General
Monday, 20 February 2012 00:32
182 Comments
By a Newsnet reporter
A Labour peer has caused outrage after suggesting that any scepticism of the Labour party’s historic claims on Devolution was “akin to holocaust denial”.
Former Labour MP and MSP, George Foulkes, posted the remark in response to an opinion piece by Dr. James Wilkie of the SDA in which he cast doubt on claims by the Labour party that it was always fully committed to Devolution for Scotland.
The controversial piece by Dr. Wilkie, published on Newsnet Scotland, claimed that Westminster was forced into granting Scotland a devolved parliament only after pressure from the Council of Europe.
Dr. Wilkie, who is a representative of the Scottish Democratic Alliance, also claimed that a pressure group called the Scotland-UN Committee was key to the process that ended with the creation of the new Scottish Parliament.
Tweeting in response to the article, George Foulkes said: “CyberNat myth that Devolution was forced on the Labour Govt.by EU or Council of Europe (stories vary) is akin to Holocaust denial”
Cybernat is a derogatory term adopted by Unionists in order to describe online opponents of Unionism. When an MSP, Foulkes coined the term ‘Cybernats’ in order to describe those he termed “insomniac Nationalist bloggers”.
The holocaust remark has provoked responses from SNP politicians angry at the slur which comes soon after Holocaust Memorial Day.
SNP MSP Shona Robison called on the Labour peer to withdraw the remark and said: “You should withdraw this George before you are forced to. Totally insensitive given we’ve just marked Holocaust Memorial Day.”
SNP MP Stewart Hosie called the comment “low even by Labour standards”.
Earlier the Labour peer had said “members of SNP, who boycotted the Constitutional Convention, are lying that Council of Europe forced Devo on Labour- laughable!”
However Lord Foulkes appeared to backtrack on his earlier tweets suggesting members of the SNP were behind the claims when he tweeted: “Not everyone who supports Independence Referendum is CyberNat, but only those who dissemble and abuse the truth.”
Holocaust denial is the term used to describe the practice of refusing to believe the atrocities committed against Jews by Nazis during World War II that resulted in the deaths of an estimated six million people.
In 2006, British historian David Irving was found guilty in Vienna of denying the Holocaust of and sentenced to three years in prison.
The attacks on anyone not accepting Labour’s claims on Devolution follow revelations contained in the Sunday Herald that UK Government Ministers had blocked a Freedom of Information request to publish official documents relating to the lead up to the devolution referendum.
According to the newspaper, Scottish Secretary Michael Moore and other senior LibDems vetoed the release by over-ruling a judgment of the UK’s Information Commissioner.
The Sunday Herald said the files contain material that is “still so sensitive it could deepen current rows between the devolved governments and even spark new fights.”
The paper quote Attorney General Dominic Grieve as saying that the documents expose “divergent ministerial views”, which would “seriously prejudice” the practice of collective cabinet responsibility, which obliges ministers to back government decisions.
According to the paper, in a statement of reasons, he said: “The matters discussed are manifestly not of purely historical interest and importance. Disclosure of minutes also gives rise to a real and significant risk that debates and discussions between the administrations would be prejudiced.
“A number of individuals have comments attributed to them in the minutes, including where they are not in agreement on certain policy issues.”
Comments
#
2012-02-20 00:57
Anyone else would be forced to resign.
I’d put money on it.
But Foulkes?? I wouldn’t put money on that.
I’d put money on it.
But Foulkes?? I wouldn’t put money on that.
#
2012-02-20 01:04
Zombie Foulkes can’t be forced to resign. He’s a member of the House of the Politically Undead. He’s got his position until he shuffles off to the Free Bar in the Sky – or until Scotland votes for independence.
Labour’s Zombie Arsonist Watson of I Really Don’t Like Those Curtains couldn’t be forced to resign even after the little fire-raising mishap that resulted in him going to jail.
Labour’s Zombie Arsonist Watson of I Really Don’t Like Those Curtains couldn’t be forced to resign even after the little fire-raising mishap that resulted in him going to jail.
#
2012-02-20 01:19
An appaling comment from an appaling little man.
In the last couple of weeks we have seen anti-independence politicians sink to almost unbelievable depths in their comments. From a group that claims that all SNP supporters are anti-English, much of the unionist comment has been negative and in many cases, abusive.
Nothing of substance has been advanced to make a case for the continuation of the union, probably because there is nothing to say, other than the insubstantial better together nonsense.
In the last couple of weeks we have seen anti-independence politicians sink to almost unbelievable depths in their comments. From a group that claims that all SNP supporters are anti-English, much of the unionist comment has been negative and in many cases, abusive.
Nothing of substance has been advanced to make a case for the continuation of the union, probably because there is nothing to say, other than the insubstantial better together nonsense.
#
2012-02-20 01:20
There is only one word to describe these people reprobate defined as
a depraved, unprincipled, or wicked person: a drunken reprobate
a depraved, unprincipled, or wicked person: a drunken reprobate
#
2012-02-20 01:22
Who was the numptie who thought making Foulkes a “Lord” was a good idea? It wasn’t one of Foulkes’s “good old boozing buddies” by any chance?
Since the “establishment” removed the knighthood from Fred Goodwin surely Foulkes latest pathetic antics are reason enough to have him removed from the House of Lords and have his “Lord” title removed from him, returning him to good old Mr Foulkes!
Since the “establishment” removed the knighthood from Fred Goodwin surely Foulkes latest pathetic antics are reason enough to have him removed from the House of Lords and have his “Lord” title removed from him, returning him to good old Mr Foulkes!
#
2012-02-20 01:24
They should simplify the referendum question:
Do you want to continue being ruled by Lord Foulkes?
Do you want to continue being ruled by Lord Foulkes?
#
2012-02-20 01:26
What is particularly strange about Foulke’s comment is that he seems intent on denying that the Council of Europe’s decisions had any effect on Labour’s endorsement of devolution.
It may well be that he is wholly ignorant of what was happening, because the real powers within Labour didn’t tell him. Alternatively, he may be simply partisan in pretending that British Labour were wholly ignorant of the European dimension. Perhaps both are true. Who knows?
In reality, the Council of Europe had made a strong demand that “national minorities” had to have democracy, and those interested in following this up, might like to have a look at some relevant Council of Europe documents.
(Apologies for the links not working directly – I think they are too long for the system to cope with them. Just remove the gap between the h and ttps when posting into your browser).
h ttps://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=REC(1998)043&Language;=lanEnglish&Ver;=original&Site;=Congress&BackColorIntern; et=e0cee1&BackColorIntran; et=e0cee1&BackColorLogged; =FFC679
h ttps://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=853887&Site;=Congress&BackColorIntern; et=e0cee1&BackColorIntran; et=e0cee1&BackColorLogged; =FFC679#RelatedD ocuments
I am well aware that the Council of Europe’s views were well known within elements of SLab, and used by them to push for devolution.
The Council of Europe was critical in moving the more centralist (and dominant) bits of Brit Lab.
It may well be that he is wholly ignorant of what was happening, because the real powers within Labour didn’t tell him. Alternatively, he may be simply partisan in pretending that British Labour were wholly ignorant of the European dimension. Perhaps both are true. Who knows?
In reality, the Council of Europe had made a strong demand that “national minorities” had to have democracy, and those interested in following this up, might like to have a look at some relevant Council of Europe documents.
(Apologies for the links not working directly – I think they are too long for the system to cope with them. Just remove the gap between the h and ttps when posting into your browser).
h ttps://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?Ref=REC(1998)043&Language;=lanEnglish&Ver;=original&Site;=Congress&BackColorIntern; et=e0cee1&BackColorIntran; et=e0cee1&BackColorLogged; =FFC679
h ttps://wcd.coe.int/ViewDoc.jsp?id=853887&Site;=Congress&BackColorIntern; et=e0cee1&BackColorIntran; et=e0cee1&BackColorLogged; =FFC679#RelatedD ocuments
I am well aware that the Council of Europe’s views were well known within elements of SLab, and used by them to push for devolution.
The Council of Europe was critical in moving the more centralist (and dominant) bits of Brit Lab.
#
2012-02-20 06:40
oldnat
If what you say here is true, why were you so vitriolic in attacking James Wilkie’s claims in your comments on his article the other day? There seems to me to be little difference between this and what he was claiming.
If what you say here is true, why were you so vitriolic in attacking James Wilkie’s claims in your comments on his article the other day? There seems to me to be little difference between this and what he was claiming.
#
2012-02-20 12:11
Hi Exile
Here’s my interpretation (although I’m sure OLDNAT is well able to defend himself).
James Wilkie said that Scotland-UN had influenced the Council of Europe. OLDNAT is saying that the CoE influenced the Labour government.
If both are true then James Wilkie could reasonably claim some influence for Scotland-UN with regard to Scottish Devolution. But there’s a gap in the middle and more evidence is required to bridge it.
I was disappointed, as I always am, with the unpleasant language used by some of JW’s critics and equally disappointed with James’ intemperate response. If Scotland-UN did contribute to the setting up of a Scottish Parliament then I hope it will be recognised when the evidence is produced: but if that doesn’t happen they can take comfort from the fact that there have been plenty more unsung heroes in the long road to independence.
Here’s my interpretation (although I’m sure OLDNAT is well able to defend himself).
James Wilkie said that Scotland-UN had influenced the Council of Europe. OLDNAT is saying that the CoE influenced the Labour government.
If both are true then James Wilkie could reasonably claim some influence for Scotland-UN with regard to Scottish Devolution. But there’s a gap in the middle and more evidence is required to bridge it.
I was disappointed, as I always am, with the unpleasant language used by some of JW’s critics and equally disappointed with James’ intemperate response. If Scotland-UN did contribute to the setting up of a Scottish Parliament then I hope it will be recognised when the evidence is produced: but if that doesn’t happen they can take comfort from the fact that there have been plenty more unsung heroes in the long road to independence.
#
2012-02-20 11:52
Just a short POI:
You can convert any length of URL to a much shorter version at the website
tinyurl.com/
You can convert any length of URL to a much shorter version at the website
tinyurl.com/
#
2012-02-20 01:34
Has the story escaped into the Scottish media yet or are they keeping silent on the issue?
It will probably take one of the London papers to pick it up before the Scottish ones are forced into it. However, it will be a means to an end whichever way it happens.
All that is needed is to match up Wilkies theory, with Foulkes comments and the denial of the release of the cabinet papers.
It will probably take one of the London papers to pick it up before the Scottish ones are forced into it. However, it will be a means to an end whichever way it happens.
All that is needed is to match up Wilkies theory, with Foulkes comments and the denial of the release of the cabinet papers.
#
2012-02-20 03:29
I’ve just posted a comment onto the Hootsmon article about Forsythe. I also included reference to this particular story so we’ll see how many Hootsmon readers are brave enough to come here and read the full story.
It will be even more interesting to see if there is any journalist brave enough to visit this article and do a follow up story for the Hootsmon!
It will be even more interesting to see if there is any journalist brave enough to visit this article and do a follow up story for the Hootsmon!
#
2012-02-20 09:50
Arbroath1320
Just read your post in the Scotsman:
“ He has been a sorry excuse of a politician for fart too long. “
I think you pegged him correctly Arby.
Just read your post in the Scotsman:
“ He has been a sorry excuse of a politician for fart too long. “
I think you pegged him correctly Arby.
#
2012-02-20 09:06
Quoting J Wil:
What THEORY? It is FACT. Only the ********* Foulkes and his cronies can deny it.
Comment edited bt NNS Mod Team
All that is needed is to match up Wilkies theory,
What THEORY? It is FACT. Only the ********* Foulkes and his cronies can deny it.
Comment edited bt NNS Mod Team
#
2012-02-20 11:07
“It is fact”
I have been reading about this for some years now but there does seem to be some doubt about it in some quarters and not just the Labour deniers. There is nothing I would like more for it to be the truth, but what will it take to be the unvarnished facts?
I have been reading about this for some years now but there does seem to be some doubt about it in some quarters and not just the Labour deniers. There is nothing I would like more for it to be the truth, but what will it take to be the unvarnished facts?
#
2012-02-20 01:35
Contrast the ‘snash’ from Foulkes with the competence and confidence of Alex Salmond in a 12 minute interview on Aljezeera without the normal BBC interviewer interruptions and no name calling.
aljazeera.com/…/…
aljazeera.com/…/…
#
2012-02-20 01:37
Labour needed to up their numbers and as we are aware their choice is severely restricted as to quality (Quantity no problem plenty of troughers waiting in the wings) It is only in recent times we are able to find out the level of their depravity Defined as (wouldn’t like my meaning to be lost)
corrupt, wicked, or perverted
corrupt, wicked, or perverted
#
2012-02-20 01:48
You never do
Ed has enough trouble keeping his brain and mouth in sync without trying to do the same for his lardship
Ed has enough trouble keeping his brain and mouth in sync without trying to do the same for his lardship
#
2012-02-20 02:02
Well, Mr Foulkes; that’s one of the most asymmetric applications of Godwin’s Law I’ve ever witnessed!
