Thursday, June 18, 2020

Ruth Davidson's catastrophically misjudged attack on Devi Sridhar may unwittingly reveal a lot about the toxic culture of the Scottish Tory party

Ruth Davidson made a catastrophic error of judgement yesterday - not just morally, but also from a public relations point of view.  She questioned the independence and integrity of Professor Devi Sridhar, someone who has earned a deserved reputation with the public during the pandemic for fearlessly speaking truth to power when many other experts have been silent or overly cautious.  Sridhar is not ideological - she'll praise any politician who she thinks is doing the right thing from a public health point of view, and castigate any politician who she thinks is doing the wrong thing.

What led to Davidson's gaffe was a misunderstanding - probably an honest one - on the part of the ITV journalist Peter MacMahon, who thought a tweet from Sridhar calling for schools to reopen properly in mid-August constituted an implied criticism of the Scottish Government's policy.  In fact, Sridhar was calling for the virus to be suppressed so thoroughly that it would actually be safe to relax social distancing in August, which puts her on precisely the same page as Nicola Sturgeon.  (Not a coincidence, because she almost certainly played a part in persuading Ms Sturgeon to adopt that policy in the first place.)  She categorically wasn't saying that we should throw caution to the wind and abandon restrictions while the virus is still present in the community at dangerously high levels, which is essentially the position of the Scottish Government's most vocal critics.

I'd suggest the misunderstanding came about because of a difference in communication style between politicians and journalists on the one hand, and academics on the other.  When stating what she thinks should be done, Sridhar has always been careful to honestly point out the other side of the story and the potential downsides.  When lockdown was announced in March, something she was firmly in favour of, practically the first thing she did was to stress the harms of lockdown and the undesirability of continuing with it for too long - ironically echoing some of the language of the "let the virus rip" brigade she opposes.  Any spin doctor would have been tearing their hair out at her 'naivety', because there was an obvious danger of undermining her own main objective.  Politicians in her shoes would instead have had a laser-like focus on making the case for lockdown, and would have played down or ignored any counter-arguments.  But it's Sridhar's honesty in painting a complete picture that has won her so much trust.  That's what she was doing on schools - she was saying the virus needs to be suppressed and that children need to be back in school as soon as possible.  Both of those statements are true, not just one of them, and there is no contradiction between the two.  Sticking with stronger restrictions now is what will hopefully make a relaxation in August feasible and responsible.

Having posted a second tweet to clear up any misapprehensions, it was fascinating that her clarification was automatically assumed to be dishonest by Ruth Davidson - even though anyone who follows Sridhar knows it is absolutely consistent with what she has been saying for months.  It seems that Davidson could not conceive of the possibility that anyone, even a leading academic, might have nuanced thought-processes they would actually want to share with others.  Instead, the former Scottish Tory leader thought the only plausible explanation was that Sridhar had been leaned on by Ms Sturgeon and had cravenly 'walked back' her original statement.  The even bigger misjudgement was to assume other people would find that a plausible explanation too.  Almost nobody did.

If Davidson's hopelessly faulty instincts on this matter are the product of her personal experience of human nature over the last few years, I would suggest that she's unwittingly revealed rather a lot about the toxic culture of the Tory party.  It's fear and bullying that make the world go round, but only if you happen to live in a world where nobody has any integrity, or principles they're willing to abide by.

96 comments:

  1. Devi Sridhar is one of the most consistently clearly informed and incisive voices in the current crisis. The public of all persuasions should be able to trust her ahead of any political games. But Davidson is in danger of ruining that trust - in effect trying to smear Sridhar, make her look somehow weak or partisan. Trying to drag her down to Davidson's level of paolitical mud-slinging. That would be a loss to us all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Strange it is that no one has heard of her.

      Delete
    2. Covidia is an ignorant Nazi.

      Delete
    3. Well there's a surprise. Just proves that you really are as thick as pig shit.

      Delete
    4. Hold up, is GWC actually Baron Foulkes of Cumnock?

