Westminster takes all decisions on foreign policy (treaties, wars etc.) while Holyrood decides on the use of the Trident missiles on her territory (where and when to strike). Scotland would then be a nuclear power within the framework of Great Britain." [bold] "So far we have had no reply but it's early days."[/bold] Where you do you even start with this mob? I reckon basic vowel sounds, but the primary teaching girlfriend could do without the extra work.[/quote] Ehmm.......
Nah..I'll need to go and scratch my stubble for a while.....
Brian Blessed wrote:
Big Boy Did It, And Ran Away @ 1:08am I had a look at the Record forums based on your recommendation :D Dear God in Govan! I apologise for quoting at length but an actual self-declared Labour member there writes of his proposal to Number Ten: "Our suggestion is that Westminster takes all decisions on foreign policy (treaties, wars etc.) while Holyrood decides on the use of the Trident missiles on her territory (where and when to strike). Scotland would then be a nuclear power within the framework of Great Britain." "So far we have had no reply but it's early days." Where you do you even start with this mob? I reckon basic vowel sounds, but the primary teaching girlfriend could do without the extra work.
Ehmm.......
Nah..I'll need to go and scratch my stubble for a while.....
Posted by: Vivas, Embra on 1:58am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Brian Blessed[/bold] wrote:
[bold]Big Boy Did It, And Ran Away @ 1:08am[/bold]
I had a look at the Record forums based on your recommendation :D
Dear God in Govan! I apologise for quoting at length but an actual self-declared Labour member there writes of his proposal to Number Ten:
"Our suggestion is that Westminster takes all decisions on foreign policy (treaties, wars etc.) while Holyrood decides on the use of the Trident missiles on her territory (where and when to strike). Scotland would then be a nuclear power within the framework of Great Britain."
[bold]
"So far we have had no reply but it's early days."[/bold]
Where you do you even start with this mob? I reckon basic vowel sounds, but the primary teaching girlfriend could do without the extra work.[/quote] What if Jackie Baillie accidentally hits the red button whilst stretching for her 4th mid-morning scone and jam...
Brian Blessed wrote:
Big Boy Did It, And Ran Away @ 1:08am
I had a look at the Record forums based on your recommendation :D
Dear God in Govan! I apologise for quoting at length but an actual self-declared Labour member there writes of his proposal to Number Ten:
"Our suggestion is that Westminster takes all decisions on foreign policy (treaties, wars etc.) while Holyrood decides on the use of the Trident missiles on her territory (where and when to strike). Scotland would then be a nuclear power within the framework of Great Britain."
"So far we have had no reply but it's early days."
Where you do you even start with this mob? I reckon basic vowel sounds, but the primary teaching girlfriend could do without the extra work.
What if Jackie Baillie accidentally hits the red button whilst stretching for her 4th mid-morning scone and jam...
Posted by: TamHickey, Glasgow on 1:59am Fri 9 May 08
When Devolution was accepted by the people of Scotland, there was a feeling of being patted on the head by Westminster with the promise of "jam tomorrow". Well it looks like Robertson's jam factory will have to up production significantly!
When Devolution was accepted by the people of Scotland, there was a feeling of being patted on the head by Westminster with the promise of "jam tomorrow". Well it looks like Robertson's jam factory will have to up production significantly!
Posted by: nouveauxscum, Sett on 2:04am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Vivas[/bold] wrote:
[quote][bold]Brian Blessed[/bold] wrote: [bold]Big Boy Did It, And Ran Away @ 1:08am[/bold] I had a look at the Record forums based on your recommendation :D Dear God in Govan! I apologise for quoting at length but an actual self-declared Labour member there writes of his proposal to Number Ten: "Our suggestion is that Westminster takes all decisions on foreign policy (treaties, wars etc.) while Holyrood decides on the use of the Trident missiles on her territory (where and when to strike). Scotland would then be a nuclear power within the framework of Great Britain." [bold] "So far we have had no reply but it's early days."[/bold] Where you do you even start with this mob? I reckon basic vowel sounds, but the primary teaching girlfriend could do without the extra work.[/quote] What if Jackie Baillie accidentally hits the red button whilst stretching for her 4th mid-morning scone and jam...[/quote] I know she's a big girl but that arm would have to stretch all the way to Pennsylvannia Avenue.