#
2012-02-20 02:18
Foulkes? I’m sorry? same Foulkes convicted in 1993 of being drunk and disorderly, accosting a 70 year old woman and assaulting a polisman?
Shurely shome mishtake?
Shurely shome mishtake?
#
2012-02-20 02:21
Ah, that’s how he became a Lord!
I was wondering how he managed to achieve such a grandiose status.
I was wondering how he managed to achieve such a grandiose status.
#
2012-02-20 02:24
Didn’t you ever read PG Woodhouse’s accounts of Bertie Wooster and the British upper class?
Mind you, whether Foulkes should be compared to the witless Bertie Wooster or the more intelligent Empress of Blandings is a matter of opinion.
Mind you, whether Foulkes should be compared to the witless Bertie Wooster or the more intelligent Empress of Blandings is a matter of opinion.
#
2012-02-20 02:26
Class act Foulkes:-
“Unfortunately, the pavements of Westminster dipped and rose like the deck of a clipper on a choppy sea, tossing him into the arms of pedestrians. An attempt to dance with a 70-year-old lady resulted in them both hugging the asphalt. Foulkes biffed one persistently helpful constable on the chin.
He was arrested and invited to spend the night enjoying Her Majesty’s hospitality. He pleaded guilty to assault and being drunk and disorderly, and was fined £1,050. He vowed not to drink whisky again.”
No whisky Geordie?
Comment edited by NNS Mod Team
“Unfortunately, the pavements of Westminster dipped and rose like the deck of a clipper on a choppy sea, tossing him into the arms of pedestrians. An attempt to dance with a 70-year-old lady resulted in them both hugging the asphalt. Foulkes biffed one persistently helpful constable on the chin.
He was arrested and invited to spend the night enjoying Her Majesty’s hospitality. He pleaded guilty to assault and being drunk and disorderly, and was fined £1,050. He vowed not to drink whisky again.”
No whisky Geordie?
Comment edited by NNS Mod Team
#
2012-02-20 02:27
Naw I haven’t read P.G. Woodhouse’s ramblings about the upper class. I’m more of a working class girl. Seeing how the “Lord” behaves I’m glad I’m working class and not upper class! 😀
#
2012-02-20 02:36
You might want to have a look at Wodehouse sometime. Working class Jeeves is the intellectual giant stopping the aristocrats from making even bigger fools of themselves than actually do.
#
2012-02-20 10:41
Surely, Lord F****(edited – NNS Mod Team is more of a Lord Emsworth: en.wikipedia.org/…/… (Clarence Threepwood, 9th Earl of Emsworth), except that Lord Emsworth is a rather likeable, harmless old cove, vague to the point of dementia – and Foulks is neither likeable, or harmless.
Call me dave is definitely the embodiment of the Hon Freddie Threepwood. Thoroughly recommend PG Woodhouse – and the Blanding stories in particular – to anyone who hasn’t yet sampled their delights.
Call me dave is definitely the embodiment of the Hon Freddie Threepwood. Thoroughly recommend PG Woodhouse – and the Blanding stories in particular – to anyone who hasn’t yet sampled their delights.
#
2012-02-20 06:45
I was amongst the recipients of this tweet. My first response was to call on him to behave. After further thought I tweeted him again with
“@GeorgeFoulkes My father-in-law was amonst the first to enter Belsen You desecrate his memory and those who died there with your contempt”
Many, many responded to him, however it was telling that my latter tweet was re-tweeted about a dozen times(even with spelling error)
He has clearly lost the plot and on one occassion said he enjoyed cybernat baiting.
A regular contributor to these columns Weegiewarbler did a piece on it:
weegiewarbler.blogspot.com/…/…
“@GeorgeFoulkes My father-in-law was amonst the first to enter Belsen You desecrate his memory and those who died there with your contempt”
Many, many responded to him, however it was telling that my latter tweet was re-tweeted about a dozen times(even with spelling error)
He has clearly lost the plot and on one occassion said he enjoyed cybernat baiting.
A regular contributor to these columns Weegiewarbler did a piece on it:
weegiewarbler.blogspot.com/…/…
#
2012-02-20 07:57
Foulkes is a politician not a public servant. He’ll look at the outrage caused by his comments and laugh himself sick. For him and his ilk its just soundbites intended to cause offense and provoke reaction. The worst thing we can do to him, that’ll hit home, is remove his title.
Bring on 2014
Bring on 2014
#
2012-02-20 10:45
Foulkes is a very poor politician, as his actions appear to have exactly the opposite effect to the ones he intended.
#
2012-02-20 11:30
Mornin’ Siôn
Agreed, he is a poor politician. Still, his job at the moment seems to be placing soundbites and controversial issues up in the public forum which will damage honest debate, distract focus from the bigger public questions and mire the SG in answering questions on issues which go off in tangents.
If we let him, he’d keep us arguing about ‘Rockall’ for the next two years. 🙂
Agreed, he is a poor politician. Still, his job at the moment seems to be placing soundbites and controversial issues up in the public forum which will damage honest debate, distract focus from the bigger public questions and mire the SG in answering questions on issues which go off in tangents.
If we let him, he’d keep us arguing about ‘Rockall’ for the next two years. 🙂
#
2012-02-20 08:37
I get the feeling that the leadership of the pro-independence parties will be grimacing at this.
The Scotland-UN story is one Dr Wilkie has been pushing for years, without one shred of corroboration.
It is the stuff of the sort of conspiracy theorists who write to newspapers in green ink and capital letters.
People chiding online Labour supporters with this look foolish, because they will get asked for proof, and there is none. Dr Wilkie sent letters and lodged papers. He may ave had a nicely worded letter back saying ‘we received your letter’
What he doesn’t have jigs any letter saying ‘We propose to take Action X in contacting the British Government’ from the Council of Europe or anyone else
He has no correspondence between those bodies. Even if Westminster were o keep them secret, the Council of Europe or other external body has no such obligation, but there is nothing emanating from them either.
None of the. Independence supporting parties back this theory up
So, because of the fantastical hobbyhorse of a bloke in Vinna and a couple of mates in the UK, supporters of Independence risk looking like frothing idiots because of this
I hope it is ll forgotten by the time of the Referendum
The Scotland-UN story is one Dr Wilkie has been pushing for years, without one shred of corroboration.
It is the stuff of the sort of conspiracy theorists who write to newspapers in green ink and capital letters.
People chiding online Labour supporters with this look foolish, because they will get asked for proof, and there is none. Dr Wilkie sent letters and lodged papers. He may ave had a nicely worded letter back saying ‘we received your letter’
What he doesn’t have jigs any letter saying ‘We propose to take Action X in contacting the British Government’ from the Council of Europe or anyone else
He has no correspondence between those bodies. Even if Westminster were o keep them secret, the Council of Europe or other external body has no such obligation, but there is nothing emanating from them either.
None of the. Independence supporting parties back this theory up
So, because of the fantastical hobbyhorse of a bloke in Vinna and a couple of mates in the UK, supporters of Independence risk looking like frothing idiots because of this
I hope it is ll forgotten by the time of the Referendum
#
2012-02-20 08:43
John Major is alive and kicking so should be able to confirm Dr. Wilkie’s assertion of the impact of the Council of Europe on the devolution debate.
Something must have irked Tony Blair against Scotland and the return of its parliament. What could that be ?, a dictate from another body that could not be ignored ?. Could not be ignored but overlaid by sufficient fog to prevent the CofE from ever finding out just how little was ‘given away’.
Why would Foulkes react so angrily to Dr. Wilkies assertion if there wasn’t more than a grain of truth to it ?.
Labour have form remember, lying and obfuscation are second nature to them. No different on this story.
Something must have irked Tony Blair against Scotland and the return of its parliament. What could that be ?, a dictate from another body that could not be ignored ?. Could not be ignored but overlaid by sufficient fog to prevent the CofE from ever finding out just how little was ‘given away’.
Why would Foulkes react so angrily to Dr. Wilkies assertion if there wasn’t more than a grain of truth to it ?.
Labour have form remember, lying and obfuscation are second nature to them. No different on this story.
#
2012-02-20 09:18
Should be able to, but won’t. He is probably extremely pleased that the Cabinet papers covering the subject are not being released, despite approval by the Information Commissioners
#
2012-02-20 09:34
I received this Tweet on the issue
Jo Swinson (@joswinson) replied to you:
@joswinson: @snowthistle isn’t the default that Cabinet papers are all private for
30 years to facilitate open discussion?
Jo Swinson (@joswinson) replied to you:
@joswinson: @snowthistle isn’t the default that Cabinet papers are all private for
30 years to facilitate open discussion?
#
2012-02-20 12:44
Snowthistle. Interesting tweet back from Jo Swinson.
Now if I remember correctly the F.o.I. request was for access to Cabinet papers from 1979. Now I admit my maths aint that great but hell even I can add 30 onto 1979. Oh look the answer is 2009.
I guess Jo Swinson is even worse at maths than I am. 😀
Now if I remember correctly the F.o.I. request was for access to Cabinet papers from 1979. Now I admit my maths aint that great but hell even I can add 30 onto 1979. Oh look the answer is 2009.
I guess Jo Swinson is even worse at maths than I am. 😀
#
2012-02-20 13:46
I understood that it was the information from 1997 that was requested.
Dominic Grieve: ‘Release of cabinet papers not in public interest’
(scotsman.com)
tinyurl.com/7sdkv6j
“.. Such a veto has been used only twice in the past, once relating to further devolution papers and once over a request for Cabinet minutes relating to Iraq. ..”
Was the information from 1979 also suppressed?
Dominic Grieve: ‘Release of cabinet papers not in public interest’
(scotsman.com)
tinyurl.com/7sdkv6j
“.. Such a veto has been used only twice in the past, once relating to further devolution papers and once over a request for Cabinet minutes relating to Iraq. ..”
Was the information from 1979 also suppressed?
#
2012-02-20 10:55
Quoting UpSpake:
And why is it necessary to lock down cabinet papers on the subject? The official reasons given are just patronising pap. If there was nothing to hide they would be in the public domain. If it reeks of hypocrisy and lies it sure is unionist. The union is built and maintained on such standards.
I am delighted to read that the vile little man Foulkes reads these dispatches. It has long been known that he spends a lot of his useless life winding people up on the forums, especially the Scotsman asylum. His absence from Holyrood is most welcome and refreshing. If there is one person who is the epitome of Labours ugly face it is him.
I watched the recent debate in the House of the undead, when he and his allies Forsyth, and Steele, were cautioned by some other Lords for their intemperate language in describing Alex Salmond.
Foulkes has an obsessional hatred of our First Minister of The Scottish Government Alex Salmond, that borders on the pathological. It is that blinding hate that has cast London labour in to the cess pit where it belongs. Long may the little toad stay there.
John Major is alive and kicking so should be able to confirm Dr. Wilkie’s assertion of the impact of the Council of Europe on the devolution debate.
Something must have irked Tony Blair against Scotland and the return of its parliament. What could that be ?, a dictate from another body that could not be ignored ?. Could not be ignored but overlaid by sufficient fog to prevent the CofE from ever finding out just how little was ‘given away’.
Why would Foulkes react so angrily to Dr. Wilkies assertion if there wasn’t more than a grain of truth to it ?.
Labour have form remember, lying and obfuscation are second nature to them. No different on this story.
And why is it necessary to lock down cabinet papers on the subject? The official reasons given are just patronising pap. If there was nothing to hide they would be in the public domain. If it reeks of hypocrisy and lies it sure is unionist. The union is built and maintained on such standards.
I am delighted to read that the vile little man Foulkes reads these dispatches. It has long been known that he spends a lot of his useless life winding people up on the forums, especially the Scotsman asylum. His absence from Holyrood is most welcome and refreshing. If there is one person who is the epitome of Labours ugly face it is him.
I watched the recent debate in the House of the undead, when he and his allies Forsyth, and Steele, were cautioned by some other Lords for their intemperate language in describing Alex Salmond.
Foulkes has an obsessional hatred of our First Minister of The Scottish Government Alex Salmond, that borders on the pathological. It is that blinding hate that has cast London labour in to the cess pit where it belongs. Long may the little toad stay there.
#
2012-02-20 20:27
Quote:
This whole “lock down” of Cabinet papers flies in the face of “Call me Dave” and his claim to be more open and to have more transparency in government.
This whole “keep it secret at all costs” attitude of the coalition government is as clear as mud! Mind you can we really expect any thing different from a unionist run government?
On a side thought, isn’t it interesting that the unionist parties are shouting from the roof tops for more clarity from the Scottish Government yet when we, the people ask, don’t shout but ask, for information they shut up shop tighter than a clam!