      It's a probable hypothesis!

      Delete
    5. Sridhar's never off the news. Brit media love her; invite her on all the time.

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-52486714

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-52486714

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000j50w/sign/question-time-2020-14052020

      Delete
  2. And of course, the sainted Ruth wasn't alone in her misjudgements.

    Blair McDougall:
    "She should be delivering this to a camcorder, with the peeling wallpaper of an abandoned farmhouse behind her, in a video that begins with someone in a balaclava holding a copy of today’s newspaper."

    "Just a joke," he said.

    George Foulkes:
    "I also don't know who you are but you seem a little over sensitive!"

    As James says, it shows so much more of their real selves than they think it does.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. When I saw McDougall's tweet, I assumed he was taking part in a Better Together/Johnson-Cummings supporting campaign with his old colleague Davidson. I blocked Foulkes some time ago because his tweets were starting to resemble the ramblings of an old drunk in the corner of a bar and just as embarrassing and boring.

      The tweets really do give in an insight into the vile environment these British nationalists inhabit.

      Delete
    2. Iain, I think you are right. Judging from the similarity in phraseology of the Tories, S. Labour, Lib Dems and much of the media, I think that they are all reading from the same press briefings. At the start of lockdown, Messrs Carlaw and Leonard showed a substantial degree of solidarity in Parliament with the SG stance. Indeed, Mr Carlaw defended the FM when the London media, such as Piers Morgan, made an ill-informed and visceral attack on her. However, as the epidemic has played out and as the SG daily briefings have proved far more seriously informative and consultative in tone than the mendacity and outrageous claims of the Westminster ones, confidence in the SG has increased and that towards Westminster has nose-dived, particularly after the Cummings affair. With polls showing a slow but steady increase in support for independence and with increasing likelihood of an SNP majority at Holyrood next year, bolstered by increased numbers Green MSPs, then panic has come in and, for at least a month, we have been pretty much back to Better Together Project Fear. BBC Scotland, as before, has been in the van.

      Delete
  3. Your poll numbers have spooked them.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Absolutely!

      It's a destructive mentality though, and it pervades down to the ground of people who voted no who we need to convert to yes. Which sets a challenge of how to persuade them.

      Delete
  4. Scottish Tories, Labourites, and Lib Dems, are puppets on the strings of Westminster. After independence gather them up and dump them over the border where they wil be happy at last.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Your advocating the forced deportation of people from a country due to their political beliefs then? This indy Scotland does not sound a very nice place in this case.

      Delete
    2. I don't think that "Scottish Tories, Labourites, and Lib Dems, are puppets on the strings of Westminster" as you say.

      That's too kind.

      Their current mindset is trying to make the Scottish Government look *as bad* as Westminster. In 2014 it was the "best of both worlds", now when one side is (unsuprisingly) abysmal it's the 'worst of both worlds'.

      Delete
    3. The job of the Tories Lab and LD and greens is to oppose the Government, that's why they are called the opposition. So they are perfectly in the rights to question the government and highlight what they think the Scot Gov is doing wrong on badly. That's what opposition parties do.

      Delete
    4. Not that I'm advocating such things, but England/the UK regularly rounds up and deports people from Scotland against the will of Scots / the Scottish government

      Delete
    5. You could argue Scots had agreed to this in 2014, however the recent Section 30 refusal means these are now mass forced deportations.

      Delete
    6. I though a indy Scotland was meant to be better than being in the UK though? According to some apparently not appears some supporters of Independence seem to want to forcibly deport people because of the political party they support/vote for, something the UK Government has quite rightly never done. Ties in with politicians and their supporters not being allowed to say anything 'bad' about the Scottish Government.

      Delete
    7. Are you honestly arguing that if I can find a few brits online that want to deport people for political views, that I can consider this representative of Brits as a whole? Are you like dumb as fuck?