lol
Vivas wrote:
Brian Blessed wrote: Big Boy Did It, And Ran Away @ 1:08am I had a look at the Record forums based on your recommendation :D Dear God in Govan! I apologise for quoting at length but an actual self-declared Labour member there writes of his proposal to Number Ten: "Our suggestion is that Westminster takes all decisions on foreign policy (treaties, wars etc.) while Holyrood decides on the use of the Trident missiles on her territory (where and when to strike). Scotland would then be a nuclear power within the framework of Great Britain." "So far we have had no reply but it's early days." Where you do you even start with this mob? I reckon basic vowel sounds, but the primary teaching girlfriend could do without the extra work.
What if Jackie Baillie accidentally hits the red button whilst stretching for her 4th mid-morning scone and jam...
I know she's a big girl but that arm would have to stretch all the way to Pennsylvannia Avenue.
lol
Posted by: Wullie, Aberdeen on 2:07am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Brian Blessed[/bold] wrote:
[bold]Big Boy Did It, And Ran Away @ 1:08am[/bold]
I had a look at the Record forums based on your recommendation :D
Dear God in Govan! I apologise for quoting at length but an actual self-declared Labour member there writes of his proposal to Number Ten:
"Our suggestion is that Westminster takes all decisions on foreign policy (treaties, wars etc.) while Holyrood decides on the use of the Trident missiles on her territory (where and when to strike). Scotland would then be a nuclear power within the framework of Great Britain."
[bold]
"So far we have had no reply but it's early days."[/bold]
Where you do you even start with this mob? I reckon basic vowel sounds, but the primary teaching girlfriend could do without the extra work.[/quote] LOL. Im speechless.
Brian Blessed wrote:
Big Boy Did It, And Ran Away @ 1:08am
I had a look at the Record forums based on your recommendation :D
Dear God in Govan! I apologise for quoting at length but an actual self-declared Labour member there writes of his proposal to Number Ten:
"Our suggestion is that Westminster takes all decisions on foreign policy (treaties, wars etc.) while Holyrood decides on the use of the Trident missiles on her territory (where and when to strike). Scotland would then be a nuclear power within the framework of Great Britain."
"So far we have had no reply but it's early days."
Where you do you even start with this mob? I reckon basic vowel sounds, but the primary teaching girlfriend could do without the extra work.
LOL. Im speechless.
Posted by: Dave, Away on 2:08am Fri 9 May 08
If anyone hasn't seen the latest FMQ's you simply must go to holyrooodtv and watch for yourselves...
I have not laughed that hard in a long time....better therapy than if you'd paid for it :-)
The GREEN party member was even joking about "even if Wendy Alexander manages to deliver Independence...."
Alex Salmond still is constantly talking about a positive future for Scotland in detail....He is still winning.
(Wendy is still prettier.)
[bold][italic]Wendy for Queen!![/italic] [/bold]
(Alex Salmond for President :-) )
If anyone hasn't seen the latest FMQ's you simply must go to holyrooodtv and watch for yourselves...
I have not laughed that hard in a long time....better therapy than if you'd paid for it :-)
The GREEN party member was even joking about "even if Wendy Alexander manages to deliver Independence...."
Alex Salmond still is constantly talking about a positive future for Scotland in detail....He is still winning.
(Wendy is still prettier.)
Wendy for Queen!!
(Alex Salmond for President :-) )
Posted by: Wallace, Perth on 2:11am Fri 9 May 08
On yesterday's FMQ's, Wendy Alexander was as usual slapped down by Alex Salmond, but the attacks on her by her fellow unionist party leaders were even more merciless in their tone and delivery. And for once even the usual barracking of the First Minister by the Labour rabble was half hearted. Maybe they are coming to realise what everyone else has, namely how much of a liability their leader is to their party's credibility.
On yesterday's FMQ's, Wendy Alexander was as usual slapped down by Alex Salmond, but the attacks on her by her fellow unionist party leaders were even more merciless in their tone and delivery. And for once even the usual barracking of the First Minister by the Labour rabble was half hearted. Maybe they are coming to realise what everyone else has, namely how much of a liability their leader is to their party's credibility.