Democracy in action. Don’t you just love it!
And why is it necessary to lock down cabinet papers on the subject? The official reasons given are just patronising pap. If there was nothing to hide they would be in the public domain. If it reeks of hypocrisy and lies it sure is unionist. The union is built and maintained on such standards.
This whole “lock down” of Cabinet papers flies in the face of “Call me Dave” and his claim to be more open and to have more transparency in government.
This whole “keep it secret at all costs” attitude of the coalition government is as clear as mud! Mind you can we really expect any thing different from a unionist run government?
On a side thought, isn’t it interesting that the unionist parties are shouting from the roof tops for more clarity from the Scottish Government yet when we, the people ask, don’t shout but ask, for information they shut up shop tighter than a clam!
Democracy in action. Don’t you just love it!
#
2012-02-20 09:15
George Foulkes “The SNP are on a very dangerous tack at the moment. What they are doing is trying to build up a situation in Scotland where the services are manifestly better than south of the border in a number of areas.”
BBCs Colin MacKay intervened to say: “Is that a bad thing?”
Lord George said: “No, but they are doing it deliberately…”. LOL
Radio Scotland 25 February 2008
BBCs Colin MacKay intervened to say: “Is that a bad thing?”
Lord George said: “No, but they are doing it deliberately…”. LOL
Radio Scotland 25 February 2008
#
2012-02-20 19:41
Don’t worry clootie, the Scottish Government is pushing through a bill that should help fight this. Apparently “Call me Dave” is now looking at a similar bill. 😀
#
2012-02-20 09:26
Firstly,I would think that Foulkes outburst is likely to damage the pro-union movement.People who were unaware of the contribution of the involvemt of the Council of Europe in the push for devolution, now will be.Also a lot of people are likely to view Foulkes behaviour as innapropriate.
Secondly,as an SNP activist in the 1970’s,I know that labour were reluctant converts to devolution.What focused their minds was 11 SNP MP’s at Westminster and the SNP in second place in more than 15 labour held constituencies.
During the first referendum campaign labour activists were thin on the ground.The people who transported elderly people to the polls to put their cross for labour,were invisible.On the evening of polling day.I noticed that the lights were out in the Labour office of my Glasgow constiturncy.A handful of SNP activists and even fewer liberals were desperately trying to pull out the YES vote.I called my local labour councillor for help,only to be informed that he was having a few drinks in the pub with his mates.When we place this alongside the 40% rule where dead people and non voters were counted as a NO vote,and Callaghans refusal to put out a three line whip following a majority YES vote,I think we can say that labour were playing games with us.
In the 1990’s the SNP were regulrly second behind labour in opinion polls,but apart from Jim Sillers byelection victory in Govan,were not as strong during Westminster elections, as they were in the 1970’s.I cannot believe that one byelection win and two SNP MEP’s was enough to interest Blair in Devolution.There were other groups campaigning for Devolution,incl uding Dr Wilkies organisation.Something must have spooked Blair because he did not appear to have much enthusiasm for Scottish Devolution.This was apparent when he referred to the Scottish Parliament as a parish council. The negative attitude from Labour was also emphasised by one of their MP;s who stated that:”They can call it the white heather club,but they will never be the Scottish Government.”Whatever,the exact facts are,Labour cannot claim a monopoly of the push for devolution.They simply reacted to events occurring around them,fo defend their own interests.
Secondly,as an SNP activist in the 1970’s,I know that labour were reluctant converts to devolution.What focused their minds was 11 SNP MP’s at Westminster and the SNP in second place in more than 15 labour held constituencies.
During the first referendum campaign labour activists were thin on the ground.The people who transported elderly people to the polls to put their cross for labour,were invisible.On the evening of polling day.I noticed that the lights were out in the Labour office of my Glasgow constiturncy.A handful of SNP activists and even fewer liberals were desperately trying to pull out the YES vote.I called my local labour councillor for help,only to be informed that he was having a few drinks in the pub with his mates.When we place this alongside the 40% rule where dead people and non voters were counted as a NO vote,and Callaghans refusal to put out a three line whip following a majority YES vote,I think we can say that labour were playing games with us.
In the 1990’s the SNP were regulrly second behind labour in opinion polls,but apart from Jim Sillers byelection victory in Govan,were not as strong during Westminster elections, as they were in the 1970’s.I cannot believe that one byelection win and two SNP MEP’s was enough to interest Blair in Devolution.There were other groups campaigning for Devolution,incl uding Dr Wilkies organisation.Something must have spooked Blair because he did not appear to have much enthusiasm for Scottish Devolution.This was apparent when he referred to the Scottish Parliament as a parish council. The negative attitude from Labour was also emphasised by one of their MP;s who stated that:”They can call it the white heather club,but they will never be the Scottish Government.”Whatever,the exact facts are,Labour cannot claim a monopoly of the push for devolution.They simply reacted to events occurring around them,fo defend their own interests.
#
2012-02-20 10:59
Quoting Suomi:
It is also true that Blair has never contacted Alex Salmond to congratulate him or acknowledge his success.
Firstly,I would think that Foulkes outburst is likely to damage the pro-union movement.People who were unaware of the contribution of the involvemt of the Council of Europe in the push for devolution, now will be.Also a lot of people are likely to view Foulkes behaviour as innapropriate.
Secondly,as an SNP activist in the 1970’s,I know that labour were reluctant converts to devolution.What focused their minds was 11 SNP MP’s at Westminster and the SNP in second place in more than 15 labour held constituencies.
During the first referendum campaign labour activists were thin on the ground.The people who transported elderly people to the polls to put their cross for labour,were invisible.On the evening of polling day.I noticed that the lights were out in the Labour office of my Glasgow constiturncy.A handful of SNP activists and even fewer liberals were desperately trying to pull out the YES vote.I called my local labour councillor for help,only to be informed that he was having a few drinks in the pub with his mates.When we place this alongside the 40% rule where dead people and non voters were counted as a NO vote,and Callaghans refusal to put out a three line whip following a majority YES vote,I think we can say that labour were playing games with us.
In the 1990’s the SNP were regulrly second behind labour in opinion polls,but apart from Jim Sillers byelection victory in Govan,were not as strong during Westminster elections, as they were in the 1970’s.I cannot believe that one byelection win and two SNP MEP’s was enough to interest Blair in Devolution.There were other groups campaigning for Devolution,incl uding Dr Wilkies organisation.Something must have spooked Blair because he did not appear to have much enthusiasm for Scottish Devolution.This was apparent when he referred to the Scottish Parliament as a parish council. The negative attitude from Labour was also emphasised by one of their MP;s who stated that:”They can call it the white heather club,but they will never be the Scottish Government.”Whatever,the exact facts are,Labour cannot claim a monopoly of the push for devolution.They simply reacted to events occurring around them,fo defend their own interests.
It is also true that Blair has never contacted Alex Salmond to congratulate him or acknowledge his success.
#
2012-02-20 12:29
Hi SUOMI
I’m of the same vintage as yourself and I agree with all of your comment above. However, with regard to the pyrotechnics in a tea cup which followed James Wilkie’s article I hoped that the following thoughts, also left above in response to EXILE, might help.
James Wilkie said that Scotland-UN had influenced the Council of Europe. OLDNAT is saying that the CoE influenced the Labour government.
If both are true then James Wilkie could reasonably claim some influence for Scotland-UN with regard to Scottish Devolution. But there’s a gap in the middle and more evidence is required to bridge it.
I was disappointed, as I always am, with the unpleasant language used by some of JW’s critics and equally disappointed with James’ intemperate response. If Scotland-UN did contribute to the setting up of a Scottish Parliament then I hope it will be recognised when the evidence is produced: but if that doesn’t happen they can take comfort from the fact that there have been plenty more unsung heroes in the long road to independence.
I’m of the same vintage as yourself and I agree with all of your comment above. However, with regard to the pyrotechnics in a tea cup which followed James Wilkie’s article I hoped that the following thoughts, also left above in response to EXILE, might help.
James Wilkie said that Scotland-UN had influenced the Council of Europe. OLDNAT is saying that the CoE influenced the Labour government.
If both are true then James Wilkie could reasonably claim some influence for Scotland-UN with regard to Scottish Devolution. But there’s a gap in the middle and more evidence is required to bridge it.
I was disappointed, as I always am, with the unpleasant language used by some of JW’s critics and equally disappointed with James’ intemperate response. If Scotland-UN did contribute to the setting up of a Scottish Parliament then I hope it will be recognised when the evidence is produced: but if that doesn’t happen they can take comfort from the fact that there have been plenty more unsung heroes in the long road to independence.
#
2012-02-20 09:32
If Foulkes isn’t suffering from some sort of menatl incapacity, he should be encouraged. All that needs to happen is to post leaflets, blogs and various media that advertises “The thoughts of a typical Scottish Labour politician.”
You couldn’t buy this sort of publicity for the indpendence movement.
Keep it up George!
You couldn’t buy this sort of publicity for the indpendence movement.
Keep it up George!
#
2012-02-20 09:46
Isn’t there ANYONE in Whitehall with a few morals who might choose to use the auspices of Wikileaks and get these papers into the open?
#
2012-02-20 12:03
Quoting Aplinal:
Do you see where you went wrong?
Isn’t there ANYONE in Whitehall with a few morals
Do you see where you went wrong?
#
2012-02-20 12:51
Woah there boy!
Whitehall…….Morals ??????????????
RIGHT medicine WRONG dose methinks Aplinal. 😀
Remember we are talking about Westminster here, the central core of amoral activity.
Whitehall…….Morals ??????????????
RIGHT medicine WRONG dose methinks Aplinal. 😀
Remember we are talking about Westminster here, the central core of amoral activity.
#
2012-02-20 09:57
“Former Labour MP and MSP, George Foulkes, posted the remark in response to an opinion piece by Dr. James Wilkie of the SDA in which he cast doubt on claims by the Labour party that it was always fully committed to Devolution for Scotland.”
atschool.eduweb.co.uk/…/…
or maybe : …/scotland-said-yes.html
Geordie!!! THE TRUTH WILL FIND YE OOT!
atschool.eduweb.co.uk/…/…
or maybe : …/scotland-said-yes.html
Geordie!!! THE TRUTH WILL FIND YE OOT!
#
2012-02-20 10:27
“There’s a joke in the Scottish Party about our 1918 manifesto. Then we promised Home Rule, proportional representation and the prohibition of alcohol. And in more than seventy years we have managed to secure none of them.”
(Gordon Brown Daily Record 8/4/93)
That statement by Brown sums up Labour’s approach.
(Gordon Brown Daily Record 8/4/93)
That statement by Brown sums up Labour’s approach.
#
2012-02-20 10:16
I am not convinced the Council of Europe made that much difference to Labour, at least the Scottish MPs who were all for it, unless it was to help persuade Blair of the need to make good on promises in Scotland. These embargoed papers would make good reading.
#
2012-02-20 10:22
“SNP MSP Shona Robison called on the Labour peer to withdraw the remark and said: “You should withdraw this George before you are forced to. Totally insensitive given we’ve just marked Holocaust Memorial Day.”
SNP MP Stewart Hosie called the comment “low even by Labour standards”.”
Are the SNP equivalent of Cooper and Balls the only people who could be found to be outraged.
SNP MP Stewart Hosie called the comment “low even by Labour standards”.”
Are the SNP equivalent of Cooper and Balls the only people who could be found to be outraged.
#
2012-02-20 10:29
You are right ituna semea.
George Foulkes deliberately provokes so he is best completely ignored.
Its what he likes least.
George Foulkes deliberately provokes so he is best completely ignored.
Its what he likes least.
#
2012-02-20 11:28
Quoting Louperdowg:
It would be great if the vile little man had the moral fibre to come on line and not hide behind a moniker.
Some fine Newsreel from Pathe:
tiny.cc/j5pu9
You are right ituna semea.
George Foulkes deliberately provokes so he is best completely ignored.
Its what he likes least.
It would be great if the vile little man had the moral fibre to come on line and not hide behind a moniker.
Some fine Newsreel from Pathe:
tiny.cc/j5pu9
#
2012-02-20 13:38
I think you should have put up a public warning with this link Donald. 😀
Two snakes slithering around and mutually kissing each other’s ****. It is enough to make any one sick to the core.
The only thing missing from the clip was the pair of them leaving the chamber in the same way as Morecambe and Wise used to do at the end of their shows.
Two snakes slithering around and mutually kissing each other’s ****. It is enough to make any one sick to the core.
The only thing missing from the clip was the pair of them leaving the chamber in the same way as Morecambe and Wise used to do at the end of their shows.
#
2012-02-20 10:40
Those who give regular offence, like Lord Foulkes, always claim that they have been offended.
