SNP are lying b******s as well !

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by One Day Soon

I'm not sure that's fair. I find it quite hard to believe that even the most spectacular clown in Scottish politics would come out with "I'm always surprised when one of my colleagues is arrested" as a pre-conceived sound bite.

---

😀

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

Much of which (as you surely know only too well) Scotland played a wholehearted part in, particularly enslavement and empire. We were as guilty as the likes of Spain, France, Portugal, the Dutch and other European nations who don't seem to put self-loathing ahead of accepting the sins of their past and trying to move on from them. I can't see how that has any bearing on independence. I'm unclear also why defeating Hitler should be seen as a blight upon the union.

We've been through this numerous times on here but suffice to say there's far more to our shared history as a union than only the bad stuff. From science, medicine and engineering to the arts, music and sport, each of the nations which make up the union have contributed richly to the greater whole. I reckon Scotland has, in fact, punched above its weight here. The geographical diversity of the UK is another wonderful thing and is close to my heart having spent much of my life working and travelling all over the nation. Culturally it's also a really diverse and dynamic melting pot and I think the Scottish nationalists' separatist mindset is an unhealthy, narrow one which ignores the fact that as a nation, politics aside, there is much more that unites us than divides us.

---

I actually agree with a lot of what you say here, obviously not all of it.

Half a century ago I think I’d have been an avowed unionist and I’m not sure the argument for independence was all that strong.

Possibly since Thatcher thought I’ve just seen 2 countries going in different directions. The benefits that were once there for both parties have diminished. A lot of the union benefits feel like ancient history to me and the direction of travel doesn’t appear to favour the union and it would appear that “the youth of today” think likewise.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Sixth largest economy in the world.
High degree of integration including energy infrastructure.
Led the world on the abolition of slavery.
NHS.
Significant levels of internal devolution.
The British Empire was nothing to be proud of ( and Scottish people were active paticipants), but some more enlightened approaches to decolonisation, compared to other European nations.
High degree of multiculturism, particularly in larger cities in England.

I don't feel particularly proud to be British or Scottish. But I'm happy being both I appreciate you need to frame it as being proud to be British or proud to be Scottish. For you it can't be both.

---

Never in a month of Sunday's did I ever think I'd see the abolition of slavery used as a benefit of the union, in the present day.

Clutching much. 😆

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jones28

It's not that it can't be both, it's that I see no valid reasoning for it to be both. If you'd asked me ten or fifteen years ago I would probably have said there were positives to being part of the union and I would have said the NHS, EU Membership and the UK's unique position within the EU, strong currency, our approach to migration and integration of economic migrants, our globalist outlook and general position globally as a well respected country, our prices are fair and life is liveable.

Now? Our deputy prime-minister has resigned because hes a bully. Thats where we are.

---

I didn't bring up slavery, but it's interesting that you can't bring yourself to acknowledge the role that Britain played. As for decolonisation, do you prefer the French, Belgian or Dutch approach? And note, the bullying DPM has resigned. He would have been sacked if he hadn't. Actions have consequences. Isn't that a good thing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

Never in a month of Sunday's did I ever think I'd see the abolition of slavery used as a benefit of the union, in the present day.

Clutching much. 😆

---

I didn't bring it up. It was a critique of the Union.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

I didn't bring it up. It was a critique of the Union.

---

It's in your post mate.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ronaldo7

It's in your post mate.

---

In response to an earlier post.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

In response to an earlier post.

---

🎯

Led the world. 😆

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

I think you might want to counter with facts?

---

I think I did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

Much of which (as you surely know only too well) Scotland played a wholehearted part in, particularly enslavement and empire. We were as guilty as the likes of Spain, France, Portugal, the Dutch and other European nations who don't seem to put self-loathing ahead of accepting the sins of their past and trying to move on from them. I can't see how that has any bearing on independence. I'm unclear also why defeating Hitler should be seen as a blight upon the union.

