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

TrickyTree83

zagubov wrote: »

The text under that clip still pushes the lie that the anti-Farage protesters were SNP activists. Thanks for reminding us about how stories always get twisted to end up as "SNP bad"!.;)

Because the text under the clip is testament to the veritas of the words spoken by Galloway, particularly those regarding Salmond's involvement.

zagubov

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Because the text under the clip is testament to the veritas of the words spoken by Galloway, particularly those regarding Salmond's involvement.

So the lies in the text are all Galloway's got going for his argument? Or do his sentiments count for more than facts?;)

Shakethedisease

antrobus wrote: »

No, what you said was this;



You need to learn how to tell the truth.

Since your "realm of Scottish politics" seems to involve making things up, I would hope that most people are well outside of it.:)

No I said this

the unionist side of the independence debate regarding currency.

Which is quite correct. Read a few posts here from Clapton or kabayiri. Again, satire seems to have passed you by somewhat.

My realm of Scottish politics is actually living here and reading the daily newspapers. Yours am afraid, is a little short on, well anything much when it comes to Scotland. So much so you're reduced to wailing about people making things up and boringly personalising posts.

The Chinese withdrew because of the negative media frenzy from other political parties and the newspapers about the deal and the SNP starting talks about a deal. Now I've provided you with links to the stories behind those negative headlines from Dugdale and Rennie and they are just a very small sample compared to what was reported day to day in Scottish newspapers ( ie the one's I actually read ). I suggest you either read them in full, and in the context of why this deal fell through. Or else provide evidence to the contrary.

Otherwise you're clueless in what you're posting about am afraid.

Shakethedisease

Hintza wrote: »

http://www.snp.org/i_m_with_her

I'm with her - Nicola's explicit support for Hillary is going down a storm with her supporters NOT! Definite rumblings in the ranks

Have look here:-

https://www.facebook.com/NicolaSturgeonSNP/

It's the same for Kezia. And at the end of the day at least it's Sturgeon's facebook page. Not a crowd of Scottish Labour MSP's standing about grinning like lemons with a cardboard cut out of Clinton. Or Dugdale jetting off for 3 days last week to 'help out' the campaign.

Got to admit would rather Clinton than Trump. I think it's something most of us would echo.

Alan Jenkins ‏@ajjenkins Nov 3 A Hill-arious moment at Holyrood today as MSPs including @kezdugdale and @agcolehamilton posed with a cardboard cut-out.

Kezia Dugdale ‏@kezdugdale Oct 29
Just arrived in New York to campaign for Hillary and against Trump's poison for the next 3 days #imwithher

Shakethedisease

Moto2 wrote: »

They haven't introduced a single bit of legislation to Parliament since the last election apparently, that's quite shocking if it's true.

Holyrood was only elected in May this year. Then there was the Brexit campaign till 23rd June, then there was recess. They've only been back since 3rd Sept and there's the little matter of Brexit to deal with along with everything else.

Not quite as shocking as it sounds. Still, the independence bill should be drafted soon eh.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Because the text under the clip is testament to the veritas of the words spoken by Galloway, particularly those regarding Salmond's involvement.

Words spoken by Galloway ? You're not serious ? Lol. Wait until Farage marches 100,000 up to the Supreme Court when you're talking about intimidation v's the rights to protest.

Galloway is just Galloway. I'm surprised you take him seriously in the slightest. Do you think he's a great man Tricky ?

TrickyTree83

Shakethedisease wrote: »

Words spoken by Galloway ? You're not serious ? Lol. Wait until Farage marches 100,000 up to the Supreme Court when you're talking about intimidation v's the rights to protest.

Galloway is just Galloway. I'm surprised you take him seriously in the slightest. Do you think he's a great man Tricky ?

Galloway is like most people, he has his own opinions. Some are wildly out of step, others are on the money. I don't regard him as a great man, but I don't disagree with what he said in that clip. Binary issues often bring strange bedfellows together.

You often say people like myself don't understand because we're not in it somehow. Well I can say that I have a perspective shared by many who aren't. How the SNP is seen outside its bubble of support is near ubiquitous. Perhaps you're unable to see the SNP as we do. It doesn't make us wrong to be on the outside looking in, it's a different perspective. One whose perception could also be described as being the target of the SNP support, an Englishman and a unionist. If you're correct then the people who experience the SNP as I do are wholly more qualified to comment on that perspective than those within the SNP bubble.

The poster who gave us the YouTube clip of Galloway I assume is one such person. Instead of giving merit to their personal perspective on the SNP or the independence movement you and others simply move to tell them they're wrong and that SNP dogma is correct. Well, was George Galloway correct that Salmond did not denounce the attack on Nigel Farage? Did Salmond allow free speech and full political discourse in Scotland? I would think the answer to that will be a litmus test of how open to reason or lost to dogma the SNP support are.

