tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post4378916237032580114..comments2024-03-29T00:28:42.289+00:00Comments on SCOT goes POP!: FACTCHECK: Have the SNP "gone into alliance with the DUP to kill independence"? (Spoiler: No, they haven't.)James Kellyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01516007141763230886noreply@blogger.comBlogger60125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-88086164710071692102019-10-24T08:12:39.716+01:002019-10-24T08:12:39.716+01:00Hello Stuart. Nice to see you using the third pers...Hello Stuart. Nice to see you using the third person rather than the royal 'We' for once.<br /><br />As for Hillsborough, if you bothered to read any of the reports (e.g. Taylor) you'll find that the tunnel to the terrace was sloped downwards. No-one needed to push to end up putting all of their weight on the people in front - all it would take is a single person to slip, and like dominoes everyone would be pushed forward towards the front. Basic physics. But given your mad theories on Lara Croft, it's understandable you don't get it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-28768585946359773162019-10-21T21:54:09.442+01:002019-10-21T21:54:09.442+01:00Balance Baby ...... "I just urge tolerance an...Balance Baby ...... "I just urge tolerance and consideration for a range of ideas and viewpoints....". You might try suggesting that to Stu Campbell, whose "tolerance and consideration of ideas and viewpoints" that differ from his, doesn't have any stretch .... at all. His "tolerance and consideration" consists of banning anyone who disagrees with him, from posting comments on his blog.Alex Birnienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-268981643809213822019-10-21T21:38:32.517+01:002019-10-21T21:38:32.517+01:00You're not urging tolerance - you're urgin...You're not urging tolerance - you're urging people to refrain from expressing dissenting views. "Consideration" is code for "no, you can't criticise this opinion, it has special status". That's intolerance, not tolerance. That's stifling of debate, not encouragement of it.<br /><br />But maybe it all looks different in a "metaphysical sense", who knows.James Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05264559835025144323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-77584614954480065652019-10-21T21:33:30.658+01:002019-10-21T21:33:30.658+01:00Loyalist anti-English* mobs gathering.
https://tw...Loyalist anti-English* mobs gathering.<br /><br />https://twitter.com/Paul_UTV/status/1186347058036461568<br /><br /><i>People from Loyalist communities are gathering in East Belfast to discuss their concerns about Boris Johnson’s Brexit deal.</i><br /><br /><br />----<br />*Unionist term for people from Wales/NI/Scotland angry at Westminster ruleScottish Skierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10584099659760612109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-89284440220944769782019-10-21T21:26:55.041+01:002019-10-21T21:26:55.041+01:00The British wanted the London intervention. It'...The British wanted the London intervention. It's the essence of unionism. Scottish Skierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10584099659760612109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-10948878833853404362019-10-21T21:15:27.787+01:002019-10-21T21:15:27.787+01:00Young James, I did not say I disliked the change i...Young James, I did not say I disliked the change in abortion law I just pointed out the consequences and the Irish have been wanting the London intervention. Perhaps you have been obsessed with your petty nationalism to keep up with NI. GWCnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-76440912409048250732019-10-21T21:06:29.907+01:002019-10-21T21:06:29.907+01:00It's a fine Great British Law passed by brexit...It's a fine Great British Law passed by brexiters. <br /><br />As a trading block, the EU leave such things up to member states. A domestic matter only.Scottish Skierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10584099659760612109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-53321017471686063072019-10-21T21:03:22.218+01:002019-10-21T21:03:22.218+01:00So, the English Tories successfully forced gay mar...So, the English Tories successfully forced gay marriage and legalisation of abortion on the N. Irish unionists / Orange Order.<br /><br />Another great day for unionism.Scottish Skierhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10584099659760612109noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-90387085047071334412019-10-21T21:01:26.494+01:002019-10-21T21:01:26.494+01:00If we were talking about a regular punter, then pa...If we were talking about a regular punter, then parsing sentences might be a worthwhile exercise. However, Mr Campbell is no ordinary punter. He is a highly skilled journalist and wordsmith and the obvious interpretation of his words is EXACTLY what he means to say. <br /><br />He is now doing exactly the same thing as Cochrane, Daisley and others have been doing for the last half decade - using his considerable literary skills to maximum effect, to damage the SNP. Cochrane, Daisley and that gang are doing it to damage the cause of independence, and Mr Campbell used to excoriate them for their cunning use of words to create the worst impression of the SNP, thus damaging the yes movement.