politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » As the big day gets closer Sporting Index returns to politi

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness, following my earlier observation re the disputed Rhineland, Frenchness is the Islam of nationalities. Believes it is inherently superior: therefore is perpetually irritated by clear evidence it isn't...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

Sean, As I ham it up on here most of the time , they may not actually all be accurate. Happy that you promote the fact that YES voters are passionate and not driven by money as unionists seem to focus on all the time. Be interesting to see if you really understand me from the myriad good and bad stuff I put on here.

PS: Let us know when the article is out. My observation is that we are more in your face , the further south you go the more they dance around things scared to offend etc and so do not show how they really feel. We are happy to just call a spade a spade and rip the mince out of each other. There is nothing bad or violent in it , but it does come across as scary at times if you are not used to it.

BBC – “Leader of Somali Islamist group al-Shabab, Ahmed Abdi Godane, killed by US attack earlier this week, Pentagon says”

RIP.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-29086800

TheWatcher said:

BTW You've named the vessel incorrectly - it should be the 'Taj Mahal', with a sister ship 'Spice Island'.

I was talking about the flagship...

1.bp.blogspot.com/_O_hK0iUVXLI/TIJA3755GKI/AAAAAAAABis/8ljDWYinFUo/s1600/IMG_6149_vital_spark.jpg

NickPalmer said:

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness, following my earlier observation re the disputed Rhineland, Frenchness is the Islam of nationalities. Believes it is inherently superior: therefore is perpetually irritated by clear evidence it isn't...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

Intriguing. Can you find characteristics that unite you, me, plato, Socrates, Isam and Hugh?

We are all sort of literate, I suppose.

We like an argument?

(Easy comeback here....)

Socrates said:

rcs1000 said:

Socrates said:

165,000 15-24 year olds have moved out of Ireland in the last five years? There's only about 4.5 million people in Ireland. That age group must be about, what, an eighth of their population? That's about half a million. So about 30% of Irish youths have left? And probably the more talented ones too.

That will be devastating for them long term.

The numbers were just as bad in the early 1980s. As the economy recovered people moved back from the UK.

Ireland is currently the only country in Europe outgrowing the UK.

It is also the only country in Europe where the PMIs and Employment Optimism numbers are better than the UK.

It's pretty easy to grow quickly when you're still climbing back from a 20% drop in GDP. You're just going back to where you were before.

Given the way Irish FDI is picking up, and that debt-to-GDP is now falling, it's very hard not be pretty optimistic about the Irish economy in the medium term. (Also, remember it's two largest trading partners are the UK and the US.)

If the UK were to vote to leave the EU, you would expect a lot of relocations to Ireland. I know a number of the big investment banks have been investigating property in Dublin - ostensibly for moving back offices, but also as an insurance policy.

Dublin real estate is bouncing hard of its lows. I think it could stll be extremely interesting.

isam said:

NickPalmer said:

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness, following my earlier observation re the disputed Rhineland, Frenchness is the Islam of nationalities. Believes it is inherently superior: therefore is perpetually irritated by clear evidence it isn't...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

Intriguing. Can you find characteristics that unite you, me, plato, Socrates, Isam and Hugh?

We are all sort of literate, I suppose.

We like an argument?

(Easy comeback here....)

cats?

Socrates said:

Anyway, I identify as British more than English...

Just like an immigrant......

Dear Dear , BT partners losing the plot big time, serious meltdown in progress.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/05/scotland-ukip-alex-salmond_n_5770734.html?1409915478

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness, following my earlier observation re the disputed Rhineland, Frenchness is the Islam of nationalities. Believes it is inherently superior: therefore is perpetually irritated by clear evidence it isn't...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

Sean, As I ham it up on here most of the time , they may not actually all be accurate. Happy that you promote the fact that YES voters are passionate and not driven by money as unionists seem to focus on all the time. Be interesting to see if you really understand me from the myriad good and bad stuff I put on here.

PS: Let us know when the article is out. My observation is that we are more in your face , the further south you go the more they dance around things scared to offend etc and so do not show how they really feel. We are happy to just call a spade a spade and rip the mince out of each other.