Posted by: Im no really here, but over there on 2:14am Fri 9 May 08
I just looked at the Daily Record Forums too. I can't stand that format. It's like having all your female relatives over when all you want to do is watch Football on TV. As for content, look like they read the Herald headlines, but are too scared to post here. I'm off to have a shower.
I just looked at the Daily Record Forums too. I can't stand that format. It's like having all your female relatives over when all you want to do is watch Football on TV. As for content, look like they read the Herald headlines, but are too scared to post here. I'm off to have a shower.
Posted by: Wardog, Buckie on 2:49am Fri 9 May 08
Brown's Annus Horrilibus?
Brown's Annus Horrilibus?
Posted by: Edward, Edinburgh on 2:59am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Wen D[/bold] wrote:
latest (private) poll from beans constituency Lab 22% SNP 63% Lib 6% con 8% Others 1% No wonder the great snotgobbler is looking grimmer by the day! the 22% is a bit worrying . I KNOW its Scotland, but surely even WE dont have such a high percentage of imbiciles??[/quote] Is this true?
or conjecture?
any links?
Not doubting, just amazed at the change from 2005 election
If it were true, then no labour MP's would bereturned at the next election
Wen D wrote:
latest (private) poll from beans constituency Lab 22% SNP 63% Lib 6% con 8% Others 1% No wonder the great snotgobbler is looking grimmer by the day! the 22% is a bit worrying . I KNOW its Scotland, but surely even WE dont have such a high percentage of imbiciles??
Is this true?
or conjecture?
any links?
Not doubting, just amazed at the change from 2005 election
If it were true, then no labour MP's would bereturned at the next election
Posted by: Mike, Edinburgh on 3:21am Fri 9 May 08
I think the grass roots of New Labours supporters are in reality Nationalists. Perhaps Wendy has actually worked that out and wants Labour in Scotland to begin the transition into a party that wants to be around after Independance. Lets face it, there wont be any of the Westminster MP's moving up here and standing for election they are unelectable in Scotland after their treachery. There is little or no chance of any spots coming up for elected former MSP's to make the transition to Westminster.
The Scottish Parliament is going to be the main show, as far as any Scottish Politician is concerned. Better repositioning themselves soon, before Brown is thrown out and the English Labour MP's take over. If that is Wendy's ploy she and the Scottish Labour Party may actually survive Gordon Brown and his cabal of traitors, by working for an Independant Scotland.
Of course a Scottish Labour Party run by and for the Scottish People, would stand a better chance of being elected,after Independance than one that opposed the will of the Scottish People instead of supporting self determination.
I think the grass roots of New Labours supporters are in reality Nationalists. Perhaps Wendy has actually worked that out and wants Labour in Scotland to begin the transition into a party that wants to be around after Independance. Lets face it, there wont be any of the Westminster MP's moving up here and standing for election they are unelectable in Scotland after their treachery. There is little or no chance of any spots coming up for elected former MSP's to make the transition to Westminster.
The Scottish Parliament is going to be the main show, as far as any Scottish Politician is concerned. Better repositioning themselves soon, before Brown is thrown out and the English Labour MP's take over. If that is Wendy's ploy she and the Scottish Labour Party may actually survive Gordon Brown and his cabal of traitors, by working for an Independant Scotland.
Of course a Scottish Labour Party run by and for the Scottish People, would stand a better chance of being elected,after Independance than one that opposed the will of the Scottish People instead of supporting self determination.
Posted by: Traquir, Alba on 3:49am Fri 9 May 08
Personally I found this article really funny, but then the humor
quickly disappeared when I read the crap pack of lies that
The Herald put as a headline which disallowed comments :
"Salmond offers a Commons pact to Cameron"
I have put an official complaint in the Press Complaints
Commission for the outrageous press abuse and I highly
recommend others to do the same. The exact
text of my complaint is below :
Complaints can be submitted at : tinyurl.com/6xl5v9
"1(i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.
The article in question is complete inaccurate, misleading and
distorted.
In addition the The Herald prevented comments on this
inaccurate, misleading and distorted article, whilst
still allowing comments on similar stories. Preventing
comments on this just helps to compound the
degree to which this story is inaccurate, misleading
and distorted.
1(ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published.
As per (i) I would expect a full apology for this
violation per the Code Of Practice to which
The Herald has committed itself.