      If deportation of unionists was Scottish government policy, then you'd be very right to be up in arms. But some faceless poster on the internet who could in fact be a unionist? You really need to get out more if that's how your brain works. I'd certainly not give someone a job if that was how low their level of intellect was.

      Of course the UK government is actually forcibly deportation Scots for no reason at all against the will of Scotland's government and people. It's an unpleasant, ugly state.

      Delete
    8. Nope your lying once again. I said that some supporters. Its worrying that even some supporters think this way. Can you show were the UK Gov is deporting Scots please (people with Scottish/UK citizenship)

      Delete
    9. So you must be more worried about remaining in the UK given it has more people that think this way, ergo a higher vote share for strong to far right parties?

      I mean the guy that pished on the PC memorial in London was British and pro-brexit. Is that what the a future in the UK looks like?

      By Scots I mean people living and working in Scotland (who the population / Scottish government want to remain here). I wasn't thinking along blood and soil lines like you seem to be.

      Delete
    10. You must be worried that there are just a few English people like this right?

      https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glasgow-news/raging-footballer-bawled-im-superior-18382961

      hRaging footballer bawled 'I'm superior' during anti-Scottish rant in Drumchapel

      James Hurst coughed at cops then claimed he had coronavirus and branded them 'Scottish slaves'...

      ..The former West Brom and Portsmouth defender initially contacted the police claiming to be the victim of domestic abuse...

      ...The ex-England youth international was told to calm down...


      And really worried about this deep racist hatred?

      https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-ban-scottish-people-from-being-prime-minister-2019-6?r=US&IR=T

      Boris Johnson said Scottish people should not be allowed to be prime minister

      Boris Johnson said it would be "utterly outrageous" for a Scottish person to become prime minister.

      I'm glad I don't polish Johnson's shoes like GWC.

      Delete
    11. Imagine wanting to make a minority group second class citizens politically. Deport them from normal society and the rights it bestows. Deep, deep racist hatred. Johnson is like Churchill in this respect at least.

      Delete
    12. I mean the guy that pished on the PC memorial in London was British and pro-brexit

      Was he. Of course he was British just like you and me are but have you any evidence that he was Pro Brexit?


      Delete
    13. He was English/British and right wing / there to protect statues of racist right wingers. So an educated guess.

      However that doesn't change my point. Surely even a few people like that from England concerns you RE continuing the union?

      Or are you just racist against Scots?

      Delete
    14. I'm more concerned that people no matter what their political leanings think its ok to break the law. Attacking the police is wrong /illegal no matter who is doing it. Defacing pulling down statues is wrong\ illegal no matter who is doing it. Urinating in public is illegal no matter who is doing it.

      Unlike you i'm quite broad minded I don't go around separating people into groups based on their political leanings and then make generalised statements based on that.

      I'm also not bothered about calling out people who do wrong no matter their nationality or political leanings, you however seem obsessed with the English/Brexit /Conservatives

      Delete
    15. Erm, you do nothing but focus on 'Scottish nationalists'.

      And I'm not obsessed with the English/Brexiters/Conservatives; it's very obviously other other way around. I support independence / Scotland minding its own business while the former a refusing a Section 30 / trying to control Scotland. It's them that's obsessed with Scotland. It's nuts to suggest otherwise.

      They are racist anti-Scottish too, as evidenced by the PM believing Scots should not be allowed to hold high office in the UK because they are 'vermin'.

      It's really not me that's the problem. I for example have no problem at all with an English person becoming the FM or PM of Scotland. I'm not filled with racist hatred like the British government is.

      If Johnson had said blacks or muslims shouldn't be allowed to be PM, there'd have been uproar in the British press. However, because it's acceptable to be anti-Scottish in the UK because we are seen as 'vermin', his comments were not condemned.

      Delete
    16. I post about my politics. You just post England bad links to articles..

      Anyhow enjoy the rest of your day.

      Delete
    17. The PM of the UK isn't political?

      You are a liar. The two links about don't refer to England. One is about Scotland's PM, the other about a bloke in Scotland.