It's for The Spectator.

I suspect you'll be portrayed as malcolm Antoinette, every other post a 'Turnip' insult.

Bon chance!

Let them eat turnips

Scott_P said:

Better Together are pushing “an inconvenient truth for Salmond” today: that more SNP supporters are voting No than Labour supporters voting Yes.

Realised Eck is an empty suit?

http://labourlist.org/2014/09/scottish-referendum-the-liveblog/

Ha Ha Ha , what a rogues gallery in that picture, have you ever seen as many Scottish Tories together in the one photo

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness, following my earlier observation re the disputed Rhineland, Frenchness is the Islam of nationalities. Believes it is inherently superior: therefore is perpetually irritated by clear evidence it isn't...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

Sean, As I ham it up on here most of the time , they may not actually all be accurate. Happy that you promote the fact that YES voters are passionate and not driven by money as unionists seem to focus on all the time. Be interesting to see if you really understand me from the myriad good and bad stuff I put on here.

PS: Let us know when the article is out. My observation is that we are more in your face , the further south you go the more they dance around things scared to offend etc and so do not show how they really feel. We are happy to just call a spade a spade and rip the mince out of each other.

It's for The Spectator.

I suspect you'll be portrayed as malcolm Antoinette, every other post a 'Turnip' insult.

Bon chance!

Let them eat turnips

Arf - Je n'aime pas les navets

SimonStClare said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness, following my earlier observation re the disputed Rhineland, Frenchness is the Islam of nationalities. Believes it is inherently superior: therefore is perpetually irritated by clear evidence it isn't...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

Sean, As I ham it up on here most of the time , they may not actually all be accurate. Happy that you promote the fact that YES voters are passionate and not driven by money as unionists seem to focus on all the time. Be interesting to see if you really understand me from the myriad good and bad stuff I put on here.

PS: Let us know when the article is out. My observation is that we are more in your face , the further south you go the more they dance around things scared to offend etc and so do not show how they really feel. We are happy to just call a spade a spade and rip the mince out of each other.

It's for The Spectator.

I suspect you'll be portrayed as malcolm Antoinette, every other post a 'Turnip' insult.

Bon chance!

Let them eat turnips

Arf - Je n'aime pas les navets

Bashed neeps?

perdix said:

HurstLlama said:

Socrates said:

Scott_P said:

@MarkUrban01: Nato members just agreed to spend 2% of GDP on defence by 2024. For the UK that will actually mean a substantial increase to def budget

@AliBunkallSKY: 2nd UK Aircraft Carrier, Prince of Wales, WILL come into service with the Royal Navy, David Cameron announces

Enlarged Royal Navy and British Army, with no Scots...?

Fantastic news. Will they stick to it?

No. The 2% spend has been a NATO agreement for years and only four countries, including the UK, have stuck to it. Note too the date, the agreement is that they will spend 2% of GDP p.a. by 2024. This is just more meaningless guff, promise to do something in ten years time which they have already promised, and failed, to do.

Note too that the UK will probably comply with the agreement next year when the next set of Treasury imposed defence cuts, sorry I mean the next Strategic Defence Review, take place. The UK current spends about 2.4% on defence so this new pledge provides lots of nice political cover for more cuts.

By the way, looking at the afternoon papers, its seems we are gearing up to go to war in Iraq again.

With UK GDP rising more quickly than expected the ratio of spend to GDP is likely to appear to reduce.

Yes of course it will if spending stays constant. It will also reduce if spending is cut as I am sure it will be. Today's agreement allows HMG to cut the actual amounts whilst declaring we are complying with NATO standards.

Scott_P said:

Enlarged Royal Navy and British Army, with no Scots...?

The New Gurkhas !

rcs1000 said:

Socrates said:

rcs1000 said:

Socrates said:

165,000 15-24 year olds have moved out of Ireland in the last five years? There's only about 4.5 million people in Ireland. That age group must be about, what, an eighth of their population? That's about half a million. So about 30% of Irish youths have left? And probably the more talented ones too.