1(iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.
This story clearly violate this code of practice also.
2 Opportunity to reply
The Herald deliberately suspended comments on this
story thereby severely restricting the opportunity to reply.
10(ii) Engaging in misrepresentation
This story seriously misrepresents the position
of the SNP Government"
Personally I found this article really funny, but then the humor
quickly disappeared when I read the crap pack of lies that
The Herald put as a headline which disallowed comments :
"Salmond offers a Commons pact to Cameron"
I have put an official complaint in the Press Complaints
Commission for the outrageous press abuse and I highly
recommend others to do the same. The exact
text of my complaint is below :
Complaints can be submitted at : tinyurl.com/6xl5v9
"1(i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures.
The article in question is complete inaccurate, misleading and
distorted.
In addition the The Herald prevented comments on this
inaccurate, misleading and distorted article, whilst
still allowing comments on similar stories. Preventing
comments on this just helps to compound the
degree to which this story is inaccurate, misleading
and distorted.
1(ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published.
As per (i) I would expect a full apology for this
violation per the Code Of Practice to which
The Herald has committed itself.
1(iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.
This story clearly violate this code of practice also.
2 Opportunity to reply
The Herald deliberately suspended comments on this
story thereby severely restricting the opportunity to reply.
10(ii) Engaging in misrepresentation
This story seriously misrepresents the position
of the SNP Government"
Posted by: Traquir, Alba on 4:07am Fri 9 May 08
The gift that just keeps giving :)
'One Labour MP says: "The general view is Wendy has probably gone mad." '
http://tinyurl.com/4
3xg7a
The gift that just keeps giving :)
'One Labour MP says: "The general view is Wendy has probably gone mad." '
http://tinyurl.com/4
3xg7a
Posted by: Hamish McKropotkin, Bannockburn on 8:01am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Ronald[/bold] wrote:
One expects little from the likes of Douglas Fraser, but by Christ he never fails to disapoint ! Methinks its time that this NEW LABOUR flunky and lickspittle got his marching orders.[/quote] Wonderful Ronald,
You go on to a worker's employer's website and insist he is dismissed. You're a classy guy.
Ronald wrote:
One expects little from the likes of Douglas Fraser, but by Christ he never fails to disapoint ! Methinks its time that this NEW LABOUR flunky and lickspittle got his marching orders.
Wonderful Ronald,
You go on to a worker's employer's website and insist he is dismissed. You're a classy guy.
Posted by: Hamish McKropotkin, Bannockburn on 8:04am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Traquir[/bold] wrote:
Personally I found this article really funny, but then the humor quickly disappeared when I read the crap pack of lies that The Herald put as a headline which disallowed comments : "Salmond offers a Commons pact to Cameron" I have put an official complaint in the Press Complaints Commission for the outrageous press abuse and I highly recommend others to do the same. The exact text of my complaint is below : Complaints can be submitted at : tinyurl.com/6xl5v9 "1(i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures. The article in question is complete inaccurate, misleading and distorted. In addition the The Herald prevented comments on this inaccurate, misleading and distorted article, whilst still allowing comments on similar stories. Preventing comments on this just helps to compound the degree to which this story is inaccurate, misleading and distorted. 1(ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published. As per (i) I would expect a full apology for this violation per the Code Of Practice to which The Herald has committed itself. 1(iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact. This story clearly violate this code of practice also. 2 Opportunity to reply The Herald deliberately suspended comments on this story thereby severely restricting the opportunity to reply. 10(ii) Engaging in misrepresentation This story seriously misrepresents the position of the SNP Government"[/quote] ha ha ha ha ha ha ha you're a hoot, ha ha ha ha ha ha ..no really, you're too much ha ha ha ha ha you think the opportunity to reply includes the anonymous swivel-eyed paranoia-fest of these boards, that's what you think the right to reply is?..ooo ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.........you complete and utter buffoon.........