      Delete
    18. Skier, if being pro Brexit makes you right wing then what does being pro Scottish Nat si make you?

      Delete
    19. I've consistently voted for higher taxes (personal and business), better welfare (I support citizens basic income), government funded education to uni level, free movement (international socialism), nationalization / keeping key utilities nationalized, and end to UK tax avoidance havens...for less gravy train politicians, against racism / bigotry, improved democracy and international human rights (such as the right to self determination)...

      That puts me on the left and liberal. A poor fit for the Tory UK.

      Delete
    20. Strange that you support the neo liberal(fascist) EU

      Delete
  5. I don't know if William Purves was joking (I hope so), but his comments touch on a subject that I find fascinating. What are diehard unionists going to do after independence? Presumably a tiny minority WILL up sticks and move to England or Wales? Only the monumentally stupid ones would move to NI, because it would almost certainly be out of the independence frying pan into the United Ireland fire for them. (GWC perhaps?)

    I suppose a sizeable minority will start a new movement to have Scotland re-unite with rUK?
    One generation? Two?

    The vast majority will quickly accept the new reality, particularly if the heavens don't fall in and we are reduced to eating only porridge, as the doomsayers predict.

    Anyone got different ideas? ...... not you, GWC ..... please? Your ideas are just silly....

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The unhinged former history professor from Edinburgh recently suggested some parts of Scotland (basically, Edinburgh & Borders) remain in Rumpuk, while the rest would be independent. We'll see a lot more if that as the poll numbers increase. I'm betting on Shetland and maybe Orkney being visited and wooed by British nationalist politicians and old historical differences being touted around. The demographics of Orkney, Borders, Galloway and Highlands suggest this idea will gain some traction.

      Delete
    2. Not mine, but I saw somewhere an idea that there is basically a race between NI and Scotland to get out of the UK. Should one escape substantially before the other, some of its diehard unionists are predicted to move to the other, thereby strengthening the UK's hold onto that part.

      Delete
    3. Those parts of England/Wales that wanted to remain in the EU could come and join is in some sort of new union of equals.

      If Scotland is divisible, so's England.

      Delete
    4. You'd have to hate the English/Welsh to think it's ok for bits of Scotland to be allowed to remain in the UK, but not all those bits of England/Wales that wanted to stay in the EU with Scotland to do that.

      Delete
    5. Birnie, Scotland and NI are in the UK Union. It is your lot who have a problem. We are here to stay.

      Delete
  6. Scotland's not staying in the EU, its already left. This of course despite the SNP failing to stop Scotland being dragged out of the EU against its wishes as it kept promising.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ok then, 'rejoin the EU'.

      However, we are currently still in the EU in that all its laws still apply. Brexiters are too scared to leave it seems.

      Anyway, the different deal for N. Ireland shows how anti-Scottish the UK is. English/British racist hatred for Scotland is the reason a similar deal to N. Ireland wasn't pursued for Scots.

      Delete
    2. Your right the EU could of insisted on Scotland having a different deal than the rest of the UK like they did for NI and refused to sign a deal if the UK Gov did not agree to one.

      However, don't think the EU states are racist in not doing this, just think they were not that bothered what happened to Scotland tbh.

      Delete
    3. No, the EU doesn't interfere in Scotland's affairs because it's not racist towards Scots like the rUK is.

      In the case of N. Ireland, it didn't interfere either; the different deal request came from member state Ireland.

      Delete
    4. so your saying no member states cared enough about Scotland having a special deal like Ireland did for NI?

      Delete
    5. The EU cared enough to invent a Common Fisheries Policy when Scotland got hauled into its sphere.
      On the other hand it was liberal enough not to intervene in Catalonia. That's liberal as in pc policy 'values' proto-fascist. A suitable ally for the Sturgeonites.

      Delete
    6. Skier complains when Westminster makes law that effect RUK but anything the EU wasters pass is OK. Skier wants the EU to run Scotland.

      Delete
    7. Scotland freely chose the EU. It's not freely chosen the UK; a Section 30 was refused.