We've been through this numerous times on here but suffice to say there's far more to our shared history as a union than only the bad stuff. From science, medicine and engineering to the arts, music and sport, each of the nations which make up the union have contributed richly to the greater whole. I reckon Scotland has, in fact, punched above its weight here. The geographical diversity of the UK is another wonderful thing and is close to my heart having spent much of my life working and travelling all over the nation. Culturally it's also a really diverse and dynamic melting pot and I think the Scottish nationalists' separatist mindset is an unhealthy, narrow one which ignores the fact that as a nation, politics aside, there is much more that unites us than divides us.

---

Theres not much I disagree with you about there. But you feel one way, I do not. I think there is now more that divides us than unites us and I think we've gone beyond the point of return. I don't see the Labour party bringing us together, Keir Starmer is useless and I've seen wet fish with more charisma.

The SNP are not perfect, far from it, and I think they've been guilty of several major misdemeanors in recent times. Sturgeon led the country through Covid as well as I think she could have done under the circumstances, especially compared to the incompetence of the Westminster government. I think overall they've done well for Scots, as is their prerogative, but they need some major overhauling and will have a lot of work to do to gain back the ground they've lost.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by grunt

I think I did.

---

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/di...y/english/fact

Those SNP squirrel legions seem to be diverting discussion away from the actual subject matter of this thread I see...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

I didn't bring up slavery, but it's interesting that you can't bring yourself to acknowledge the role that Britain played. As for decolonisation, do you prefer the French, Belgian or Dutch approach? And note, the bullying DPM has resigned. He would have been sacked if he hadn't. Actions have consequences. Isn't that a good thing?

---

I did acknowledge it, I also critiqued it.

Well done Britain, you abolished slavery.

I refuse to believe that it is in any way a positive of the union though :faf:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jones28

I did acknowledge it, I also critiqued it.

Well done Britain, you abolished slavery.

I refuse to believe that it is in any way a positive of the union though :faf:

---

Why? You can't have it both ways. If people rightly critique Britain because of empire why can't they acknowledge the role in ending some of the worst aspects of it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Why? You can't have it both ways. If people rightly critique Britain because of empire why can't they acknowledge the role in ending some of the worst aspects of it?

---

What about if you think it’s a mixed bag but it’s 2023 now and irrelevant moving forward?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

https://youtu.be/bRvyH_SgtVk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ozyhibby

What about if you think it’s a mixed bag but it’s 2023 now and irrelevant moving forward?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

---

I agree. I think endless harping back isn't a good thing, but it is helpful to understand the past. When the Empire and enslavement is cited as a reason not to want the Union then that is at least worthy of discussion, wouldn't you say?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Why?You can't have it both ways. If people rightly critique Britain because of empire why can't they acknowledge the role in ending some of the worst aspects of it?

---

Yes I can. I don't think Britains abolition of the slave trade in any way make up for the hundreds of years that it benefitted from it.

The Atlantic slave trade was banned in 1807, but didn't abolish salvery until the 1830's, and even then it was gradual and the owners were massively compensated.

I'm not sure I can care too much about other countries actions around slavery, or colonialism to be honest.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

I agree. I think endless harping back isn't a good thing, but it is helpful to understand the past. When the Empire and enslavement is cited as a reason not to want the Union then that is at least worthy of discussion, wouldn't you say?

---

Fair enough but it’s never something I cite as a reason for independence.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

https://www.collinsdictionary.com/di...y/english/fact

---

Don't be so patronising.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Why? You can't have it both ways. If people rightly critique Britain because of empire why can't they acknowledge the role in ending some of the worst aspects of it?

---

The detail surrounding "the ending of slavery" just doesn't stand up, archie. It's a great soundbite with William Wilberforce at the fore seeking abolition but it didn't pan out in a way that was as simple as that.



Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Jones28

Theres not much I disagree with you about there. But you feel one way, I do not. I think there is now more that divides us than unites us and I think we've gone beyond the point of return. I don't see the Labour party bringing us together, Keir Starmer is useless and I've seen wet fish with more charisma.

The SNP are not perfect, far from it, and I think they've been guilty of several major misdemeanors in recent times. Sturgeon led the country through Covid as well as I think she could have done under the circumstances, especially compared to the incompetence of the Westminster government. I think overall they've done well for Scots, as is their prerogative, but they need some major overhauling and will have a lot of work to do to gain back the ground they've lost.

---

As I said, it's always seemed to me there's more nuance to be found in a debate about the union than viewing the whole thing only through a political lens.

If basing the argument solely around politics, though, then yes obviously there's much to be dissatisfied about when it comes to the way the country's been run in recent years. However, governments come and go and already Sunak is proving a far trickier target to hit than his two predecessors, simply by appearing relatively competent and, perhaps as importantly, quite dull. Starmer, as you say, also lacks charisma but we had charisma (at least in the eyes of some) by the bucketload with the likes of Johnson and Salmond but the former proved himself utterly undeserving of the highest office in the land, while the questionable moral fibre of the latter played a major part in his undoing. Perhaps it's time to give the dullards the chance to show what they can do.

When it comes to the SNP, it's unquestionably down to them (or more accurately, Salmond) that independence has become so much more than a niche subject. However, as a vehicle for it they have been found sorely wanting. The legacy of Sturgeonism looks thinner by the day ('leading the country through Covid' gets accorded way too much clout, largely because there's not much else to commend her tenure) and we're left with a bewildered-looking 'continuity' FM trying in vain to put out the toxic binfire she and her cohorts have left in their wake. It's hardly a glowing CV with which to persuade folk of Scotland's capacity for self-determination. Being slightly less incompetent than Westminster doesn't really sell the dream.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

As I said, it's always seemed to me there's more nuance to be found in a debate about the union than viewing the whole thing only through a political lens.

If basing the argument solely around politics, though, then yes obviously there's much to be dissatisfied about when it comes to the way the country's been run in recent years. However, governments come and go and already Sunak is proving a far trickier target to hit than his two predecessors, simply by appearing relatively competent and, perhaps as importantly, quite dull. Starmer, as you say, also lacks charisma but we had charisma (at least in the eyes of some) by the bucketload with the likes of Johnson and Salmond but the former proved himself utterly undeserving of the highest office in the land, while the questionable moral fibre of the latter played a major part in his undoing. Perhaps it's time to give the dullards the chance to show what they can do.

When it comes to the SNP, it's unquestionably down to them (or more accurately, Salmond) that independence has become so much more than a niche subject. However, as a vehicle for it they have been found sorely wanting. The legacy of Sturgeonism looks thinner by the day ('leading the country through Covid' gets accorded way too much clout, largely because there's not much else to commend her tenure) and we're left with a bewildered-looking 'continuity' FM trying in vain to put out the toxic binfire she and her cohorts have left in their wake. It's hardly a glowing CV with which to persuade folk of Scotland's capacity for self-determination. Being slightly less incompetent than Westminster doesn't really sell the dream.

---

If its not seen incompetence by the Tories and it takes on a different meaning.

The Tories aren't incompetent, the direction the country has taken is exactly what they want. Outright hatred of those who they label "unpatriotic", new billionaires every year, wages for ordinary people being shaved every year, low tax for the rich, high tax for the poor, complaints about anti-racist sentiments, seeking to divide people on whatever marker is convenient, slow destruction of the NHS, milking money from the public purse into private hands.. the list goes on.

It's handy to say it's by accident but its not at all. Their policies and/or lack of them are doing the exact job as intended, making rich people richer and making poor people frightened and poorer.

The cure is seen as a super-dooper Labour Party coming along to fix it any time now but the UK's institutions will ensure the Tories will be back and loop starts again.

