Windwalker

Du is right on Cameron’s but my point, which I obviously didn’t make clear, is that the SNP seems to claim much more then most who represent remote communities. I think at one point they were 9 out of the top 10 claiming expenses. 
 

other parties representing the same remote communities were much lower. 

It’s sad that this happens in Shetland or anywhere for that matter, but unfortunately we have our idiots too.

someday, hopefully they will grow up and understand how unacceptable these type of comments are to non white and the majority of white people.

And again you deflect, by looking to blame someone else for something.

if you really  believe you have nothing against the English, you maybe need to reflect on dozens of your previous post, which clearly suggest otherwise.

plus can I remind you we are part of the U.K. Blackford is part of it, the SNP are part of it.

I’m sure I read, not long ago, that Blackford and many SNP MPs claimed the highest expenses in Westminster. I’m surprised they want to jump off the gravy train.

@george, you keep telling us to vote SNP or Alba, but I’m yet to here you give some good reasons why. Your clear hatred of everything English and Westminster seem to be blindfolding your reality of voting without knowing the possible consequences. IMHO of course.

2 hours ago, hakama said:

Thank you Windwalker that was very nice of you. I am sure that many more people think along the same lines but are afraid to say anything because if you do you will get the PC police at your door or you will be labeled . It is a way to stop people saying things that the authorities do not like. There are none so blind as those who do not want to see. Do have a serious think about all this Roachmill. There is no shame in changing ones mind.

Hakama

my experience on here is if you dare to question anything about the SNP, several will come at you, but if you ask them to clarify, provide information or justify etc, they rarely do, with a few exceptions.

Where some are concerned, their modus operandi seems to be, to try and shut you up and rather than discuss the issue they will say, such and such is worse etc. They cannot see any wrong doing by anyone in the SNP. Luckily there are a few SNP supporters who will have a good discussion and I appreciate they have their views as I do. Of course they are wrong though  

3 hours ago, Evil Inky said:

^ Is there any evidence that unregistered donations are being made to the SNP? Much of the issues about the donation to decorate the PM's flat was that it wasn't registered: in other words they were trying to keep it secret. And why would they want to keep it secret, I wonder? 

I might be wrong, but I thought he did register £58k. However to be clear I think all politicians need to be more upfront regarding donations etc.

I would assume there’s similar issues in all parties, have been for years and no doubt will be in future. As for the SNP we might never know as they tend to have someone taking minutes at meetings, then immediately destroy them.

16 minutes ago, Capeesh said:

Have you seen the renovation? It looks like someone on mind-bending drugs had a bad trip and plastered the place with tunnock tea cake wrappers, I wouldn’t pull that couch out of a skip!

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/ten-ways-to-recreate-carries-10-downing-street-decor-fjqd5vvk0

If you came home drunk, you’d never find da cooch

Couldn’t agree more, muscular dystrophy is a great charity. Perhaps all the business people who donate to the SNP may consider giving to MD instead. Of course none of them would be expecting anything in return from the SNP.

Yes, if I recall, you’ve brought that up a few times.

The point is they all have many faults, but most of us can see that, certain Folk on here seem determined that the SNP must get in, regardless of the future effects independence  might have on people and the economy. Blinkers tightly secured and smash forward without knowing the consequences. Nothing matters except independence. I agree with Hakama, “these people are deluded” IMHO of course.

2 hours ago, George. said:

It seems that Scotland is much, much more likely to go Indy and much sooner than expected.

SNP sound alarm over Tories 'shredding' evidence of Boris Johnson scandals

 

Why bother shredding anything, all he needs to do is say “I don’t recall, I don’t remember, not how I remember it etc” it kinda worked for Nicola Sturgeon.

I would imagine that most voters are more concerned about how Scotland could cope financially if independent. Most reports are worrying reading, after all Boris will no doubt be out of the picture sooner rather than later.

Strange how all the SNP folk on here remained very quiet when Sturgeon was under the spotlight, but out you come as soon as you can find someone else to berate. Me thinks it’s a bit of a ploy to take the story away from borders between Scotland/England, currency etc etc etc.

https://youtu.be/VX5gfh4-RUM

Scottish comedian Leo Kearse speaks sense.