To equate Scottish nationalism to Holocaust denial shows that Labour politicians have no sense of objectivity, balance and morality.
Scottish nationalsim hasn’t even caused a nose bleed, but we are being lectured by someone who belives that it is akin to the killing of over 6 million Jewish people in Europe.
That isn’t low, it is not even the lowest of the low, that borders on the evil minded.
We have now seen UK government ministers veto two FOIA attempts in securing the publication of the minutes of the Cabinet Ministerial Committee on Devolution to Scotland.
There has only ever been one other veto and that was with regard the blocking of release of cabinet papers on the Iraq War. An illegal war that resulted in the deaths of over 1 million Iraqis.
A war which Lord Foulkes backed.
If there is innocent blood on people’s hands then it is on the hands of Labour politicians like Lord Foulkes.
To equate Scottish nationalism to Holocaust denial shows that Labour politicians have no sense of objectivity, balance and morality.
Scottish nationalsim hasn’t even caused a nose bleed, but we are being lectured by someone who belives that it is akin to the killing of over 6 million Jewish people in Europe.
That isn’t low, it is not even the lowest of the low, that borders on the evil minded.
We have now seen UK government ministers veto two FOIA attempts in securing the publication of the minutes of the Cabinet Ministerial Committee on Devolution to Scotland.
There has only ever been one other veto and that was with regard the blocking of release of cabinet papers on the Iraq War. An illegal war that resulted in the deaths of over 1 million Iraqis.
A war which Lord Foulkes backed.
If there is innocent blood on people’s hands then it is on the hands of Labour politicians like Lord Foulkes.
#
2012-02-20 10:46
Mac said:”To equate Scottish nationalism to Holocaust denial shows that Labour politicians have no sense of objectivity, balance and morality.”
Hang on Foulkes never came anywhere near to saying that. You should refrain from putting words in his admittedly large mouth.
Hang on Foulkes never came anywhere near to saying that. You should refrain from putting words in his admittedly large mouth.
#
2012-02-20 11:02
Lord Foulkes claimed that nationalists were behind the FOIA requests and that to question Labour ministerial support for devolution was akin to Holocaust denial.
It is Lord Foulkes who has blood on his hands – the one millions Iraqis who died in an illegal war which the Labour party greatly supported, and as we know now, is in direct comparison to the poor ministerial support given to devolution for Scotland.
This is a proper comparison to make.
The same Labour politicians were more than willing to sacrifice the lives of innocents abroad but were less than willing to hand Scots more power at home.
Now that is a damning comparison.
It is Lord Foulkes who has blood on his hands – the one millions Iraqis who died in an illegal war which the Labour party greatly supported, and as we know now, is in direct comparison to the poor ministerial support given to devolution for Scotland.
This is a proper comparison to make.
The same Labour politicians were more than willing to sacrifice the lives of innocents abroad but were less than willing to hand Scots more power at home.
Now that is a damning comparison.
#
2012-02-20 11:58
Quoting ituna semea:
“CyberNat myth that Devolution was forced on the Labour Govt.by EU or Council of Europe (stories vary) is akin to Holocaust denial”
I would say that comes pretty close.
Mac said:”To equate Scottish nationalism to Holocaust denial shows that Labour politicians have no sense of objectivity, balance and morality.”
Hang on Foulkes never came anywhere near to saying that. You should refrain from putting words in his admittedly large mouth.
“CyberNat myth that Devolution was forced on the Labour Govt.by EU or Council of Europe (stories vary) is akin to Holocaust denial”
I would say that comes pretty close.
#
2012-02-20 12:02
I’d say it was nowhere near, in as much as ‘believing devolution was forced on the Labour party by Europe’ is nowhere near ‘Scottish nationalism’.
#
2012-02-20 20:04
We all know who Mr Foulkes refers to when he makes use of the term ‘cybernat’
“CyberNat myth that Devolution was forced on the Labour Govt.by EU or Council of Europe (stories vary) is akin to Holocaust denial”
If you make that
“Nat myth that Devolution was forced on the Labour Govt.by EU or Council of Europe (stories vary) is akin to Holocaust denial”
If he is not referring to Scottish Nationalists then who is he referring to?
What he is saying is …to even question ‘it’ is the same as denying the holocaust. That is a ridiculous statement to make.
“CyberNat myth that Devolution was forced on the Labour Govt.by EU or Council of Europe (stories vary) is akin to Holocaust denial”
If you make that
“Nat myth that Devolution was forced on the Labour Govt.by EU or Council of Europe (stories vary) is akin to Holocaust denial”
If he is not referring to Scottish Nationalists then who is he referring to?
What he is saying is …to even question ‘it’ is the same as denying the holocaust. That is a ridiculous statement to make.
#
2012-02-20 10:45
Another tirade against SNP and independence in Herald Letters page by “nutty” Professor Gallacher who attacks cybernats but is blinkered to the numerous Unionist trolls who attack Alex Salmond and SNP on daily basis not mention the Labour politicians who try to associated the SNP with Nazis when in fact Newsnetscotland recently revealed that the Scotand says No campaign is being led by former BNP people.
#
2012-02-20 11:01
It just shows how worried they are about how the internet is being used to debunk the lies put about by the unionists, undermining their whole credibility. In the past they have got away with it. I am sure they would like to go back to those happy days where the population was deprived of the truth.
#
2012-02-20 11:01
The odd thing is, George seems to be reacting as if this was a new story. Wilkie has been promoting his fairy-tale about the Council of Europe for years, anywhere he could find a platform. He was pushing it on the old Herald comments threads four or five years ago. That “realmofscotland ” web site is essentially unchanged in all that time.
The only thing that’s new is that Wilkie is linking his tale to the recent story about the FoI denial of the devolution cabinet papers, and that NNS gave him a platform for an article that was a bit higher profile than his previous publicity attempts.
If George was previously unaware of Wilkie’s claims, he doesn’t get out much.
The only thing that’s new is that Wilkie is linking his tale to the recent story about the FoI denial of the devolution cabinet papers, and that NNS gave him a platform for an article that was a bit higher profile than his previous publicity attempts.
If George was previously unaware of Wilkie’s claims, he doesn’t get out much.
#
2012-02-20 11:29
Quoting Soixante-neuf:
That’s the key, I think. We obviously get under his skin.
NNS gave him a platform
That’s the key, I think. We obviously get under his skin.
#
2012-02-20 11:42
Quoting Soixante-neuf:
Why then lock down the cabinet papers? There is no smoke with out fire! Something reeks of hypocrisy.
Your posts holds no more credibility than Wilkies or Foulkes, it’s just stuff you said.
The odd thing is, George seems to be reacting as if this was a new story. Wilkie has been promoting his fairy-tale about the Council of Europe for years, anywhere he could find a platform. He was pushing it on the old Herald comments threads four or five years ago. That “realmofscotland ” web site is essentially unchanged in all that time.
The only thing that’s new is that Wilkie is linking his tale to the recent story about the FoI denial of the devolution cabinet papers, and that NNS gave him a platform for an article that was a bit higher profile than his previous publicity attempts.
If George was previously unaware of Wilkie’s claims, he doesn’t get out much.
Why then lock down the cabinet papers? There is no smoke with out fire! Something reeks of hypocrisy.
Your posts holds no more credibility than Wilkies or Foulkes, it’s just stuff you said.
#
2012-02-20 12:30
It’s a matter of record all over the internet that Wilkie has been pushing this line for years. That, of course, is “just stuff he said”. Records that he wrote letters to people prove no more than that he wrote letters to people. Not that the recipients did anything at all as a result.
There is plenty scope for incendiary revelations in these papers without Wilkie’s little fantasy having anything to do with it.
There is plenty scope for incendiary revelations in these papers without Wilkie’s little fantasy having anything to do with it.
#
2012-02-20 16:46
There’s a very simple principle of logic and science that supporters of the SDA’s claims would do well to recognise.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
It’s called the Sagan Standard, after the American astrophysicist Carl Sagan, but it was first formulated by the 18th century French mathematician Pierre Simon La Place, who said “The weight of evidence for an extraordinary claim must be proportioned to its strangeness.”
In any sphere of science, if you make a claim that overturns accepted understanding, then you require a solid body of evidence which backs up your case. If you are making a claim that says “I’m correct and everyone else has got it wrong”, then the evidence you supply must be irrefutable and leave no room for doubt. The quantity and quality of your evidence must be proportional to the size and importance of the claim you’re making. The evidence must be of such a quality that independent observers can reach no other conclusion and so can rule out the alternative hypotheses.
The evidence supplied by SDA for their claim is not inequivocal. Pointing this out is not a personal attack on James Wilkie. It’s simply a statement that the evidence supplied is partial and open to alternative explanations, and therefore we should not accept the claim until more evidence is supplied to remove all doubt.
Foulkes is still a buffoon though. He’s trying to claim that “Cybernats” accept Wilkie’s evidence, when in fact “Cybernats” do nothing of the sort – otherwise there wouldn’t have been such a heated discussion about it in Newsnet’s comments.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
It’s called the Sagan Standard, after the American astrophysicist Carl Sagan, but it was first formulated by the 18th century French mathematician Pierre Simon La Place, who said “The weight of evidence for an extraordinary claim must be proportioned to its strangeness.”
In any sphere of science, if you make a claim that overturns accepted understanding, then you require a solid body of evidence which backs up your case. If you are making a claim that says “I’m correct and everyone else has got it wrong”, then the evidence you supply must be irrefutable and leave no room for doubt. The quantity and quality of your evidence must be proportional to the size and importance of the claim you’re making. The evidence must be of such a quality that independent observers can reach no other conclusion and so can rule out the alternative hypotheses.
The evidence supplied by SDA for their claim is not inequivocal. Pointing this out is not a personal attack on James Wilkie. It’s simply a statement that the evidence supplied is partial and open to alternative explanations, and therefore we should not accept the claim until more evidence is supplied to remove all doubt.
Foulkes is still a buffoon though. He’s trying to claim that “Cybernats” accept Wilkie’s evidence, when in fact “Cybernats” do nothing of the sort – otherwise there wouldn’t have been such a heated discussion about it in Newsnet’s comments.
#
2012-02-20 11:04
Foulkes is an absolute buffoon; the sort that voted for the Union in the first place.
If we weren’t doing such a good job of fronting-up to the Unionist propaganda machine, he’d have no reason to complain.
Enjoy his ranting! We are winning the argument and he doesn’t like it.
If we weren’t doing such a good job of fronting-up to the Unionist propaganda machine, he’d have no reason to complain.
Enjoy his ranting! We are winning the argument and he doesn’t like it.
#
2012-02-20 11:53
A bit of cheesy background into the FOI and a request for someone in the know to get off their backside and chuffing well do something rather than rely on the blogosphere to play their games for them!
…/what-lies-within.html
…/what-lies-within.html
#
2012-02-20 12:04
I Think that this information about the COE,devulution and labour and the fib dems spurious claims to be the parents of devolution, should be used against them at every oppertunity,it would certainly keep them on the back foot,and if true could help destroy the union once and for all,and certainly gaurantee yes in the referendum,i think there is mileage in this story,if not why would they deny access to the files about it,i think our enemy realy fears this coming out,snp take note.
#
2012-02-20 12:09
Must take issue with the comments that Foulkes is a poor politician; when he was an MSP he had the MSP’s salary, his MP’s pension and around 50 grand a year from the House of Lords. Do not know if he has any directorships, but the above makes him a very well heeled politician.
#
2012-02-20 12:13
Plenty of property, here, London, France. Still involved in UK Caribbean relations/junkets…It’s a hard life for Georgie Porgy.
#
2012-02-20 12:28
Here is what George Foulkes is involved in :
Chairman of the Advisory Board of Govnet Communications
www.govnet.co.uk/…/
Govenor of Westminster Foundation for Democracy
wfd.org/…/lord-foulkes.aspx
President of the Caribbean Council Advisory Committee
www.caribbean-council.org/…/
The first one is some kind of lobby group
the second one is quite ironic as it promotes democracy
and the third is a strange one as he doesnt actually have any connection with the Carribean, al be it probably swung a few free trips when he was an MP and enjoys the some of the liquid produce for the Caribbean
Chairman of the Advisory Board of Govnet Communications
www.govnet.co.uk/…/
Govenor of Westminster Foundation for Democracy
wfd.org/…/lord-foulkes.aspx
President of the Caribbean Council Advisory Committee
www.caribbean-council.org/…/
The first one is some kind of lobby group
the second one is quite ironic as it promotes democracy
and the third is a strange one as he doesnt actually have any connection with the Carribean, al be it probably swung a few free trips when he was an MP and enjoys the some of the liquid produce for the Caribbean
#
2012-02-20 12:15
I am not a religious person but Foulkes is causing me to believe in re-incarnation as it seems, the same people who sold us out in 1707 are back again to a repeat performance. But this time.
