The New Fat Scotland 'Thanks for all the Fish' Thread.

Malthusian

Herzlos wrote: »

The frothing about WM politicians is that if they are in the Tory party, they almost always get suspended and then re-hired a few months later.

Exactly. It's such a waste of taxpayer's money. They should just do nothing like with Lord Rennard, Cyril Smith and the rest.

fun4everyone

ScottishNonceParty

Labsuper

Grooming a 16 year old child !!!!!!. Scottish !!!!!! Pervert. Oh look he's sorry...aye right...he's only sorry he got caught!

mollycat

Herzlos wrote: »

Bad people should be removed from authority, which he has been. Presumably he'll stand down as MSP too.


The frothing about WM politicians is that if they are in the Tory party, they almost always get suspended and then re-hired a few months later. It's as if they tolerate this stuff internally (Thatcher apparently hired sex pests as cabinet because she could control them better) but know it's politically unwise to admit to it.


It's the double standard that annoys me.


It will be interesting to see how much they use this as a stick to beat the independence movement with.

I see that you "thanked" my recent post, (#151149).

Feel free to remove the thanks as you obviously misunderstood the whole point I was making....there are no "double standards".

Trying to minimise the actions of a member of the SNP who is borderline grooming a 16 year old boy right now by comparing it to something you believe may have happened in Mrs Thatcher's day is a pretty poor show.

baldelectrician

Enterprise_1701C wrote: »

Parliament cannot bind its successors, so it is irrelevant, and it has never had any legal force anyway.

Well said,

As you have said that then the 'once in a...' comment is now void as we have had elections since then where the SNP had specific items in the manifesto about a 2nd indyref

Or is it the usual unionist ... different rules for indyref.... change goalposts to obstruct another referendum

LABMAN

baldelectrician wrote: »

Well said,

As you have said that then the 'once in a...' comment is now void as we have had elections since then where the SNP had specific items in the manifesto about a 2nd indyref

Or is it the usual unionist ... different rules for indyref.... change goalposts to obstruct another referendum

Since when is an item being in an SNP manifesto binding? The SNP pick and chose what they deliver from what they pledged to do in their manifesto.

abz88

Shakethedisease wrote: »

You've forgotten who puts the SNP where they are. When you say 'they' you mean the Scottish electorate, not the SNP. If the SNP disappeared tomorrow there would still be half the country wanting out of the union. Democracy will always find a way.

If there was to be some kind of time limits to the next referendum then the Scottish electorate should've been told at the time. They weren't. You're moving the goalposts for Scottish voters and confusing political parties with electorates who don't always vote for the SNP in elections yet still wish independence. ( See Scottish Labour voters ). The SNP while standing for independence aren't the problem for the union. It's the Scottish voters across all parties who want it. They've deemed the mandate, not Boris.

I'm not confusing anything, more than 50% of the electorate have voted for parties that are pro-Union. To claim "there is a mandate because people that vote for Unionist parties actually want independence" is clutching at straws at best and you have no way to prove it other than quoting polls while also claiming polls can't be trusted. You are also ignoring people that vote for SNP but do not want Indy (something even Sturgeon has acknowledged) in your perceived mandate.
Similarly, if Indy parties/electorates wanted to have an Indy vote every time the wind changes direction, then the Unionists should have been told it at the time.

fun4everyone

270 times this middle aged !!!!!! messaged that 16 year old boy trying to groom him.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-51397956

He says he has behaved "foolishly" I would say its more sinister, repulsive and criminal.

molerat

I wonder if she has deleted the e-mails yet ?
Maybe he will be able to share a room with Salmond.

Labsuper

His budget speech should be cancelled and not just be delivered by another. It needs to be checked as he is clearly lacking in judgement.