      Delete
    8. "so your saying no member states cared enough about Scotland having a special deal like Ireland did for NI?"

      Other states should stay out of Scotland's business just like England should. But doesn't.

      Delete
    9. I'd be immediately against the EU if it suddenly took a position on Scottish indy (be that Yes or no) and started trying to dictate our post brexit situation.

      That would make it just like England.

      Delete
    10. England does not involve its self with Scotland's business, the UK Government involves its self in reserved matters (such as international relations). The UK Government has elected representatives from England Wales and Scotland.

      Delete
    11. English MPs believed they should decide on the future of Scotland, not Scottish people. They stood on this as a manifesto pledge and won a big majority.

      They take control of devolved powers whenever they see fit, such as with the brexit bill, so they can get England a better deal. Fishing is devolved. Or at least it was until England figured it would barter away Scots fisheries to secure a better deal for the English, while refusing a section 30.

      The PM is English and openly racist against Scottish people. He said Scots should not be allowed to become PM of the UK.

      Imagine the uproar if Sturgeon said English people should be banned from being FM.

      Delete
    12. Some random on the internet saying unionists should be deported is somehow a reason to attack an entire country / people, yet this:

      https://www.businessinsider.com/boris-johnson-ban-scottish-people-from-being-prime-minister-2019-6?r=US&IR=T

      Boris Johnson said Jewish people should not be allowed to be prime minister.

      Is totally fine? From the PM of the UK? Yet no inquiry? No calls for him to apologise for the open racist hatred? No police questioning?

      Shows you how deeply ingrained the UK racism is against Scots.

      It's illegal to discriminate against people based on their race. Except if they are Scottish it seems.

      Delete
    13. I read somewhere that Tony Blair was in league with the Vatican to attack the Muslim hordes who were threatening Christendom. To get Vatican support he had to change his allegiance.

      Delete
    14. If he had been PM in 2005 im sure more would of been made of it.

      Anyhow I see once again you are saying that the UK Goverment is just England.

      They take control of devolved powers whenever they see fit, such as with the brexit bill

      Did only English MPs vote to take these powers? Not a single MP from Scotland, Wales or NI voted yes?

      THe answer of course is that MPs from other countries in the UK Voted yes, therefore it is not just English MPs as you claim.

      Always amazes me that people who scream 'racism' the loudest are racist themselves - ie only blaming England for UK Gov decisions.

      Delete
    15. MPs of British parties are classed as English MPs because all Unionist parties are registered in London ergo English

      Just because a person is Scottish doesn't mean they represent Scotland, Michael Gove is Scottish but doesn't like anybody knowing that, born and bred in Aberdeen and past Grandmaster of the OO, which makes him a scumbag English MP

      Delete
    16. Err no there really not. When you say English MP or Welsh MP or Scottish MP you are referring to the country there constituency is in. Are you honestly trying to say that a MP who represents a seat in Wales should be referred to as a English MP?

      Of course Michael Gove is an English MP, as I say above he represents an English constituency. The fact that he does however, does not stop him being any less Scottish of course.

      Delete
    17. ScottytheScotinScotlandJune 19, 2020 at 10:53 AM

      Gove is British. Just like Brown, Marr, Kuensberg, Wark, Neil and all the rest of them that sign up to the Ragmans Roll.

      Delete
  7. I have a vaccine against British nationalists

    ReplyDelete
  8. ScottytheScotinScotlandJune 18, 2020 at 9:57 PM

    Someone called anonymous above states " England does not involve itself with Scotlands business". It just steals Scotlands resources.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Just England? Not a single bit of Scotland's resources goes to Wales or Northern Ireland? Your sure about that and have evidence to back that up?