2 minutes ago, Capeesh said:

I'm glad to hear it, does that mean if independence parties win a majority on May 6th you'll be happy for them to fulfill the mandate they've been given?

 

Despite it being their mandate the Scottish elections and independence are two completely different issues, which is why they require to be voted for as such. As I’ve already said I will respect any democratic vote as long as it is done within current laws.

You’ve still not said if you would also accept an outcome which the majority voted to remain part of the union.

10 minutes ago, Capeesh said:

Democracy never stands still, people change their minds, voters die and new ones take their place, policies change, the world around us changes etc.

The people who want to prevent the people from voting can never be described as democrats, it's as simple as that.

 

 

 

That’s your take on it, I don’t think things as as straight forward, you didn’t mention if you would accept another vote if it was about remaining in the union. For clarity I would accept any outcome as long as it is carried out legally.

1 hour ago, Capeesh said:

The democratic argument is a bit easier to follow for laymen like me. I would be genuinely interested if anybody can refute this claim...

Blocking, or attempting to block a democratic route to Scottish independence is an impossible position for anybody who wants to call themselves a democrat.

 

 

See where your coming from, but it’s likely not that simple. Each side can put up their own arguments. Probably depends on what side of the fence you sit on.

I voted to remain part of the Union, believed it was a once in a generation thing, I could argue that it’s undemocratic that this is raising its head so soon. 
 

Sturgeon argues the reason for another referendum is that the majority of Scotland voted to stay in the EU. So lets look that argument.  Like all of Scotland, the 62% entered a vote that they knew was a U.K. wide vote and the decision rested with all U.K. voters. Now you could argue it’s undemocratic that the Scottish Gov won’t accept that decision. Let’s break that down a bit. 62% voted to remain in the EU therefore Sturgeon suggests the majority of Scotland is unhappy, well are they. I was one of the 62% who voted to remain, but I knew and accepted it was a U.K. vote and therefore accepted the outcome. I’m sure many more of the 62% will feel the same way. So I would doubt if the majority of Scotland didn’t accept democracy, regardless of how they voted.

The next issue is that current polls suggest that 52% now want independence. We all know that polls can change overnight, we all know that when it comes to voting day, where folk are hopefully making a better judged decision things can change considerably.

Sturgeon argues it would be democratic, whilst at the same time has refused to accept past votes that, in my opinion were democratic. It’s typical politics, but we can’t keep having referendums on a regular basis because we don’t like the outcome.

To be honest I’m neither surprised at either Johnson or Sturgeon’s take on this.  interestingly, if Sturgeon get her way but the outcome was the majority wished to remain in the union, will you see that as democratic and accept it. I’ll guarantee the SNP won’t.

12 minutes ago, Davie P said:

My understanding is that the Scottish Parliament can hold an advisory referendum on anything it wishes. The Scottish Parliament would only need approval for a legally binding Independence referendum because the constitutional position of the UK is a 'reserved' matter for Westminster.

It's quite a distinct difference and would need to be made abundantly clear to avoid the post-Brexit referendum fiasco.

Having looked it up Davy P, your quite right. They can hold an advisory referendum, but without approval it wouldn’t really mean anything other than provide a result that could provide a stronger case one way or another.

A binding referendum would require a section 30 or an amendment to the Scotland act 1998, both of which require to be granted by Westminster as the Scottish government cannot pass legislation on matters reserved to Westminster.

4 minutes ago, Capeesh said:

If the majority of the Scottish electorate vote for parties supporting independence that's democracy in action.

If those parties use their mandated majority in the Scottish parliament and vote to hold a referendum on independence that's democracy in action.

A referendum is a further democratic event designed to guage the will of the electorate (it also removes the doubt that Urabug raised regarding  voters that vote for independence parties but don't support independence).

If Westminster refuses then you tell me, what democratic route to independence is left?

 

I understand where your coming from but Just because you vote to do something doesn’t make it legal. I would assume they will have to keep applying pressure on the government to change their mind. 
 

Having a wildcat referendum may prove its what the majority of Scotland want, but unless the government agree, it’s a stand off. I can’t see how Sturgeon can move ahead if the U.K. government won’t play ball. I have no idea how this will play out, if I did, I’d be very rich.

19 minutes ago, Capeesh said:

How would it be illegal?