<br /><br />He now claims that his insinuations against the SNP are to "protect" or "save" the independence movement, but how is this possible? If damage is done to the electoral prospects of the SNP, then this will harm the independence movement, and it matters not a jot, who is doing the damage.<br /><br />Daisley, Cochrane and the rest have been trying to damage the SNP for years. Campbell has joined them. <br /><br />The only response from yes voters to Campbell should be "Et tu Brute?".Alex Birnienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-10678216437401949942019-10-21T20:46:52.623+01:002019-10-21T20:46:52.623+01:00The distinction between disruptive and destructive...The distinction between disruptive and destructive is very much in the eye of the beholder, particularly in the non physical or metaphysical sense. There's no adoration for wings or suggestion he's correct and certainly no mention of anything he does or says is cutting edge. Cutting edge to me is being a pioneer or at the forefront of knowledge generation in any doctrine or philosophy.<br /><br />Radical is just thinking outside the box or differently from others. Rejoining the UK may one day be radical but unlikely to be perceived as cutting edge.<br />I just urge tolerance and consideration for a range of ideas and viewpoints even if they differ from the majority or are critical of the SNP. Wings ideas should be scrutinised and challenged, but inciting a witch hunt because he doesn't act like he's part of a cult is a bit much. Alba for Independencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02976605539450227099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-24687493070236718982019-10-21T20:45:21.134+01:002019-10-21T20:45:21.134+01:00I'm just a career psychopath who enjoys bumpin...I'm just a career psychopath who enjoys bumping his gums.<br /><br />I was of course quoting from the writings of The Proprietor And Master Of Us All, so I would urge caution in your future use of these texts. Dominic Comynnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-72099286950487166532019-10-21T20:41:51.217+01:002019-10-21T20:41:51.217+01:00That's fair comment, John. If opinion sharing ...That's fair comment, John. If opinion sharing is a one-way street though, it becomes a completely different animal. I am now blocked from commenting on Wings, and while I am not sure how widespread his blocking has become, it is readily apparent that comments from the more eloquent critics are becoming few and far between. Mr Campbell is churning out nothing but anti-SNP propaganda nowadays (When was the last Wings blog, where he supported the SNP on ANY subject?), and it becomes harder and harder to come to any conclusion other than that he has declared war on the SNP ...... for whatever reason. I don't CARE what his reasons are. His constant drip, drip, drip of poisonous innuendo is doing nothing for the furtherance of Indy and everything to aid unionism.<br /><br />At what point does a former ally become recognised as an enemy of the cause? I will never put another penny into that man's crowdfunders, and I will continue to express MY opinion of his shenanigans as long as he continues with them. He'll mend him and his political ambitions. Alex Birnienoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-60906191401947584622019-10-21T20:37:28.568+01:002019-10-21T20:37:28.568+01:00Wikipedia is your friend. (See, life isn't suc...Wikipedia is your friend. (See, life isn't such a hard and lonely road.)Screaming Sir Jamesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-5688579687600775102019-10-21T20:18:46.127+01:002019-10-21T20:18:46.127+01:00What should certainly be called out is you posing ...What should certainly be called out is you posing as 'Mr Balance' when you've already outed yourself as a partisan Wings cheerleader in an adoring comment further down this thread.<br /><br />I'm not going to waste any further time responding to your truly desperate points of pedantry, hair-splitting and reinterpretation. What I will say, though, is that I categorically reject your claim (and I believe you're probably the person who made a similar claim on an earlier thread using a different moniker) that I somehow "know what you're saying is correct" and that I'm just "pretending" to "misunderstand" Wings' posts.<br /><br />I understand them only too well, sunshine.James Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05264559835025144323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-73144937085546978212019-10-21T20:06:52.137+01:002019-10-21T20:06:52.137+01:00The Rev Stu is not an SNP supporter. He works towa...The Rev Stu is not an SNP supporter. He works towards an independent Scotland and is also an animal lover. The SNP allowing the mutilation of puppies risks putting off potential Yes votes and also runs counter to his principles. That's why he raises the matter.<br /><br />Do you put supporting everything madmentalnicky does ahead of animal welfare and the rights of children not to be poisoned and castrated?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-56243697433134017282019-10-21T19:58:19.876+01:002019-10-21T19:58:19.876+01:00Bizarre.