#
2012-02-20 12:58
Quoting nchanter:
I know what you mean I don’t believe in re-incarnation either ..which is a bit strange ‘cos in my last life I did.
I am not a religious person but Foulkes is causing me to believe in re-incarnation as it seems, the same people who sold us out in 1707 are back again to a repeat performance. But this time.
I know what you mean I don’t believe in re-incarnation either ..which is a bit strange ‘cos in my last life I did.
#
2012-02-20 12:38
Quite common to see the jealousy that Labour have, because they dont have a team of supporters cybering for them, only a handful of fanatics and die heards along with the MPs themselves.
#
2012-02-20 12:43
Ye see yon birkie ca’d ‘a lord,’
Wha struts, an’ stares, an’ a’ that?
Tho’ hundreds worship at his word,
He’s but a cuif for a’ that.
For a’ that, an’ a’ that,
His ribband, star, an’ a’ that,
The man o’ independent mind,
He looks an’ laughs at a’ that.
Wha struts, an’ stares, an’ a’ that?
Tho’ hundreds worship at his word,
He’s but a cuif for a’ that.
For a’ that, an’ a’ that,
His ribband, star, an’ a’ that,
The man o’ independent mind,
He looks an’ laughs at a’ that.
#
2012-02-20 12:55
O/T but I thought you’d all like to know that the UK’s most advanced tidal current generation company Marine Current Turbines Ltd has just been bought by the Germany company Siemens.
#
2012-02-20 14:12
I think that has been on the cards for quite some time. This is one of the really frustrating things about not having control of all the necessary levels of the economy. We have HUGE potential in Scotland for a diverse renewable energy production, but because Westminster hold the purse strings, we are unable to create the environment in which more advanced R&D; can take place. Expertise will be lost, and the window of opportunity slammed shut if we screw up this (I believe) LAST chance at Independence.
Saor Alba
Saor Alba
#
2012-02-20 14:15
They have had an increasing stake for some time. Should be good news.
Tidal was held back by the DTI for years, against their own science committee recommendations .
In my view the wrong engineering approach is being taken.
I think there should have been arrays of very cheap systems which would both generate enough electricity to pay for themselves and also provide a huge amount of information on deployment optimization regarding spacing, hight configurations.
If duct assisted systems are used then smaller cheaper turbines can be used and the tidal turnaround time decreased. If they were cable anchored with buoy support this would give a very cheap system which is also easy to reconfigure for depth and spacing for engineering purposes.
ASAP deployment of the above would be very cheap, would provide invaluable engineering data and would generate enough electricity to pay for itself.
We are in danger of having very time consuming trials and beauty contests on elaborate and expensive systems to assess the ‘optimum’ turbine regarding efficiency etc. when quite probably array deployment configuration experimentation is more important for a holistic optimization.
Tidal energy is created and dissipated every year whether we use it or not. If we do not use it it is simply lost. If we do use it, even inefficiently, that has no bearing whatsoever on future ‘optimized’ yields so there is no resource downside like there would be in say, the inefficient extraction of oil (like the UK does compared to the Norwegian Sector).
Why not go ahead with a large array of low tech. cheap systems in the Pentland Firth right now?
You would get electricity which pays for itself, you get engineering data.
There is the problem of grid connection but there is still the old Dounreay grid connection which should serve at least for the pay-for-itself engineering phase.
And if there are technological and cost delays in coming up with the supreme system we still get cheap electricity which is a renewable (actually an inexhaustible) for as long as it takes.
You never know, the optimal system in terms of generation and cost might not be that far off the system described. Direct transfer of wind style turbines I feel is missing a trick by not having the dynamically configurable duct assistance which is possible with tidal and which could greatly extend the generation cycle.
I will finish by pointing out, as I usually do, that the key thing about tidal is that it is not at all dependent on fickle weather conditions unlike other renewables. With a mixture of tidal resources in different tidal phase regions and pumped storage to cover low generation times we get a system which represents a base load. Possibly even enough to supply all Scotland’s electricity requirement. That means no highly expensive backup fossil system to keep in standby with full crews etc. like you require for wind and wave. A really huge financial saving.
Tidal was held back by the DTI for years, against their own science committee recommendations .
In my view the wrong engineering approach is being taken.
I think there should have been arrays of very cheap systems which would both generate enough electricity to pay for themselves and also provide a huge amount of information on deployment optimization regarding spacing, hight configurations.
If duct assisted systems are used then smaller cheaper turbines can be used and the tidal turnaround time decreased. If they were cable anchored with buoy support this would give a very cheap system which is also easy to reconfigure for depth and spacing for engineering purposes.
ASAP deployment of the above would be very cheap, would provide invaluable engineering data and would generate enough electricity to pay for itself.
We are in danger of having very time consuming trials and beauty contests on elaborate and expensive systems to assess the ‘optimum’ turbine regarding efficiency etc. when quite probably array deployment configuration experimentation is more important for a holistic optimization.
Tidal energy is created and dissipated every year whether we use it or not. If we do not use it it is simply lost. If we do use it, even inefficiently, that has no bearing whatsoever on future ‘optimized’ yields so there is no resource downside like there would be in say, the inefficient extraction of oil (like the UK does compared to the Norwegian Sector).
Why not go ahead with a large array of low tech. cheap systems in the Pentland Firth right now?
You would get electricity which pays for itself, you get engineering data.
There is the problem of grid connection but there is still the old Dounreay grid connection which should serve at least for the pay-for-itself engineering phase.
And if there are technological and cost delays in coming up with the supreme system we still get cheap electricity which is a renewable (actually an inexhaustible) for as long as it takes.
You never know, the optimal system in terms of generation and cost might not be that far off the system described. Direct transfer of wind style turbines I feel is missing a trick by not having the dynamically configurable duct assistance which is possible with tidal and which could greatly extend the generation cycle.
I will finish by pointing out, as I usually do, that the key thing about tidal is that it is not at all dependent on fickle weather conditions unlike other renewables. With a mixture of tidal resources in different tidal phase regions and pumped storage to cover low generation times we get a system which represents a base load. Possibly even enough to supply all Scotland’s electricity requirement. That means no highly expensive backup fossil system to keep in standby with full crews etc. like you require for wind and wave. A really huge financial saving.
#
2012-02-20 14:33
There are a couple of companies doing duct assisted designs. Not Scottish of course but also not even UK.
All the tidal/wave energy companies that aren’t already foreign owned have overseas investors or partners some of which are also making takeover noises.
This is ultimately not good for Scotland which is why we desparately need our own financial institutions operating under Scottish regulations.
All the tidal/wave energy companies that aren’t already foreign owned have overseas investors or partners some of which are also making takeover noises.
This is ultimately not good for Scotland which is why we desparately need our own financial institutions operating under Scottish regulations.
#
2012-02-20 16:00
What about Edinburgh based Pelamis wave system?
I agree it would be ideal if all the technology was developed and manufactured in Scotland, but in the case of tidal there are many potential benefits regardless of who develops it.
1. Could supply all Scotland’s EGR.*
2. Secure supply not dependent on oil, gas, coal, uranium or wind.
3. Should be ultimately cheaper than wind (since far fewer turbines required).
4. Invisible, so zero impact on tourism. Scotland’s tourism earnings started to dip even before the credit crunch. People come to Scotland for the scenery, not the weather or midge spotting.
5. Area of seabed required tiny in comparison to wind farms* which will not supply all the EGR anyway. Probably not much more than 10 miles by 10 miles required.
6. Minimal effect on marine life.
7. No expensive back up system needing to be maintained to cover extended flat calm conditions.
If anyone remembers, Gordon Brown’s stated preference when PM was to have a mix of nuclear and wind. That particular scenario, where nuclear effectively has to ramp up and down to cover for wind loss is a nuclear disaster waiting to happen.
* As stated in the other comment, one of the biggest bones of contention is what the actual yield model should be for array configurations. Unlike wind, where it can easily get round and in between turbines, the restriction for water and resultant pressure build may result in higher yields than would be predicted for wind based array modelling (see Professor Salter’s work on this). Until there is a sufficiently large array out there to test this, how much more or how little more energy may be transduced for a liquid flow system will remain uncertain, hence question marks on yield and area requirements. And the need to get a sizeable test array out there quickly.
I agree it would be ideal if all the technology was developed and manufactured in Scotland, but in the case of tidal there are many potential benefits regardless of who develops it.
1. Could supply all Scotland’s EGR.*
2. Secure supply not dependent on oil, gas, coal, uranium or wind.
3. Should be ultimately cheaper than wind (since far fewer turbines required).
4. Invisible, so zero impact on tourism. Scotland’s tourism earnings started to dip even before the credit crunch. People come to Scotland for the scenery, not the weather or midge spotting.
5. Area of seabed required tiny in comparison to wind farms* which will not supply all the EGR anyway. Probably not much more than 10 miles by 10 miles required.
6. Minimal effect on marine life.
7. No expensive back up system needing to be maintained to cover extended flat calm conditions.
If anyone remembers, Gordon Brown’s stated preference when PM was to have a mix of nuclear and wind. That particular scenario, where nuclear effectively has to ramp up and down to cover for wind loss is a nuclear disaster waiting to happen.
* As stated in the other comment, one of the biggest bones of contention is what the actual yield model should be for array configurations. Unlike wind, where it can easily get round and in between turbines, the restriction for water and resultant pressure build may result in higher yields than would be predicted for wind based array modelling (see Professor Salter’s work on this). Until there is a sufficiently large array out there to test this, how much more or how little more energy may be transduced for a liquid flow system will remain uncertain, hence question marks on yield and area requirements. And the need to get a sizeable test array out there quickly.
#
2012-02-20 19:57
Pelamis are difficult to read. They have joint projects running with Scottish Power and EON and another deal running with Vattenfall. Their shareholding is not easy to determine but their Chair is from a Swiss venture capitalist. So one has to assume they’re being fattened up for a sale.
As it happens I’m not overly pro wave. I have this dread that a good storm will simply rip their anchors out of the seabed and they’ll all be deposited on the rocks!!
I prefer tidal…… but have no hopes of their ever being a Scottish tidal technology industry of any note.
As it happens I’m not overly pro wave. I have this dread that a good storm will simply rip their anchors out of the seabed and they’ll all be deposited on the rocks!!
I prefer tidal…… but have no hopes of their ever being a Scottish tidal technology industry of any note.
#
2012-02-20 20:15
Totally ignorant about all this Scamp (weren’t you going to write an article to educate us? 😉 ). Why do you have no hopes for tidal technology in Scotland?
#
2012-02-21 21:51
Quoting snowthistle:
Could it be that Scotland has 25% of all tidal power in Europe waiting to be harnessed?
Totally ignorant about all this Scamp (weren’t you going to write an article to educate us? 😉 ). Why do you have no hopes for tidal technology in Scotland?
Could it be that Scotland has 25% of all tidal power in Europe waiting to be harnessed?
#
2012-02-22 16:14
It was such a mystery to the Westminster Science Committee they published an open letter once about 15 years ago, asking why nothing was being done.
Putting on a Brit Imperialist hat for a second, I think the prospect of a self-sufficient Scotland regarding EGR using clean, cheap, invisible tidal power would certainly not predispose Scots to accepting nuclear, coal, oil and wind generation capacity to fulfil its duty as an electricity power station for NIMBY England.
Such a development would also do nothing to slow Scotland’s march to normal levels of self-government and would probably have hastened it.
After all Scotland is there to serve as a guinea-pig supplier for social and clinical experiments, a toxic waste disposal area, a nuclear weaponstarget base, a cannon fodder supply source, nuclear waste and nuclear sub repository, a net food contributor and oil well, amongst others. Isn’t it?
So we don’t want to lose that.
“We have catcht hold of Scotland and would keep her fast.” – Speaker, HoC, 1713
Putting on a Brit Imperialist hat for a second, I think the prospect of a self-sufficient Scotland regarding EGR using clean, cheap, invisible tidal power would certainly not predispose Scots to accepting nuclear, coal, oil and wind generation capacity to fulfil its duty as an electricity power station for NIMBY England.
Such a development would also do nothing to slow Scotland’s march to normal levels of self-government and would probably have hastened it.
After all Scotland is there to serve as a guinea-pig supplier for social and clinical experiments, a toxic waste disposal area, a nuclear weapons
So we don’t want to lose that.
“We have catcht hold of Scotland and would keep her fast.” – Speaker, HoC, 1713
#
2012-02-20 13:12
Could I request that the debate about Dr Wilkie is a complete distraction of the sort that our enemies would enjoy and seek to promote.
You can read into that whatever you think reasonable.
The two votes on devoultion were concessions given because of the continuous pressure of the SNP. That is all.
The SDA is, at best, an irrelevance
You can read into that whatever you think reasonable.
