Jump to content

Stuart Hill (Captain Calamity) Forvik


Do you support Stuart Hill  

222 members have voted

  1. 1. Do you support Stuart Hill

    • Yes!
      58
    • No!
      164
    • Don't know?
      8


Recommended Posts

There is a book in the library called STOLEN ISLES by STUART HILL. I have read it and found it most interesting and would say that anyone interested in the history of Shetland should read it. It is at times a bit heavy but if you stick at it by the end you will have learned some thing and most definitely had your eyes opened.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 1.4k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

^ He very probably is right, up to a point at least. However, standing against that is "use and wint", in that we've "accepted" their jurisdiction for over 500 years "without resistance", which in its

I find it interesting that all the courts so far have not been prepared to "test" his assertion that Shetland is not part of the UK and therefore their courts do not have jurisdiction here.

His boat, and his 'erection,, were by all accounts located on land that belonged to someone else. Unless he had a signed and sealed agreement, which there's no word of, to have it there the owners are

There is a book in the library called STOLEN ISLES by STUART HILL. I have read it and found it most interesting and would say that anyone interested in the history of Shetland should read it. It is at times a bit heavy but if you stick at it by the end you will have learned some thing and most definitely had your eyes opened.

The thing is Stuart Hill is right but its easier for them to just mock him and portray the man as eccentric or daft.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes the problem I have always said with Mr Hill is that it is the right message but the wrong man delivering it. His antics have only managed to portray him as a nutter in the eyes of most Shetlanders, thereby taking away from his own cause. 
 

 

I hadn't seen this particular piece before, very interesting. 

The historical argument is relevant whether people like it or not but even without it there would still be a case to be made for autonomy. 


I hope this election has opened peoples eyes a bit. A common complaint is that all the candidates arguments boiled down to the same thing, beg Holyrood for more money for XY & Z. The votes Ryan Thomson achieved shows that you don't have to be part of a major party to make headway. Perhaps in the future people would be more open to a local party which can offer a truly alternative choice and set of ambitions than just going cap in hand to uncaring bureaucrats and ministers in Edinburgh. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

XAM7102 ... If you live anywhere near Stuart Hill you should be aware that his activities are not confined to writing books or sensible campaign activities. As Whalsa has said, "Right idea, wrong man"

 

He has managed to make a public nuisance of himself repeatedly since washing up on these shores some years ago.

 

These activities have included breaking into buildings and interfering in other people's business for purely malicious reasons.

 

He may have written an interesting book, that doesn't make him a nice person or someone who has proved to be of any benefit to the community that welcomed him. In fact he has proved to be the opposite.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Unfortunately Calamity is a double edged sword with regard to autonomy/independence/whatever, while his work has put additional meat on the bones of what many already knew the basics of, and publicised it to those who didn't, the rest of his activities have succeeded in placing autonomy/independence/whatever = Calamity = the lunatic fringe in much of the Shetland public's psyche.

 

Dispelling the myth that's its something cranks and crackpots are associated with is going to take work.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't like throwing personal insults about particularly as I do not know Mr Hill, the man isn't stupid but, he does appear to be an "idiot".

 

He seems to have put himself in a position where the "authorities" will seek to prosecute him for every little thing they can and will bring the full "weight" of the state on him at every opportunity.  Anything to discredit him and his research(?).

 

If that wasn't bad enough, he also appears to have upset quite a number of locals.

 

He might enjoy "tilting at windmills" but, he has set the case for any kind of autonomy back by at least 10 years.

Link to post
Share on other sites

^ His 'methods' might be tolerable if they brought results, but he's been at it for getting on for 20 years, and nothing is one iota ahead of where it was when he started. Ever since the 'Forvik' (here's a model I made earlier from sticky back paper and toilet roll cores) debacle over 10 years ago, he's steadily become increasingly irrelevant anyplace that matters, unless for maintaining negativity by association in the general public's perception.

 

You can't fault the man's dedication and commitment to his 'cause', but beyond that........

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...
  • 2 months later...

https://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2019/12/10/sic-remove-hills-placards-after-he-refuses

 

I read the article and, never a dull moment is there ?

 

The SIC's response though is "interesting", and a (possibly) unique interpretation of the applied legislation.

 

I wonder if it applies to ALL people who attach posters etc. to lamp posts ?

 

I wonder, if it does, is EVERYONE charged for their removal ?

 

I wonder what having to pay for removal would have done to the SNP's election expenses a couple of weeks back ?

 

Seems that the excuse that only "political candidates" (and their reps) are allowed to litter the lamp posts of Shetland is a very narrow definition imho.  I thought that our "laws" applied to everyone ?

 

Stuart Hill is "marmite" to most sensible people but, as far as I know, he STILL has the same rights of expression as everyone else. 

Edited by Colin
Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2019/12/10/sic-remove-hills-placards-after-he-refuses

 

I read the article and, never a dull moment is there ?

 

The SIC's response though is "interesting", and a (possibly) unique interpretation of the applied legislation.

 

I wonder if it applies to ALL people who attach posters etc. to lamp posts ?

 

I wonder, if it does, is EVERYONE charged for their removal ?

 

I wonder what having to pay for removal would have done to the SNP's election expenses a couple of weeks back ?

 

Seems that the excuse that only "political candidates" (and their reps) are allowed to litter the lamp posts of Shetland is a very narrow definition imho.  I thought that our "laws" applied to everyone ?

 

Stuart Hill is "marmite" to most sensible people but, as far as I know, he STILL has the same rights of expression as everyone else. 

The political placards fixed to lamp posts by the LibDems and the SNP are removed by the party themselves. If they left them up then they too would be charged.

 

I agree that Mr Hill has every right to express himself, but I have always thought there is something a little bit "off" about a middle-class Englishman coming to Shetland to tell us ignorant natives that we have everything wrong politically, and that he knows more about Shetland's history than any of us plebs. Just another know-it-all white settler in my opinion.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that you just might be correct but, character assasination aside, my point was ;

 

"Do the SIC treat everyone equally".

 

Apparently not I think.

 

Who is to say that Stuart Hill would NOT have removed his posters after the election AND, were all the "parties" given 24 hours to remove theirs ?

 

Level playing field and all that stuff. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree that you just might be correct but, character assasination aside, my point was ;

 

"Do the SIC treat everyone equally".

 

Apparently not I think.

 

Who is to say that Stuart Hill would NOT have removed his posters after the election AND, were all the "parties" given 24 hours to remove theirs ?

 

Level playing field and all that stuff. 

Difference is Mr Hill is not standing as a candidate,just imagine the mess if we all plastered posters anywhere we wanted, to emphasize our views !

 

just as a matter of interest perhaps, I think i have had a Lib/Dem leaflet in my letterbox everyday for the past few weeks,whats that cost !  

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...

×
×
  • Create New...