      Delete
    2. Stealing a country's resources is what The UK has always done.
      While we're exposing the evils of the slave trade which was barely worth a mention when I was at the school, nobody in London seems keen on criticising the notion that the British Empire was based on theft and exploitation.
      Colonialism begat Racism.
      Awarding OBEs CBEs MBEs proves that the UK is in denial.
      It's simple NO NATION SHOULD RULE ANOTHER.
      Wales Scotland and Ireland are on a journey.
      England needs to take a long and radical look at itself and where its place is in the world.

      Delete
    3. Have Wales or N. Ireland refused Scotland a Section 30?

      I thought it was only the EVEL English government that did that.

      Delete
    4. ScottytheScotinScotlandJune 19, 2020 at 10:45 AM

      Ramstan - well said. An honours system that awards medals referring to being a commander of the Brutish Empire is reflective of a country that is, as you say, in denial of its past.

      Anonymous - the money goes to the south east/London - that's England. Westminster got the taste for stealing other countries resources when they took control over the British isles. They then took the same colonial attitude outwards to the rest of the world. Westminster is England.

      It is time England stood on its own two feet. Time for England to give up colonialism. Time for England to be independent.

      Delete
    5. For sure, the UK like the other European powers quite wrongly went and stripped other countries of their wealth.

      However lets drop the pretence that it was just England that did this, whilst Scotland was a innocent party

      Scotland pre union had numerous attempts at doing the same. In fact some historians think that the failure of the Darien Scheme was once of the motivations of the act of the union. Why bankrupt yourself on failed attempts at colonisation, when you could join a union and benefit from the wealth of that countries Empire.

      Delete
    6. I thought it was only the EVEL English government that did that

      THe UK Goverment is made up of MPs from England Scotland & Wales therefore is not an English Goverment. Only if it was just MPs representing English consiuancies in the goverment it could be called an English Goverment, obviously.

      Scotty, when did England have control of the British Isles. Are you saying England solely and on its own controls England, Ireland, Wales, Scotland, The Channel Islands and the Isle of Man?

      Also can you provide evidence every single penny 'taken' from Scotland ends up in London/The South East?

      Delete
    7. ScottytheScotinScotlandJune 19, 2020 at 11:04 AM

      " In fact Some historians .........". Yes British Nationalist phoney historians. Eg Neil Oliver.

      PS Scotland was not bankrupt - you are full of Britnat propaganda disguised as history.

      Your last sentence gives the game away when you condone colonialism. It was a forced union in 1707.

      Delete
    8. ScottytheScotinScotlandJune 19, 2020 at 11:11 AM

      Anonymous 10.58am - why don't all you anonymous people put a name to yourself if you want to be taken seriously. Even the Britnat turd GWC can manage that.

      The Channel islands and the Isle of Man are not governed by Westminster and are not part of the UK. So you really do not know what you are talking about.

      Delete
    9. Scotty you said,
      " Westminster got the taste for stealing other countries resources when they took control over the British isles."

      The British Isles includes the channel Islands and Isle of Man and Ireland, hence my question to you of when England took control of them.

      I never said that Scotland was bankrupt I said that the ruling elite had lost alot of money through the failed attempts and colonization.

      When have I condoned colonialism? I clearly stated
      the UK like the other European powers quite wrongly went and stripped other countries of their wealth.

      I was pointing out that the inaccuracy that Scotland was not involved in colonialism pre union that I hear alot.

      Delete
    10. Yes, the Scottish Empire was impressive.

      How many countries did it comprise again? How many native peoples were under the Scottish jackboot?

      I can't remember off hand.

      Delete
    11. Yea, disease, mis managemnt, the weather, conflict, staravtion all paid a part in the colonies failing very early on.

      Of course this changes nothing. They did not go to other peoples countries to fail and possibly die. They went to plunder the countries and subjugate the natives (put them under the Scottish jackboot to coin your phrase.) Just because they failed does not excuse their intentions.

      So my statement that its a myth that its only the English who went out to strip other countries of their wealth stands.

      Delete
    12. I was asking about which countries Scotland colonised / asset stripped / peoples it had subjugated. I had a look and apparently it was none.