The two votes on devoultion were concessions given because of the continuous pressure of the SNP. That is all.
The SDA is, at best, an irrelevance
#
2012-02-20 13:37
Douglas Alexander MP,Labour, Wales speech Saturday:-
“The Labour Party conference in 1918 supported legislative assemblies for Scotland and Wales.
As the authors of devolution, we must now become devolution’s defenders.”
1918 !!!!! Goodness gracious me. They were quick off the mark. My Gran’s Mum was born about then.She didn’t live to see a Scottish Assembly,died age 51. Labour all her life,same as my Mum and Dad (not any more).
I thought they were keeping all the embarrasing bits hidden under the mattress, e.g. the McCrone Report—Yes,Lord Foulkes and Danny A,we know about that one too.
Never again.
“The Labour Party conference in 1918 supported legislative assemblies for Scotland and Wales.
As the authors of devolution, we must now become devolution’s defenders.”
1918 !!!!! Goodness gracious me. They were quick off the mark. My Gran’s Mum was born about then.She didn’t live to see a Scottish Assembly,died age 51. Labour all her life,same as my Mum and Dad (not any more).
I thought they were keeping all the embarrasing bits hidden under the mattress, e.g. the McCrone Report—Yes,Lord Foulkes and Danny A,we know about that one too.
Never again.
#
2012-02-20 13:50
Oh My God!
What have you done D.W.
McCrone Report?
You know of course you can get the cybernat accusation thrown at you for even thinking about that report far less mentioning it in a public place!
What have you done D.W.
McCrone Report?
You know of course you can get the cybernat accusation thrown at you for even thinking about that report far less mentioning it in a public place!
#
2012-02-20 15:59
quote name=”Arbroath1320″]Oh My God!
What have you done D.W.
McCrone Report?
You know of course you can get the cybernat accusation thrown at you for even thinking about that report far less mentioning it in a public place!
BOTTLE DUNGEON,ST ANDREWS FOR ME.
Remember to bring the saw in that Dundee cake!
What have you done D.W.
McCrone Report?
You know of course you can get the cybernat accusation thrown at you for even thinking about that report far less mentioning it in a public place!
BOTTLE DUNGEON,ST ANDREWS FOR ME.
Remember to bring the saw in that Dundee cake!
#
2012-02-20 16:49
Aye, and it’s a shame it wasn’t a Labour PM who was handed the National Covenant (with 2 million signatures attached) calling for a Scottish Parliament 32 years later. No, the Labour Party was fully committed to it, being such a long-standing policy, but unfortunately Clement Attlee was a member of the … oh, now wait a minute!
#
2012-02-20 13:48
Foulkes! Does anyone pay the slightest attention to this ermined eejit?
The only interesting thing about the bibulous buffoon’s latest blundering outburst is the effort the MSM are putting into avoiding any mention of it.
The only interesting thing about the bibulous buffoon’s latest blundering outburst is the effort the MSM are putting into avoiding any mention of it.
#
2012-02-20 14:03
Now that Newsnet Scotland seems to have been identified as a “talking shop for Cybernats”, can I ask you all, please, not to become embroiled in internecine posting.
It serves nobody well, least of all the posters who are responsible for some of the most informed comments I’ve ever seen on Forums. There have already been comments about schism within the SNP, and this site was actually quoted “for those who want to see for themselves”. This site is a beacon for people who want to find the truth – and I, like many others, have directed people here; I don’t want for them to feel that it is all about who did what.
We are all better than that.
Does it matter whether Dr Wilkie had any input? Really?
It serves nobody well, least of all the posters who are responsible for some of the most informed comments I’ve ever seen on Forums. There have already been comments about schism within the SNP, and this site was actually quoted “for those who want to see for themselves”. This site is a beacon for people who want to find the truth – and I, like many others, have directed people here; I don’t want for them to feel that it is all about who did what.
We are all better than that.
Does it matter whether Dr Wilkie had any input? Really?
#
2012-02-20 14:16
IQuoting brusque:
Internecine eh! I had one of those and it ran out of petrol one night on the Crask, so I went in to the Crask Inn and forgot about it.
I don’t think anyone who has the wit and the wisdom to be Cybernattic is going to be diverted from independence by anyone or thing. However, and this is my own personal opinion, either Alex is playing a blinder with this Devious Max stuff or he has become diverted. We should be going full throttle for total independence. It does not need to be explained, only to a fool.
Now that Newsnet Scotland seems to have been identified as a “talking shop for Cybernats”, can I ask you all, please, not to become embroiled in internecine posting.
It serves nobody well, least of all the posters who are responsible for some of the most informed comments I’ve ever seen on Forums. There have already been comments about schism within the SNP, and this site was actually quoted “for those who want to see for themselves”. This site is a beacon for people who want to find the truth – and I, like many others, have directed people here; I don’t want for them to feel that it is all about who did what.
We are all better than that.
Does it matter whether Dr Wilkie had any input? Really?
Internecine eh! I had one of those and it ran out of petrol one night on the Crask, so I went in to the Crask Inn and forgot about it.
I don’t think anyone who has the wit and the wisdom to be Cybernattic is going to be diverted from independence by anyone or thing. However, and this is my own personal opinion, either Alex is playing a blinder with this Devious Max stuff or he has become diverted. We should be going full throttle for total independence. It does not need to be explained, only to a fool.
#
2012-02-20 14:35
Quoting brusque:
Absolutely agree with you, Brusque, and snecked again above.
Let’s have some informed comment instead of division, especially since almost all here (including myself) are NOT party to the facts in their entirety on Scotland-UN. I have been as guilty as others but have wised up to what is happening.
Let me urge those who are indulging their opinions, to please, please remember, there are absolutely those amongst us who would seek to very slowly and very carefully create divisions. I have seen others on these forums at NNS who have tried to in the most subtle way, create division.
Divide and conquer, that will be the mantra. Do not be taken for fools,. and jump headfirst. As in 1707, there will surely be those who would seek to become part of the independence movement, with the intention of seeking nothing but division.
The enemy within, often appears to be your greatest friend.
Now that Newsnet Scotland seems to have been identified as a “talking shop for Cybernats”, can I ask you all, please, not to become embroiled in internecine posting.
It serves nobody well, least of all the posters who are responsible for some of the most informed comments I’ve ever seen on Forums. There have already been comments about schism within the SNP, and this site was actually quoted “for those who want to see for themselves”. This site is a beacon for people who want to find the truth – and I, like many others, have directed people here; I don’t want for them to feel that it is all about who did what.
We are all better than that.
Does it matter whether Dr Wilkie had any input? Really?
Absolutely agree with you, Brusque, and snecked again above.
Let’s have some informed comment instead of division, especially since almost all here (including myself) are NOT party to the facts in their entirety on Scotland-UN. I have been as guilty as others but have wised up to what is happening.
Let me urge those who are indulging their opinions, to please, please remember, there are absolutely those amongst us who would seek to very slowly and very carefully create divisions. I have seen others on these forums at NNS who have tried to in the most subtle way, create division.
Divide and conquer, that will be the mantra. Do not be taken for fools,. and jump headfirst. As in 1707, there will surely be those who would seek to become part of the independence movement, with the intention of seeking nothing but division.
The enemy within, often appears to be your greatest friend.
#
2012-02-20 16:41
Quoting Robert Louis:
I cannot find fault with a word you post. however there is a vast difference between now and 1707 not the least of it being 3 centuries.
This will be the first time ever that Scottish residents have been asked if they actually want to be in this union.
Since 1707 we have seen the birth of many wonderful things, not the least of them being: The SNP. The Internet, and the Cybernat. These three things will I believe deliver what none other will, Scottish Independence.
The Cybernat was born of necessity as was this NNS site. The dearth of support for Scottish independence in the MSM created us. The internet has delivered so much for our cause. That is why it is necessary to engage with the argument and not to ignore it. As I said I do not believe that any one who is a Cybernat, and who has had the wit and the wisdom to get this far will be easily diverted from the independence cause. We are all to weel aware of the antics of the unionist black ops gang, they are now so transparent and predictable as to be worthy of nothing but our utter contempt and pity.
Foulkes is like a drunk in a pub, attention seeking, selfish self serving and one to laugh at. He can do us no harm he is a total nonentity. Ashtrays and motorbikes spring to mind. The beauty of the internet is that these charlatans and quislings are so readily exposed and publicly humiliated.
I say it again the Trojan Horse is Devious Max, he is the one to watch and the one that the SNP should be walking quickly away from. Anything else is a betrayal.
Quoting brusque:Now that Newsnet Scotland seems to have been identified as a “talking shop for Cybernats”, can I ask you all, please, not to become embroiled in internecine posting.
It serves nobody well, least of all the posters who are responsible for some of the most informed comments I’ve ever seen on Forums. There have already been comments about schism within the SNP, and this site was actually quoted “for those who want to see for themselves”. This site is a beacon for people who want to find the truth – and I, like many others, have directed people here; I don’t want for them to feel that it is all about who did what.
We are all better than that.
Does it matter whether Dr Wilkie had any input? Really?
Absolutely agree with you, Brusque, and snecked again above.
Let’s have some informed comment instead of division, especially since almost all here (including myself) are NOT party to the facts in their entirety on Scotland-UN. I have been as guilty as others but have wised up to what is happening.
Let me urge those who are indulging their opinions, to please, please remember, there are absolutely those amongst us who would seek to very slowly and very carefully create divisions. I have seen others on these forums at NNS who have tried to in the most subtle way, create division.
Divide and conquer, that will be the mantra. Do not be taken for fools,. and jump headfirst. As in 1707, there will surely be those who would seek to become part of the independence movement, with the intention of seeking nothing but division.
The enemy within, often appears to be your greatest friend.
I cannot find fault with a word you post. however there is a vast difference between now and 1707 not the least of it being 3 centuries.
This will be the first time ever that Scottish residents have been asked if they actually want to be in this union.
Since 1707 we have seen the birth of many wonderful things, not the least of them being: The SNP. The Internet, and the Cybernat. These three things will I believe deliver what none other will, Scottish Independence.
The Cybernat was born of necessity as was this NNS site. The dearth of support for Scottish independence in the MSM created us. The internet has delivered so much for our cause. That is why it is necessary to engage with the argument and not to ignore it. As I said I do not believe that any one who is a Cybernat, and who has had the wit and the wisdom to get this far will be easily diverted from the independence cause. We are all to weel aware of the antics of the unionist black ops gang, they are now so transparent and predictable as to be worthy of nothing but our utter contempt and pity.
Foulkes is like a drunk in a pub, attention seeking, selfish self serving and one to laugh at. He can do us no harm he is a total nonentity. Ashtrays and motorbikes spring to mind. The beauty of the internet is that these charlatans and quislings are so readily exposed and publicly humiliated.
I say it again the Trojan Horse is Devious Max, he is the one to watch and the one that the SNP should be walking quickly away from. Anything else is a betrayal.
#
2012-02-20 20:16
“Foulkes is like a drunk in a pub, attention seeking, selfish self serving and one to laugh at”
A few years ago I and a number of Welsh and English lads were up for the Scotland/Wales match at Murrrayfield.
One evening, we were graced with the birkie’s presence in a popular Edinburgh hostelry. Whenever we approached the bar or otherwise moved past him, he strutted and stared at us, accompanied by a number of sycophants who worshipped at his word. My friends were not impressed by this behaviour.
Relieved at his eventual departure, I explained that he was a member of the House of Coofs and a giant of the Labour movement in Scotland. My friends were incredulous to say the least.
A few years ago I and a number of Welsh and English lads were up for the Scotland/Wales match at Murrrayfield.
One evening, we were graced with the birkie’s presence in a popular Edinburgh hostelry. Whenever we approached the bar or otherwise moved past him, he strutted and stared at us, accompanied by a number of sycophants who worshipped at his word. My friends were not impressed by this behaviour.
Relieved at his eventual departure, I explained that he was a member of the House of Coofs and a giant of the Labour movement in Scotland. My friends were incredulous to say the least.
#
2012-02-20 14:18
Enquiries about moderation decisions should be made using the contact us button at the top of the page – NNS Mod Team
#
2012-02-20 14:33
Oh dearie me. It looks like the little kindergarten that is the House of Lords is going to be taking the huff fairly shortly.
www.presstv.ir/…/227650.html
Awe, the little diddumsies don’t like the idea that they will have to stand for election to the “big house”. Poor wee souls.
The gravy train is coming to the end of the track and they don’t like where the station is. Now they are going to have to do some “real” work to keep their snouts in the trough. I use the term real work advisedly, very advisedly in this context. 😀
I see Press TV is also highlighting the hypocrisy of U.K. arms sales.
www.presstv.ir/…/227635.html
www.presstv.ir/…/227650.html
Awe, the little diddumsies don’t like the idea that they will have to stand for election to the “big house”. Poor wee souls.