You literally just stated that you onl...Bizarre.<br /><br /> You literally just stated that you only liked WoS when he wrote stuff you agreed with. The very definition of a one-eyed bigot.<br /><br /> What is ludicrous about his view on the Hillsborough disaster? 96 Liverpool fans died because a load of other Liverpool fans decided the best response to meeting a wall of bodies in a tunnel was to push as hard as they could. The 30 year campaign by the permanent victhims to absolve themselves of all blame will not ever change the facts.<br /><br /> The point is that the consequenses of self-ID have not hit the general public yet and when they do there will be Hell to pay for those pushing perverts into schools. Sacrificing independence for Scotland so that some half-wit politicians can boost their rainbow stoked egos is not something 99.999% of Yes voters agree with.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-45863507321054590482019-10-21T19:52:13.592+01:002019-10-21T19:52:13.592+01:00Lets clear this up crystally
"FACTCHECK have...Lets clear this up crystally<br /><br />"FACTCHECK have the SNP gone into alliance with the DUP to kill independence, no they haven't"<br /><br />"The SNP are about to enter an alliance......"<br /><br />The Wings article is both hypothetical and conditional<br /><br />if......materialises , the SNP will be..........<br /><br />Your reply inferred Wings stated the SNP HAD entered an alliance with the DUP, an historical fact. Or about to enter an alliance i.e. certain to undertake a course of action.<br /><br />Which clearly was not the case.<br /><br />The next sentence in the wings article which follows your own citing<br /><br />"The DUP? The Tories don’t sound quite so bad now, do they?"<br /><br />Hence the point is very much the SNP having a 'whatever you want to call it with the DUP as opposed to the same thing with Tories.<br /><br />An alliance is defined in a dictionary as<br /><br />"a merging of efforts or interests by persons, families, states, or organizations"<br /><br />It would be difficult to argue that the SNP and DUP are not merging efforts or interests by voting together on such an important vote with such huge wide ranging implications.<br /><br />Context is not an innocuous frame but a very important frame of reference for any statement. Labour have always blamed the SNP for 1979 and voting with the Tories for Thatcher and the SNP counterclaims of a Labour/Tory alliance during indyref 'standing shoulder to shoulder'etc.<br /><br />The context for wings article is, as you know, that the SNP delivering the result of the EU referendum could be perceived as a relationship with the Tories which Labour and the SNP have for many years been at pains to strenuously avoid and implicate the other with.<br /><br />So again the point is, whether you agree with it or not, that the DUP are as toxic as the Tories and given the amount of time Labour and SNP politicians have spent trying to discredit the otherside with association with the Tories must be perceived to matter. <br /><br />I didn't state you or Wings had used the term formal relationship but if there is no formal relationship inferred by Wings why the hyperbole.<br /><br />An organisation ENTERING or ABOUT to ENTER into also implies some form of action, activity or formal undertaking rather than being 'in a state of' as mentioned by wings.<br /><br />Wings simply states that if the SNP did vote for the referendum they would be in a state of alliance, 'a condition of being in alliance with i.e. the merging or sharing of interests or activities with, whether they liked it or not rather than entering into an alliance with the DUP as you implied.<br />He also clearly contrasts this relationship with the alternative, the Tory party as his substantive point.<br /><br />Kill is an emotive word for ending independence, the alliance with the DUP, emotive terminology its' intended to invoke a reaction, to question the current strategy and reconsider the options, that's it. There is no suggestion whatsoever that we are about to see the Scottish Democratic Unionist National Party of Northern Ireland. <br /><br />What is actually crystal clear is that any phrase taken out of context to discredit an individual should be called out. You cannot remove the context of the content however hard you may try. Alba for Independencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02976605539450227099noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-56047826998537362442019-10-21T19:45:28.702+01:002019-10-21T19:45:28.702+01:00There's a very big difference between being di...There's a very big difference between being disruptive and being destructive.<br /><br />What actually is the big idea here anyway? What's the innovative, cutting edge thinking? Doing a deal with the Tories to implement Brexit in return for an indyref? I've already explained why that isn't possible, but even if it were, the moment for doing that would almost certainly have long since passed by May 2021. So what will be the Wings party's plan for bringing about an independence referendum? Would there even be a plan at all? <br /> Would the manifesto just say "IT'S TOO LATE, WE'VE MISSED OUR CHANCE"? That's the logic of his last post but one.James Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05264559835025144323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-1114126313740746712019-10-21T19:33:35.746+01:002019-10-21T19:33:35.746+01:00Let's take today for example.