Unless I’m wrong the holding of an independence referendum can only take place with the approval of Westminster it’s not a devolved decision. She could apply to the Supreme Court, but I can’t see them going against a process which is written in law. Johnson has so far refused mainly on the bases of a once in a generation argument. Any “wildcat” referendum will not be recognised by the U.K. or EU. 

Im sure I read somewhere that if Sturgeon decided to hold a “wildcat” referendum using public funds, she could find herself in a bit of bother, but I don’t know if there’s any truth in that.

54 minutes ago, Capeesh said:

I agree, democracy in action.

Well that’s if democracy was about holding an illegal referendum which neither the U.K. government nor the E.U. will recognise.

8 minutes ago, Roachmill said:

Well that's a step in the right direction. And please do understand that both opposing viewpoints have their merits as well as gaping holes in their logic. They also both have their fanatical believers which are best given a wide berth. We'll get nowhere forming tribal lines, dismissing all considerations we don't like and general name calling just kills the chance of actual dialogue that may prove beneficial.

FWIW, I do not envisage, should it come to be, a transference to independence being a walk in the park at all. Not one bit. Trade, logistics, currency and a whole raft of other things (some my wee brain likely has not even considered yet) are all there. However, one of the biggest fears I have is the campaigning to come. I don't see it being what it should be: fair, honestly informed and conducted in an old school sportsmanship like fashion. The media is going to play a pivotal role yet again... and that never bodes well for anyone but what the folk at the top want the outcome to be - which invariably comes down to making more money.

Mmhh, naughty. You missed the full quote which was: I’m completely against independence “in this manner”. I also in the same post confirm that I’m not against independence, if it were to be done in sma steps.

However I’m enlightened by the rest of your post. One of my concerns and I’ve said it on here, is some SNP folk seem hell bent on independence at whatever cost to the country, it’s very refreshing to see someone who accepts this would be fraught with difficulties and completely agree with you that the media will make a bun fight out of this if it moves forward which will inevitably make our vote more difficult and confusing.

I though our councillors were bad at times, but could not stop laughing at the antics of these lot during their zoom meeting. Here’s a snippet, but it’s well worth watching the longer version.

starts with “are we ready to begin”,  ‘f’off can be heard as a reply. 
 

I can mind droughts as a youngster, where we had hose bans etc, with the Sandy loch at a very low ebb . Our infrastructure has obviously improved greatly since then, which along with our expected rainy climate had seen little lack of fresh drinking water in recent years. Mind you I always think the summers back then we’re sunnier and drier.

It seems to suggest that we could go from a drought one year to floods the next. Who would have thought Shetland could be short if water.

23 minutes ago, George. said:

I think that I'm very happy to hear of your, possibly partial, agreement with the thoughts and attitude of the S.N.P.   @Windwalker.  To the reason that I included the Guardian link was because it was yet another statement or claim by yet somebody else.

As I see it, yet another side to the battle is beneficial.

Thanks for that George, glad to make someone a bit happier in the current climate. I must point out though, that whilst I see a way that ‘a’ Scottish government might over a long period of time convince the Scottish people, I no way agree with the current thoughts and attitudes of the SNP, in particular to how they are going about it, their timing and the disregard to more than half the populations previous vote less than 6 years ago.

The unfortunate outcome is that our country remains so divided. 

8 hours ago, George. said:

IMHO, that is certainly a pretty positive statement.

Sturgeon: SNP will hold Scottish independence vote if it wins in May

I’m a bit confused George, if I read it right,  you quote a bit of my post about taking independence in small steps, saying that in your opinion it’s a pretty positive statement, but then add a link which says Sturgeon will crash ahead with a referendum regardless of whether it would be legal or not.

The two are completely different approaches, could you clarify which approach your in favour of and maybe give some reasons. Thanks.

8 hours ago, MuckleJoannie said:

Is this because most of the chocolate is consumed in the UK and import red tape means it is far simpler to make it here.

I would assume that would have been  one of the key considerations in reaching their decision.  The outcome of more jobs and manufacturing has to be a bonus. 

Great to see that despite Brexit Cadbury has decided to bring most of its production of dairy milk chocolate back to Bournville from factories in Germany and across Europe. This has to be good for British jobs and the economy. 
 

Plus, it just happens to be my favourite chocolate