The gravy train is coming to the end of the track and they don’t like where the station is. Now they are going to have to do some “real” work to keep their snouts in the trough. I use the term real work advisedly, very advisedly in this context. 😀
I see Press TV is also highlighting the hypocrisy of U.K. arms sales.
www.presstv.ir/…/227635.html
#
2012-02-20 14:51
“Members of Britain’s House of Lords have threatened to stage strike if the British government proposes to move the country toward democracy by establishing an elected House of Lords. “
In the immortal words of Douglas adams in the Hitchiker’s guide…
“Whom will that inconvenience?”
In the immortal words of Douglas adams in the Hitchiker’s guide…
“Whom will that inconvenience?”
#
2012-02-20 14:53
Their expenses claims? 😀
Just thinking about these “poor” wee souls. Can they even “afford” to go out on “strike”?
How on earth is Messrs Foulkes and co. going to survive?
Just thinking about these “poor” wee souls. Can they even “afford” to go out on “strike”?
How on earth is Messrs Foulkes and co. going to survive?
#
2012-02-20 15:06
I know it would be hard but
According to
Rafiki 2012-02-20 11:09
DonaldMhor 2012-02-20 11:15
above
Mr Foulkes at least could afford a few days OFF
According to
Rafiki 2012-02-20 11:09
DonaldMhor 2012-02-20 11:15
above
Mr Foulkes at least could afford a few days OFF
#
2012-02-20 14:55
Press Tv is what the BBC are trying to emulate in terms of propaganda
Press Tv do broadcast unfetered news, but with a Iranian propaganda twist.
So would take each Press TV news item with a large dose of salt
Press Tv do broadcast unfetered news, but with a Iranian propaganda twist.
So would take each Press TV news item with a large dose of salt
#
2012-02-20 15:02
Maybe the best bet would be to get your UK news from Press Tv and your Iranian news from BBC
#
2012-02-20 15:10
Like it jafurn, but I do take O.S.’s point.
I only intended to highlight the reports on Press TV because at least they are reporting such events. I fully accept that there ma be a Iranian political twist to the articles but the gist of the story is still true.
I only intended to highlight the reports on Press TV because at least they are reporting such events. I fully accept that there ma be a Iranian political twist to the articles but the gist of the story is still true.
#
2012-02-20 19:56
Would we notice any difference?
Oh, wait a minute. A long term “strike” by their Lardinesses might very well delay the Scotland Bill……. until after Independence.
Every cloud has a silver lining. 😀
Oh, wait a minute. A long term “strike” by their Lardinesses might very well delay the Scotland Bill……. until after Independence.
Every cloud has a silver lining. 😀
#
2012-02-20 14:52
GREETINGS.
I’m the last one to lecture,but may we all,including me, “Calm down Dear”.
I get worked up as easily as the next person,but let’s just concentrate on the matter in hand.
No offence intended.
Cool minds and counsel.
This is our strength—–the right of self determination,p resented to others in Scotland,in a truthful and measured manner.Can’t fail.
I’m the last one to lecture,but may we all,including me, “Calm down Dear”.
I get worked up as easily as the next person,but let’s just concentrate on the matter in hand.
No offence intended.
Cool minds and counsel.
This is our strength—–the right of self determination,p resented to others in Scotland,in a truthful and measured manner.Can’t fail.
#
2012-02-20 15:42
# Manxbhoy That stuff about the goings on in the 1979 Referendum should be required reading for any independists. I was working in England over that period but tried to keep in contact with Scotland as much as I could, so the revelations of chicanery amongst the Labour people are gob-smackingly crass. I suppose they could get away with it because of the lukewarm attitude to another layer of governemnt and of course the knee-jerk reaction from Labour councillors that Edinburgh governement would take away local government powers. If Thatcher hadn’t come in and changed the game they would have had no excuses for moving to subserviant devolution. All this needs to be replayed to build the climate for a yes vote. Mark MacLaclan has some good stuff on the original posters used by the nay-sayers. Hoary old arguments against Devolution are being dusted down and represented as hoary old arguments against Independence. Can someone make a video and put this on Youtube to be followed by PPBs hammering home the point about the has-been nay-sayers.
#
2012-02-20 15:57
Dr James Wilkie made an invaluable contribution towards the pro-indepence movement for 2-3 decades through his letters to the mainstream press.His contribution was informative and boosted the moral of people like me who were struggling with the electoral defeat of the SNP in 1979.We went from 11 MP’s to 2 MP’s.For that reason alone,he deserves more respect than he is getting from some comments on Newsnet Scotland.
The significance of his organisation and the Council of Europe to Blair’s conversion to Scottish Devolution,is impossible for us to judge.Perhaps we will know at some point in the future.I agree that the SNP was a major catalyst in forcing a reluctent labour party to eventually legislate for a devolution referendum.However,it is also likely that there must have been more pressure on Tony Blair than an SNP group of 5-6 MP’S and 2 MEPS,could generate.By the 1990’s the SNP were a significant force but the threat that they presented in the 1970’s had receded.
The important point is that Lord Foulke’s clumsy lurch in to this topic has,as usual harmed his cause.I suspect that his cause is to protect his own self interests.However,irrespc tive of how influential the Council of Europe was in changing Blairs mind,Foulkes has made people aware of the possibility.For some people it has probably opened up doubt about the sincerity of labours claim to be the party of devolution.The pro-independence group should not bother using any energy on this one.Lord Foulkes has done all of the work for you.Clearly he is threatened by the very idea that labour were actually anti-devolution.Many people will think that there must be something to hide.Excellent George,well done and thankyou.
The significance of his organisation and the Council of Europe to Blair’s conversion to Scottish Devolution,is impossible for us to judge.Perhaps we will know at some point in the future.I agree that the SNP was a major catalyst in forcing a reluctent labour party to eventually legislate for a devolution referendum.However,it is also likely that there must have been more pressure on Tony Blair than an SNP group of 5-6 MP’S and 2 MEPS,could generate.By the 1990’s the SNP were a significant force but the threat that they presented in the 1970’s had receded.
The important point is that Lord Foulke’s clumsy lurch in to this topic has,as usual harmed his cause.I suspect that his cause is to protect his own self interests.However,irrespc tive of how influential the Council of Europe was in changing Blairs mind,Foulkes has made people aware of the possibility.For some people it has probably opened up doubt about the sincerity of labours claim to be the party of devolution.The pro-independence group should not bother using any energy on this one.Lord Foulkes has done all of the work for you.Clearly he is threatened by the very idea that labour were actually anti-devolution.Many people will think that there must be something to hide.Excellent George,well done and thankyou.
#
2012-02-20 16:11
Who were the members of the Cabinet Ministerial Committee on Devolution to Scotland?
Perhaps by looking at the membership we could pinpoint who in Labour was opposed to devolution.
It would be highly embarrassing if Gordon Brown was counted as one of those ministers who opposed devolution back then. It would alse be embarrassing that present members of Labour’s Shadow cabinet were also opposed. Ed Milliband was a Special Advisor to Gordon Brown during these discussions.
Perhaps by looking at the membership we could pinpoint who in Labour was opposed to devolution.
It would be highly embarrassing if Gordon Brown was counted as one of those ministers who opposed devolution back then. It would alse be embarrassing that present members of Labour’s Shadow cabinet were also opposed. Ed Milliband was a Special Advisor to Gordon Brown during these discussions.
#
2012-02-20 16:33
The importance of this posting is that Mr Eels has listed the Ministers and Under Secretaries who attended these meetings –
Gordon Brown; Malcolm Chisholm; Tom Clarke; Robin Cook; Alistair Darling; Donald Dewar; George Foulkes; Sam Galbraith; Helen Liddell; Calum MacDonald; Michael Martin; John McFall; Henry McLeish; John Reid; George Robertson; Nigel Griffiths; Adam Ingram; Gavin Strang; Brian Wilson; and Tony Worthington.
newsnetscotland.com/…/…
original article
here…..
newstatesman.com/…/…
Gordon Brown; Malcolm Chisholm; Tom Clarke; Robin Cook; Alistair Darling; Donald Dewar; George Foulkes; Sam Galbraith; Helen Liddell; Calum MacDonald; Michael Martin; John McFall; Henry McLeish; John Reid; George Robertson; Nigel Griffiths; Adam Ingram; Gavin Strang; Brian Wilson; and Tony Worthington.
newsnetscotland.com/…/…
original article
here…..
newstatesman.com/…/…
#
2012-02-20 17:54
Who was pro and anti-devolution?
I recognise Darling, Reid, Robertson and Wilson as anti-devolution.
Were there others?
I seem to remember that Donald Dewar wasn’t that keen on the idea.
I recognise Darling, Reid, Robertson and Wilson as anti-devolution.
Were there others?
I seem to remember that Donald Dewar wasn’t that keen on the idea.
#
2012-02-20 19:14
I spy a certain former FM who might conceivably be open to persuasion.
No, not the one who is deceased!
No, not the one who is deceased!
#
2012-02-20 20:56
Using Dennis Canavan’s excellent ‘Let the People Decide’ as my source, the following were strongly against devolution in the run up to the 1979 referendum; Robin Cook, Donald Dewar (changed his mind in 1988), Adam Ingram and Brian Wilson. Gavin Strang was always pro-devolution.
After the defeat of the 79 referendum the cross party Campaign for a Scottish Assembly was launched. Of the above named only…..George Foulkes! is named as a supporter. Helen Liddell was against the cross party element of it and did not want Labour to be formally affiliated to the CSA. All those named in my first paragraph remained anti at this stage.
Canavan describes Gordon Brown as a ‘genuine supporter of Scottish devolution’. Sam Galbraith as a ‘crony of Donald Dewar’ which in the context I’m taking to mean lukewarm-anti on devolution.
After the defeat of the 79 referendum the cross party Campaign for a Scottish Assembly was launched. Of the above named only…..George Foulkes! is named as a supporter. Helen Liddell was against the cross party element of it and did not want Labour to be formally affiliated to the CSA. All those named in my first paragraph remained anti at this stage.
Canavan describes Gordon Brown as a ‘genuine supporter of Scottish devolution’. Sam Galbraith as a ‘crony of Donald Dewar’ which in the context I’m taking to mean lukewarm-anti on devolution.
#
2012-02-20 17:07
Totally O/T Just a bit of local colour – students in Valencia protesting this mid-day about the government’s new labour laws pelted police with mandarins from the local trees (and bottles, but that’s not so colourful).
What do you use in Scotland? Haggi? Now that would make a mess …
What do you use in Scotland? Haggi? Now that would make a mess …
#
2012-02-20 17:39
Father of the Nation, my arse
It should be noted and repeated ad nauseum – at performances of “The Cheviot, the Stag and the Black, Black Oil” the audience were invited to walk through either of two doors. One was “For” a Scottish Parliament, the other was “Against” a Scottish Parliament.
Donald Dewar walked through the “Against” door.
He was opposed to a Scottish Parliament until he was given the job of drawing up the Devolution settlement because “Lord” George Robertson wasn’t considered up to the task.
It should be noted and repeated ad nauseum – at performances of “The Cheviot, the Stag and the Black, Black Oil” the audience were invited to walk through either of two doors. One was “For” a Scottish Parliament, the other was “Against” a Scottish Parliament.
Donald Dewar walked through the “Against” door.
He was opposed to a Scottish Parliament until he was given the job of drawing up the Devolution settlement because “Lord” George Robertson wasn’t considered up to the task.
#
2012-02-20 17:56
Mr Foulkes is ably assisted in his spewed out guff by the so called ‘Scottish’ msm. Them trying to give his crass utterances legitimacy when he is a figure of ridicule shows that despite the best efforts of the press and himself, their tactics are failing…badly. People will see his insane and wild rantings for what they are. He will be dismissed as barking mad but people know with a quick google of this cretin he has vested interests and its all about his own self preservation. The internet and its social networking is their worst nightmare, you can sense their fear.
Ultimately like the uprisings around the world, the internet could be the key that opens the world up to Scotland and gifts us our much sought after independepence. The good Lord knows this only too well!
Ultimately like the uprisings around the world, the internet could be the key that opens the world up to Scotland and gifts us our much sought after independepence. The good Lord knows this only too well!
#
2012-02-20 17:59
O/T.For Newbies like me. SNP Students–came as a surprise.Look like a sensible bunch.Good for them.
www.snpstudents.org/
www.snpstudents.org/
#
2012-02-20 18:15
Television spelt the deathknell of communism and sure as the sun rises tomorrow, the internet shall spell the deathknell of the Union.
Decades of lies, obfuscation and drip feed nonsense, unchallenged often as not by the compliant media happy to earn their declining crust by printing verbatim Labour Press Releases which with a modicum of questioning could have had a coach and horses driven straight through them.