For what it's worth the reason I would agree with Galloway is this:

Free speech is not only the freedom to say what you would like, it comes with the caveat of having to listen to that which might offend. The liberal left appear to consistently ignore the caveat, rendering the whole ideal of freedom of speech impotent and in very real danger of being eroded beyond recognition. The recent witch hunt of Louis Smith is evidence of this in action.

Shakethedisease

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Galloway is like most people, he has his own opinions. Some are wildly out of step, others are on the money. I don't regard him as a great man, but I don't disagree with what he said in that clip. Binary issues often bring strange bedfellows together.

You often say people like myself don't understand because we're not in it somehow. Well I can say that I have a perspective shared by many who aren't. How the SNP is seen outside its bubble of support is near ubiquitous. Perhaps you're unable to see the SNP as we do. It doesn't make us wrong to be on the outside looking in, it's a different perspective. One whose perception could also be described as being the target of the SNP support, an Englishman and a unionist. If you're correct then the people who experience the SNP as I do are wholly more qualified to comment on that perspective than those within the SNP bubble.

The poster who gave us the YouTube clip of Galloway I assume is one such person. Instead of giving merit to their personal perspective on the SNP or the independence movement you and others simply move to tell them they're wrong and that SNP dogma is correct. Well, was George Galloway correct that Salmond did not denounce the attack on Nigel Farage? Did Salmond allow free speech and full political discourse in Scotland? I would think the answer to that will be a litmus test of how open to reason or lost to dogma the SNP support are.

For what it's worth the reason I would agree with Galloway is this:

Free speech is not only the freedom to say what you would like, it comes with the caveat of having to listen to that which might offend. The liberal left appear to consistently ignore the caveat, rendering the whole ideal of freedom of speech impotent and in very real danger of being eroded beyond recognition. The recent witch hunt of Louis Smith is evidence of this in action.

Salmond had nothing to do with the protest though. Nothing whatsoever. It was Farage who brought him into it by announcing that it was the 'ugly face of Scottish Nationalists' who had lead the protest. He was wrong in that too. It was a university group among other left wing organisations.

We debated this at the time it happened. Farage pointed the finger at the wrong people. Pure and simple. Galloway jumped, as he so often does, on the wrong bandwagon. You might want to turn your attention to 2016 now and the fact that Theresa May has so far failed to condemn attacks on 'openly gay' judges. This story is a little bit out of date by about three years or so.

You are on the outside looking in otherwise you wouldn't be holding up Galloway as a paragon of truth on a story that occurred years ago... in order to score points, any points no matter how vague and out of touch with how the Scottish electorate think and vote, against the SNP. They're by no means perfect, and very far from it. But they had nothing whatsoever to do with this Farage protest no matter what Galloway says. You should just accept that for what it actually is.

zagubov

TrickyTree83 wrote: »

Galloway is like most people, he has his own opinions. Some are wildly out of step, others are on the money. I don't regard him as a great man, but I don't disagree with what he said in that clip. Binary issues often bring strange bedfellows together.

You often say people like myself don't understand because we're not in it somehow. Well I can say that I have a perspective shared by many who aren't. How the SNP is seen outside its bubble of support is near ubiquitous. Perhaps you're unable to see the SNP as we do. It doesn't make us wrong to be on the outside looking in, it's a different perspective. One whose perception could also be described as being the target of the SNP support, an Englishman and a unionist. If you're correct then the people who experience the SNP as I do are wholly more qualified to comment on that perspective than those within the SNP bubble.

The poster who gave us the YouTube clip of Galloway I assume is one such person. Instead of giving merit to their personal perspective on the SNP or the independence movement you and others simply move to tell them they're wrong and that SNP dogma is correct. Well, was George Galloway correct that Salmond did not denounce the attack on Nigel Farage? Did Salmond allow free speech and full political discourse in Scotland? I would think the answer to that will be a litmus test of how open to reason or lost to dogma the SNP support are.

For what it's worth the reason I would agree with Galloway is this:

Free speech is not only the freedom to say what you would like, it comes with the caveat of having to listen to that which might offend. The liberal left appear to consistently ignore the caveat, rendering the whole ideal of freedom of speech impotent and in very real danger of being eroded beyond recognition. The recent witch hunt of Louis Smith is evidence of this in action.

That's interesting. Scotland's a country where just about every newspaper counts as an "opposition daily" and where what might be considered a state broadcaster freely criticises the government (as long as it's the SNP and not Labour).

Are you seriously worried that freedom of speech there is under threat?

Hintza

Shakethedisease wrote: »

They're by no means perfect, and very far from it. But they had nothing whatsoever to do with this Farage protest no matter what Galloway says. You should just accept that for what it actually is.

Utter tosh.

I guess it wasn't nationalists who hounded Jim Murphy at every turn either!