They may have been lax, but that suits them ie housing, they might seem incompetent, ie brexit but they are cashing in. It might even be haphazard but the Tories are still milking ordinary people for the betterment of the already well off - job done. Very competently executed as well.

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by archie

Right? My point was that Ozy appears to believe that those who are critical of the Scottish Government live by a 'code'. Apparently this code of silence means we can't criticise the UK Government. So when someone who isn't in the UK government opines and we don't comment are we still following the code? Might it be that Ozy needs the comfort of confecting a conspiracy to deflect from the issues the Scottish Government is facing at the moment?

---

On here, it works exactly the same both ways. Indy supporters will generally only acknowledge SNP failings if they get to also say but what about the Tories? Pro-union supporters acknowledge Tory failings with but what about the SNP? You do it yourself all over the place. No doubt I have too.

So on the only thread that is critical of the SNP, we’re back talking about the Union and Tories. Well played.

Shouldn’t be long until the next SNP headline and the thread can get back on topic.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhileTheChief..

So on the only thread that is critical of the SNP, we’re back talking about the Union and Tories. Well played.

Shouldn’t be long until the next SNP headline and the thread can get back on topic.

---

Feel free.

What are the barriers stopping anyone posting?

Sent from my SM-A528B using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhileTheChief..

So on the only thread that is critical of the SNP, we’re back talking about the Union and Tories. Well played.

Shouldn’t be long until the next SNP headline and the thread can get back on topic.

---

Ok a nice hypothetical question, if Sturgeon get arrested, charged and imprisoned, would she fancy sharing a cell with Isla Bryson :wink: :greengrin

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Berwickhibby

Ok a nice hypothetical question, if Sturgeon get arrested, charged and imprisoned, would she fancy sharing a cell with Isla Bryson :wink: :greengrin

---

This is the quality of chat that makes this forum what it is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Berwickhibby

Ok a nice hypothetical question, if Sturgeon get arrested, charged and imprisoned, would she fancy sharing a cell with Isla Bryson :wink: :greengrin

---

Not even going to go anywhere near that, way too dangerous!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by He's here!

As I said, it's always seemed to me there's more nuance to be found in a debate about the union than viewing the whole thing only through a political lens.

If basing the argument solely around politics, though, then yes obviously there's much to be dissatisfied about when it comes to the way the country's been run in recent years. However, governments come and go and already Sunak is proving a far trickier target to hit than his two predecessors, simply by appearing relatively competent and, perhaps as importantly, quite dull. Starmer, as you say, also lacks charisma but we had charisma (at least in the eyes of some) by the bucketload with the likes of Johnson and Salmond but the former proved himself utterly undeserving of the highest office in the land, while the questionable moral fibre of the latter played a major part in his undoing. Perhaps it's time to give the dullards the chance to show what they can do.

When it comes to the SNP, it's unquestionably down to them (or more accurately, Salmond) that independence has become so much more than a niche subject. However, as a vehicle for it they have been found sorely wanting. The legacy of Sturgeonism looks thinner by the day ('leading the country through Covid' gets accorded way too much clout, largely because there's not much else to commend her tenure) and we're left with a bewildered-looking 'continuity' FM trying in vain to put out the toxic binfire she and her cohorts have left in their wake. It's hardly a glowing CV with which to persuade folk of Scotland's capacity for self-determination. Being slightly less incompetent than Westminster doesn't really sell the dream.

---

I've still no question that Starmer will do a better job than any of the Tory prime-minsters we've had, but I also think some of the rhetoric coming from is frightening if this is supposed to be our "left" party.

I don't agree about Sturgeon and COVID, I think she deserves every credit for the way she conducted herself throughout the pandemic.

Bringing it back to the SNP, they have "must do better, C- "on their report card from me at the moment. I've drifted massively from politics in recent years because of the way Westminster politics has been, I just found myself getting angry.