Not so the new media on the Internet. Far from being lap-dogs they are at least of an enquiring mind and able to challenge point blank when it smells poo.
The MSM are falling off a cliff, the hegemony of Labour in the West is imploding and yet their demise is not investigated by the MSM nor BBC Scotland. They too may become an irrelevence if we can only drag ourselves away from their endless game shows, reality tv and mind numbing soaps.
Change is on the way, its just we don’t all fully recognise it yet.
Decades of lies, obfuscation and drip feed nonsense, unchallenged often as not by the compliant media happy to earn their declining crust by printing verbatim Labour Press Releases which with a modicum of questioning could have had a coach and horses driven straight through them.
Not so the new media on the Internet. Far from being lap-dogs they are at least of an enquiring mind and able to challenge point blank when it smells poo.
The MSM are falling off a cliff, the hegemony of Labour in the West is imploding and yet their demise is not investigated by the MSM nor BBC Scotland. They too may become an irrelevence if we can only drag ourselves away from their endless game shows, reality tv and mind numbing soaps.
Change is on the way, its just we don’t all fully recognise it yet.
#
2012-02-20 18:26
Clearly George, you’ve missed the link between tweeting and thinking first. Why try for a witty comment when a crass and tasteless remark will serve as well?
#
2012-02-20 21:01
Oh, don’t tell me dear old Georgie Porgie can think! That is just too much to bear.
MAKE ROOM! I’m on my way to the “Darkened Room!” 😀
MAKE ROOM! I’m on my way to the “Darkened Room!” 😀
#
2012-02-20 18:35
even for George this is an all time low
George please engage brain before opening your mouth or in this case letting rip with your fingers .
Sid
George please engage brain before opening your mouth or in this case letting rip with your fingers .
Sid
#
2012-02-20 20:45
O/T
Anybody hear the Europe Minister David Lidington on the news tonight? He’s up here to tell the Scottish parliament that an independent Scotland may need passport controls at the English border…Here’s the Press Association piece:
google.com/…/…
Anybody hear the Europe Minister David Lidington on the news tonight? He’s up here to tell the Scottish parliament that an independent Scotland may need passport controls at the English border…Here’s the Press Association piece:
google.com/…/…
#
2012-02-20 20:59
I don’t have a problem with that myself. After all whenever you fly off to Spain, Portugal or France etc to get some sun don;t you have to have a passport?
Last time I checked Spain, Portugal and France were still in the E.U.
Last time I checked Spain, Portugal and France were still in the E.U.
#
2012-02-20 21:03
There are a helluva lot of “mays” and “mights” in that story!
The UK was concerned to keep Ireland in the Common Travel Area, although the Irish would have preferred both to sign up to Schengen. Why on earth would rUK suddenly wish to kick Scotland out?
There’s a good account of Ireland and CTA/Schengen here
migration.ucc.ie/…/
The UK was concerned to keep Ireland in the Common Travel Area, although the Irish would have preferred both to sign up to Schengen. Why on earth would rUK suddenly wish to kick Scotland out?
There’s a good account of Ireland and CTA/Schengen here
migration.ucc.ie/…/
#
2012-02-20 21:06
Speaking in a post-committee briefing, he said opt-outs like Schengen, and also of the euro currency, “require not just a bilateral agreement between the UK and an independent Scotland”
Well, there’s your first mistake, Mr. Lidington. With an independent Scotland, there’s no UK to enter into an agreement with.
Well, there’s your first mistake, Mr. Lidington. With an independent Scotland, there’s no UK to enter into an agreement with.
#
2012-02-20 21:11
Just in from work so behind again(apologies )
Im with Old Nat on Dr James Wilkie
We dont want to be putting something forward that cant be backed up with facts but i dont think anyone who posts here would do that
Only thing i can read into it would be
Why would labour who are against independence provide the platform for just that because to me the next logical step after devolution would be to pursue independence so either labour
didnt want devolution or they did but hadnt thought through the consequences which i admit is possible given its labour. Bottom line is i dont see the point of Dr James Wilkies article without hard proof i just dont see it as helpful.yes if there was proof it would be dynamite but i just cant find any proof so its not something i will be telling anyone
Im with Old Nat on Dr James Wilkie
We dont want to be putting something forward that cant be backed up with facts but i dont think anyone who posts here would do that
Only thing i can read into it would be
Why would labour who are against independence provide the platform for just that because to me the next logical step after devolution would be to pursue independence so either labour
didnt want devolution or they did but hadnt thought through the consequences which i admit is possible given its labour. Bottom line is i dont see the point of Dr James Wilkies article without hard proof i just dont see it as helpful.yes if there was proof it would be dynamite but i just cant find any proof so its not something i will be telling anyone
#
2012-02-20 21:24
I think they thought devolution would kill Nationalism stone dead. Baron Robertson of Port Ellen certainly did.
#
2012-02-20 23:00
Scotland is either an equal successor state or its not. If it’s not, then it walks away with no national debt.
You canny have yer cake and eat it.
You canny have yer cake and eat it.
#
2012-02-20 23:54
Quote:
Surely if a “new” E.U. country’s financial situation is not up to the minimum requirements then surely the country can not be forced to join a currency that it is bound to fail.
Has Barroso lost the plot? Not that he necessarily had it in the first place you understand. Has he learnt absolutely nothing from the current going ons in Greece?
Quote:
And of course there is absolutely no passport control between U.K. and the rest Europe is there?
Where do the unionist parties get their “leaders from, a box of Sugar Puffs?
osé Manuel Barroso, the European Commission President, said in November that no more countries would be allowed to opt out from the single currency.
Surely if a “new” E.U. country’s financial situation is not up to the minimum requirements then surely the country can not be forced to join a currency that it is bound to fail.
Has Barroso lost the plot? Not that he necessarily had it in the first place you understand. Has he learnt absolutely nothing from the current going ons in Greece?
Quote:
Willie Rennie, Scottish Liberal Democrat leader, said: “Passport controls between England and Scotland would have a significant impact on the ease of travel between our two nations.
And of course there is absolutely no passport control between U.K. and the rest Europe is there?
Where do the unionist parties get their “leaders from, a box of Sugar Puffs?
#
2012-02-20 22:49
How to insult every independent nation on the planet! It seems to come naturally to many in Westmidden.
#
2012-02-20 23:08
Border controls: There would be border controls and we’d need passports to visit Newcastle.
The anti-independence parties want us to believe there would be an electrified fence, a moat and magic towers with long-haired princesses guarded by a dragons all along the border. Sadly for those of us for whom being strip-searched by big burly men sounds like ideal Saturday night entertainment, this is untrue.
There are no passport controls between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. Neither are there passport controls between the UK and the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, which are not only outside the UK, they’re not even a part of the EU.
The anti-independence parties claim that Scotland would be forced to join the Schengen free travel area after independence, meaning we’d be able to visit Paris and Lisbon without passports, but we’d need a passport to go to the Metro Centre in Newcastle for a Saturday shopping trip.
Membership of the Schengen area is not a precondition of EU membership. Romania and Bulgaria are EU members, but are not members of Schengen. Since Scotland’s only land frontier with the EU is our border with England, part of the British Isles Common Travel Area, we’d continue to remain a part of the existing Common Travel Area.
But if you do fancy being strip-searched by big burly men, well there are nightclubs for that sort of thing.
newsnetscotland.com/…/…
I knew that would come in handy….
The anti-independence parties want us to believe there would be an electrified fence, a moat and magic towers with long-haired princesses guarded by a dragons all along the border. Sadly for those of us for whom being strip-searched by big burly men sounds like ideal Saturday night entertainment, this is untrue.
There are no passport controls between the United Kingdom and the Republic of Ireland. Neither are there passport controls between the UK and the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, which are not only outside the UK, they’re not even a part of the EU.
The anti-independence parties claim that Scotland would be forced to join the Schengen free travel area after independence, meaning we’d be able to visit Paris and Lisbon without passports, but we’d need a passport to go to the Metro Centre in Newcastle for a Saturday shopping trip.
Membership of the Schengen area is not a precondition of EU membership. Romania and Bulgaria are EU members, but are not members of Schengen. Since Scotland’s only land frontier with the EU is our border with England, part of the British Isles Common Travel Area, we’d continue to remain a part of the existing Common Travel Area.
But if you do fancy being strip-searched by big burly men, well there are nightclubs for that sort of thing.
newsnetscotland.com/…/…
I knew that would come in handy….
#
2012-02-20 23:16
Considering the news today about the almost wholly non-existent checking of people coming into the country it is a bit rich for the pro-union side to raise the issue of border controls.
By the same token it also takes the legs from under Mr Cameron and his pro-union argument that the UK provides security against terrorism. Some security – a leaky sieve would give more security.
By the same token it also takes the legs from under Mr Cameron and his pro-union argument that the UK provides security against terrorism. Some security – a leaky sieve would give more security.
#
2012-02-20 23:36
O/T
From the BBC:
Scottish independence: Rupert Murdoch tweets ‘Let Scotland go’
The owner of News Corporation tweeted the message: “Let Scotland go and compete. Everyone would win.”
It follows a message on Sunday which described Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond as clearly the “most brilliant politician in the UK”.
tinyurl.com/7rjncw4
From the BBC:
Scottish independence: Rupert Murdoch tweets ‘Let Scotland go’
The owner of News Corporation tweeted the message: “Let Scotland go and compete. Everyone would win.”
It follows a message on Sunday which described Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond as clearly the “most brilliant politician in the UK”.
tinyurl.com/7rjncw4
#
2012-02-20 23:37
Isn’t it interesting how things can change over 24 hours.
First we had Foulkes with his usual gutteral tirade aimed, undoubtedly, at the S.N.P.
Now we have one Rupert Murdoch with this.
bbc.co.uk/…/…
I know whose tweet I’d rather read.
First we had Foulkes with his usual gutteral tirade aimed, undoubtedly, at the S.N.P.
Now we have one Rupert Murdoch with this.
bbc.co.uk/…/…
I know whose tweet I’d rather read.
#
2012-02-21 01:20
The good Lord George is one of our best recruiting agents. Keep up the good work Lord George.
It’s no wonder Rupert Murdoch and others think Alex Salmond FM is the sharpest politician in Britain, when noisy people like you appear as the opposition.
VOTE YES
It’s no wonder Rupert Murdoch and others think Alex Salmond FM is the sharpest politician in Britain, when noisy people like you appear as the opposition.
VOTE YES
#
2012-02-21 08:20
Dug this article up from 12 months ago.
Lair George has caused outrage by branding the new £2.3 billion Forth crossing a “waste of money.”
thecourier.co.uk/…/…
Even though his party voted for it.
I have no doubt whatsoever that oor Gorgie isseparated divorced from reality.
Lair George has caused outrage by branding the new £2.3 billion Forth crossing a “waste of money.”
thecourier.co.uk/…/…
Even though his party voted for it.
I have no doubt whatsoever that oor Gorgie is
#
2012-02-21 13:31
Imagine Geordie trying to visit Scotland after Independence and he is turned back at Scotland Border Control :-))
#
2012-02-21 15:12
Quoting Angus:
Stamped “Rejected, Enemy of the State”:-)
Imagine Geordie trying to visit Scotland after Independence and he is turned back at Scotland Border Control :-))
Stamped “Rejected, Enemy of the State”:-)
#
2012-02-22 12:14
Re’ the Wilkie/Ffoulkes business.
“It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts!”
“It is a capital mistake to theorise before one has data. Insensibly one begins to twist facts to suit theories, instead of theories to suit facts!”
Donate to Newsnet Scotland
Latest Comments
- Believe in yourself says Sturg...
I've never responded well to intimidatio... - David Cameron pleads with News...
Oh bugger! - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
It is interesting to note that only a fe... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
What people need to realise is that it's... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
Ex-BBC Newsnight correspondent Paul Maso... - David Cameron pleads with News...
You do realise Lynda that by not consent... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
The BBC are leading with Deutsche Bank f... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
Bullying,blackm ail and threats. Do we r... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
Jim Sillars is simply giving vivid examp... - The Real IndyRef Division
One thing that is missing from this anal... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
Mr Salmond must keep the pressure on abo... - David Cameron pleads with News...
Aye, they would have us swallow this. 'E... - RBS leak 'extraordinary' says ...
Funny I do not see any banner headlines ... - Believe in yourself says Sturg...
The saddest thing ever was that strong, ... - Miliband slammed for standing ...
I have been a member of the YouGov panel... - RBS leak 'extraordinary' says ...
I see that true to form our pals at BBC ... - New referendum poll confirms b...
Note that ICM are applying a weighting o... - RBS leak 'extraordinary' says ...
Doesn't Peston have form on this? Do I r... - RBS leak 'extraordinary' says ...
Two links to a couple of articles on the... - RBS leak 'extraordinary' says ...
The Nikkei would be open before the Lond...