      Scotland attempted to form a trade route over the isthmus of Panama; an overland canal of the time if you like. But as far as I can see, no attempt was made to take over any countries or subjugate any peoples. In Darien, the local natives welcomed the Scots with fruit and plantains, and there was some friendly, but limited trade.

      Forming colonies is not necessarily a bad thing. Land might be uninhabited or sparsely so, with the natives happy to have you there (for trade). This was the case for many colonies, including in the early USA for example, where settlers often had a good relationship with the native Americans. The natives Americans themselves of course colonised the Americas via the ice age Bering Sea land bridge.

      The problem comes when you subjugate the natives and take their land against their will, then exploit them / their land to benefit your own country.

      Maybe Scotland would have done that if it had the chance, but I understand it didn't. In that sense, it has no 'dirty' colonial past, just a trade route enterprise that was partly scuppered by it's unpleasant, violent, bullying neighbour.

      Delete
    13. The UK is of course still practicing 'dirty' colonialism; The illegal occupation of Chapos islands is an example.

      The Section 30 refusal for Scotland and open anti-Scottish racism at the very highest levels of governance is likewise.

      Delete
    14. No their colonies failed before they could get very far. Are you honest the the Scottish colonists would be nice colonists unlike the English, French, Spanish, Potugeese or Dutch ones?

      There is no dirty or clean colonial past, your making that up.

      Anyhow my post that that it is a myth that only England had a colonial past and not Scotland still stands, no matter how much you to try for it not to.

      Grow so balls FFS, how can you expect to have a successful Indy Scotland if you cannot face up to things that happened in your countries past.

      Delete
    15. ScottytheScotinScotlandJune 19, 2020 at 4:55 PM

      Anonymous - " you cannot face up to things that happened in your countries past " - ha ha you cannot even put a name to yourself Mr Anonymous - the only myths are the dodgy history that Britnats peddle.

      It's about time the Britnats and the British Empire faced up to the truths in its past. Your nonsense is just deflection.

      Individual Scots who were really Britnats embraced the UK and took part in the colonial atrocities. They were for individual enrichment just like today's Britnats who sell out Scotland. Scotland the country has always been treated as a colony in the so called union.

      Anonymous your comment that Scotland was a colonial country but was rubbish at it is classic Britnat rubbishing of Scotland. Your too wee too poor too crap propaganda will get no takers here except for GWC. That is your level.

      Delete
    16. Scotland had colonies, this is is a historical fact. Therefore it was a colonial country. You cannot change this as much as you may try. These were all pre union so they were not Britnats who supported the UK as the UK did not exist.

      Try looking into your countries history and check your facts before going on your little rants :)

      Delete
    17. ScottytheScotinScotlandJune 19, 2020 at 9:09 PM

      Anonymous - lots of posts from you on Scotlands made up history but not once have you named the countries and given dates for when they were Scottish colonies. Was England a Scottish colony in your made up world?

      No wonder you prefer to remain anonymous - posting such mince.

      Delete
    18. Nova Scotia 1621
      East New Jersy 1683
      Stuarts Town Carolina 1684
      Darien Scheme 1695 (Panama)

      If you had taken then 10 seconds it took me to get that formation from the 'net you would of saved yourself from making yourself look a touch silly by accusing me of making stuff up that is clear historical fact.

      Delete
    19. ScottytheScotinScotlandJune 20, 2020 at 9:10 AM

      Anonymous - not one of them are countries - so yes you are making stuff up.

      Delete
    20. Sorry I assumed your level of basic geography was high enough that you knew the countries there were in.

      Canada, what is now the USA and Panama.

      For the umpteeth time. Scoland had colonies as I have demonstrated and cannot be disputed. Therefore it has a colonial history.
      colonialism (noun)
      the policy or practice of acquiring full or partial political control over another country, occupying it with settlers.

      Therefore the myth that only England (and not Scotland) has a colonial history is incorrect as i have repeatedly said.

      Delete
    21. ScottytheScotinScotlandJune 20, 2020 at 11:02 AM

      Anonymous - you can keep on saying it but it is still nonsense.