Traquir wrote:
Personally I found this article really funny, but then the humor quickly disappeared when I read the crap pack of lies that The Herald put as a headline which disallowed comments : "Salmond offers a Commons pact to Cameron" I have put an official complaint in the Press Complaints Commission for the outrageous press abuse and I highly recommend others to do the same. The exact text of my complaint is below : Complaints can be submitted at : tinyurl.com/6xl5v9 "1(i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information, including pictures. The article in question is complete inaccurate, misleading and distorted. In addition the The Herald prevented comments on this inaccurate, misleading and distorted article, whilst still allowing comments on similar stories. Preventing comments on this just helps to compound the degree to which this story is inaccurate, misleading and distorted. 1(ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion once recognised must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and - where appropriate - an apology published. As per (i) I would expect a full apology for this violation per the Code Of Practice to which The Herald has committed itself. 1(iii) The Press, whilst free to be partisan, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact. This story clearly violate this code of practice also. 2 Opportunity to reply The Herald deliberately suspended comments on this story thereby severely restricting the opportunity to reply. 10(ii) Engaging in misrepresentation This story seriously misrepresents the position of the SNP Government"
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha you're a hoot, ha ha ha ha ha ha ..no really, you're too much ha ha ha ha ha you think the opportunity to reply includes the anonymous swivel-eyed paranoia-fest of these boards, that's what you think the right to reply is?..ooo ha ha ha ha ha ha ha.........you complete and utter buffoon.........
Posted by: Hamish McKropotkin, Bannockburn on 8:16am Fri 9 May 08
[quote][bold]Mike[/bold] wrote:
I think the grass roots of New Labours supporters are in reality Nationalists. Perhaps Wendy has actually worked that out and wants Labour in Scotland to begin the transition into a party that wants to be around after Independance. Lets face it, there wont be any of the Westminster MP's moving up here and standing for election they are unelectable in Scotland after their treachery. There is little or no chance of any spots coming up for elected former MSP's to make the transition to Westminster. The Scottish Parliament is going to be the main show, as far as any Scottish Politician is concerned. Better repositioning themselves soon, before Brown is thrown out and the English Labour MP's take over. If that is Wendy's ploy she and the Scottish Labour Party may actually survive Gordon Brown and his cabal of traitors, by working for an Independant Scotland. Of course a Scottish Labour Party run by and for the Scottish People, would stand a better chance of being elected,after Independance than one that opposed the will of the Scottish People instead of supporting self determination. [/quote] Mike,
You are as delusional as the most swivel-eyed fanatic of the lunatic fringe of the nationalist movement. You assume everybody has as cynical and simplistic a view of the political landscape as the nutters who support the SNP.
Treachery indeed. Pathetic. The only consolation is that when this faux-enthusiasm for the SNP subsides they will be cast into the political wilderness for another 50 years.
Mike wrote:
I think the grass roots of New Labours supporters are in reality Nationalists. Perhaps Wendy has actually worked that out and wants Labour in Scotland to begin the transition into a party that wants to be around after Independance. Lets face it, there wont be any of the Westminster MP's moving up here and standing for election they are unelectable in Scotland after their treachery. There is little or no chance of any spots coming up for elected former MSP's to make the transition to Westminster. The Scottish Parliament is going to be the main show, as far as any Scottish Politician is concerned. Better repositioning themselves soon, before Brown is thrown out and the English Labour MP's take over. If that is Wendy's ploy she and the Scottish Labour Party may actually survive Gordon Brown and his cabal of traitors, by working for an Independant Scotland. Of course a Scottish Labour Party run by and for the Scottish People, would stand a better chance of being elected,after Independance than one that opposed the will of the Scottish People instead of supporting self determination.
Mike,
You are as delusional as the most swivel-eyed fanatic of the lunatic fringe of the nationalist movement. You assume everybody has as cynical and simplistic a view of the political landscape as the nutters who support the SNP.
Treachery indeed. Pathetic. The only consolation is that when this faux-enthusiasm for the SNP subsides they will be cast into the political wilderness for another 50 years.
Posted by: KT, Dundee on 8:17am Fri 9 May 08
Love the Casabllanca reference may I add 'Round up the usual suspects' Gray Chisholm etc. and 'she'll regret it maybe not today maybe not tomorrow but soon and for the rest of her life'
Love the Casabllanca reference may I add 'Round up the usual suspects' Gray Chisholm etc. and 'she'll regret it maybe not today maybe not tomorrow but soon and for the rest of her life'
Politics
INDEX
Comment | Read Comments (158)