Wings suggests ...Let's take today for example.<br /><br />Wings suggests in an article that the SNP should extract a promise of another Indyref from UK 'opposition' parties for their MP's votes for a second EU referendum.<br /><br />So while he complains the SNP are wasting time asking the Tory Government asking for a Section 30 order, his suggestion is to ask a bunch of politicians who aren't even in a position of power to offer anything for a future promise of Indyref 2. Furthermore he has stated recently on a number of occasions his belief that a GE will not be forthcoming anytime soon. <br /><br />Next, on his Twitter feed, he mentions his disdain at Westminster politicians for apparently stopping Johnson's Withdrawal agreement vote today, claiming they will come across as a bunch of bullies to the public. Except of course that he's wrong, that motion was passed on Saturday and as today would make it a second vote, it was Parliamentary protocol that stopped the vote - not MP's. <br /><br />This is not being a 'radical thinker', 'innovative' or 'trail blazing' - it's called just being wrong. <br /><br />Whether or not he goes ahead with any political ambitions he may have remains to be seen, but something is very apparent, he appears to have taken on some of the very traits of politicians that he dismisses so readily.<br /><br />More apparent, as today's examples demonstrate, is his desire to lie, bend the truth or at least distort it. Such a shame.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-22568342938944123272019-10-21T19:32:28.490+01:002019-10-21T19:32:28.490+01:00If you dislike the change in Northern Ireland abor...If you dislike the change in Northern Ireland abortion law, you have nobody to blame but your "precious union". It's been directly imposed by London.James Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05264559835025144323noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-85150873503627279552019-10-21T19:09:45.455+01:002019-10-21T19:09:45.455+01:00Young James, as from midnight tonight no baby in t...Young James, as from midnight tonight no baby in the womb of a woman is safe from immediate extinction and destined for the NHS galvanised bucket. GWCnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-17471269008652221262019-10-21T18:58:54.173+01:002019-10-21T18:58:54.173+01:00S Sir J, Never heard of the Scottish Unionist Part...S Sir J, Never heard of the Scottish Unionist Party. GWCnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-44844758063667677952019-10-21T18:30:30.291+01:002019-10-21T18:30:30.291+01:00Indeed it won't. It's meaning is absolutel...Indeed it won't. It's meaning is absolutely crystal-clear and draws no distinction whatsoever between "agreed formal alliances" and "non-agreed, non-formal alliances". (Nor, incidentally, did my own reply draw such a distinction.)<br /><br />You're performing semantic gymnastics to try to get Mr Campbell's words to fit into the innocuous frame you want them to fit into, but I fear that's a lost cause. He did actually say that the SNP would be going into alliance with the DUP. That's what he said, no more and no less, and that's what he meant, no more and no less. Here is the quote in full, and as much as I admire your loyalty to the man, no amount of foot-stamping or sophistry is going to change the fact that these are Mr Campbell's own words. Nobody put them in his mouth.<br /><br /><i>"And let’s just spell it out, because some people are clearly a bit dim: if the above scenario materialises, <b>the SNP will be in an alliance with the DUP to stop Brexit and kill independence.</b>"</i><br /><br />(The bold text is Mr Campbell's own choice of emphasis.)James Kellyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01516007141763230886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-14765496702738045842019-10-21T17:58:48.202+01:002019-10-21T17:58:48.202+01:00I don't think you're getting an answer to ...I don't think you're getting an answer to that one, Arlene.Martin McGuinnessnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-930120922627919768.post-5079350277191216012019-10-21T17:50:09.008+01:002019-10-21T17:50:09.008+01:00The substantive point of my post stands, it is not...The substantive point of my post stands, it is not a question of semantics but meaning. He used the word alliance but he's not suggesting any form of agreed formal alliance between the DUP and SNP but that both parties will undertake the same action to produce the same effect. He clearly states also 'the Tories don't sound too bad now do they', and he doesn't propose any form of agreed formal alliance with the tory party if the SNP votes for Brexit. Its very much partnering with the tories vis a vis partnering with the DUP for this particular vote that is the issue in his post, so if he's not proposing any sort of formal alliance with the Tory party how could it be perceived that he is proposing any form of formal alliance with the DUP in the event of the SNP voting for a referendum. <br /><br />The term alliance is used for vitriolic emotive effect to emphasise the point made rather than as a label to describe a formal relationship the DUP would have with the SNP. And you know that very well, you're being disingenuous for mischief making purposes to undermine and discredit Wings probably due to his recent attitude toward the SNP.<br /><br />I've read the article and its meaning is very clear and no amount of pedantry or semantic schinanigans will change that.Alba for Independencehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02976605539450227099noreply@blogger.com