      "...... full or partial control over another COUNTRY........ your quoted definition.

      None of the above geographical areas you quote were or are countries.

      PS the Darien scheme was a Scotland/England joint venture ( English trap) promoted by English spy's like Paterson and Defoe. The English investors then pulled out at the last minute - as per the trap.

      Delete
    22. You do no what the word partial means right. If i set up a colony in part of another country setting up my own rules for the people who live there and own governance for those people, I have partial political control over another country therefore have colonized as per the dictionary definition of the word colonization.

      So one again Scotland did have colonies as per the dictionary definition of the word therefore the myth that only England had a colonial past that you are desperately trying to continue is incorrect.

      Delete
    23. ScottytheScotinScotlandJune 20, 2020 at 7:06 PM

      Anonymous - more mince - partial relates to the political control not the percentage of the country. Anyway none of them were countries at the dates you quote so you fail on two fronts.

      I never said that only England had a colonial past so once again you misrepresent.

      Delete
    24. Ok lets try one last time. Lets use Nova Scotia as an example.

      Until European colonisers arrived the area that Nova Scotia is situated in the area that the Miꞌkmaq settled - it was their country. They had their own laws traditions religion political classes.

      Then Europeans including settlers from Scotland came and colonised part of the Miꞌkmaq's country and set up their own political hierarchy laws etc. Therefore they colonised because they set up partial political control over another country.

      You have constantly said that only England (out of England and Scotland as I have stated) has a colonial past by trying to argue that Scotland has no colonial past.

      So once again Scotland has had a colonial past and the myth that it has not and only England did is untrue.

      Delete
  9. Might as well mention Vera Lynn as you Nat sis will be dwelling on Germany running Scotland.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Scotland will be running Scotland by a majority of whoever is voted in to do that irrespective of religion colour or creed
    so stand for parliament if you're not happy and see how many decent folk vote for your kind

    Or you could emigrate to Britain you know that country that isn't on any map because there's no such country, if it were a country surely it would have a flag at least, but it doesn't it has a political banner of a Nazi Union that nobody ever voted to join

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It's the way you tell em.

      Delete
    2. What a strange statement. I know is not 'Britian' its the United Kingdom, hence its the UK Gov etc not GB Gov.

      My kind? What do you mean. Do you know me, have you been spying on me to try and discover what 'kind' of person I am? All sounds a bit creepy.

      Delete
    3. I didn't understand the post either, although it's correct to say there is no such country as Britain. Only the union of the UKoGB&NI.

      I'm not even British as I'm Scots. That makes me Great British, not British. Britain was historically just England and Wales.

      I think we could see a new country of Britain emerge post Brexit as the Belfast Wall falls and Ireland is united while Scotland leaves the UK.

      Delete
    4. I thought you were Irish last week and a Frog the week before. I am a Brit/Scot.

      Delete
  11. #Safer, stronger etc.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-53078368

    But by any measure, the UK consistently appears in this unhappy club of countries hardest hit so far. Even before the pandemic, the UK's life expectancy was lower than in many other western European countries and showed the least improvement from 2011 to 2018.

    And the UK "risks a further slide down life-expectancy tables", according to Dr Raleigh, underlining the need to make comparisons with other countries, even with imperfect data.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Test Catch Trace Find Isolate Opportunity Fantastic, Dominics pal Oops disnae work, still we all got richer and ffff the public

    ReplyDelete
  13. Davidson was a PR invention by the media establishment as an alternative to NS. Just like marketing the product was the Ruth Davidson Party not the Tory party. Jackson Carlaw the present incumbent is a difficult product to sell.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Totally Marcia, thankfully most people can see through the lies and deceit of these substandard, so called politicians of the Tory and indeed Labour UK (Eng) branches in Scotland.



      Delete
    2. See me an ma big pal Marcia we are great an we agree oan everything, nothing will split us apart we hate the English more than the JPF.

      Delete