That will be devastating for them long term.

The numbers were just as bad in the early 1980s. As the economy recovered people moved back from the UK.

Ireland is currently the only country in Europe outgrowing the UK.

It is also the only country in Europe where the PMIs and Employment Optimism numbers are better than the UK.

It's pretty easy to grow quickly when you're still climbing back from a 20% drop in GDP. You're just going back to where you were before.

... I know a number of the big investment banks have been investigating property in Dublin - ostensibly for moving back offices, but also as an insurance policy. ...

Big investment banks thinking of moving to an area where they will definitely be hit with the FTT? Something doesn't add up there.

We have been told by these banks that the FTT is wrong, evil and will drive business out of the city and now you are telling us that these same banks are planning to move to where they will definitely have to pay the tax.

I detect the odour of a rodent.

malcolmg said:

SimonStClare said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness, following my earlier observation re the disputed Rhineland, Frenchness is the Islam of nationalities. Believes it is inherently superior: therefore is perpetually irritated by clear evidence it isn't...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

Sean, As I ham it up on here most of the time , they may not actually all be accurate. Happy that you promote the fact that YES voters are passionate and not driven by money as unionists seem to focus on all the time. Be interesting to see if you really understand me from the myriad good and bad stuff I put on here.

PS: Let us know when the article is out. My observation is that we are more in your face , the further south you go the more they dance around things scared to offend etc and so do not show how they really feel. We are happy to just call a spade a spade and rip the mince out of each other.

It's for The Spectator.

I suspect you'll be portrayed as malcolm Antoinette, every other post a 'Turnip' insult.

Bon chance!

Let them eat turnips

Arf - Je n'aime pas les navets

Laissez-les manger des navets , ils sont savoureux avec haggis et pommes de terre en purée

You'll never convince me MrG - as many a Burn's nights celebrated in the Mess will attest.

SimonStClare said:

malcolmg said:

SimonStClare said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness, following my earlier observation re the disputed Rhineland, Frenchness is the Islam of nationalities. Believes it is inherently superior: therefore is perpetually irritated by clear evidence it isn't...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

Sean, As I ham it up on here most of the time , they may not actually all be accurate. Happy that you promote the fact that YES voters are passionate and not driven by money as unionists seem to focus on all the time. Be interesting to see if you really understand me from the myriad good and bad stuff I put on here.

PS: Let us know when the article is out. My observation is that we are more in your face , the further south you go the more they dance around things scared to offend etc and so do not show how they really feel. We are happy to just call a spade a spade and rip the mince out of each other.

It's for The Spectator.

I suspect you'll be portrayed as malcolm Antoinette, every other post a 'Turnip' insult.

Bon chance!

Let them eat turnips

Arf - Je n'aime pas les navets

Laissez-les manger des navets , ils sont savoureux avec haggis et pommes de terre en purée

You'll never convince me MrG - as many a Burn's nights celebrated in the Mess will attest.

Simon, I absolutely love it. You could console yourself with a nice dram.

Highly esteemed guardian corresponder Shaun Walker at his finest:

Simon Ostrovsky ‏@SimonOstrovsky 50m
Ukrainian tanks leave the eastern edge of Mariupol. This ceasefire might be real.

Shaun WalkerVerified account
‏@shaunwalker7
@SimonOstrovsky FYI they stopped about 20metres down the road!!

Simon Ostrovsky ‏@SimonOstrovsky 42m
@shaunwalker7 get your face out of the minibar, we caught up with them and they're gone now

Shaun Walker ‏@shaunwalker7 41m
@SimonOstrovsky major movement among the cognac miniatures observed

Kevin Bishop ‏@bishopk 40m
@SimonOstrovsky @shaunwalker7 Shaun's high on the scnet of dill Simon. Give him a break

malcolmg said:

SimonStClare said:

malcolmg said:

SimonStClare said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness, following my earlier observation re the disputed Rhineland, Frenchness is the Islam of nationalities. Believes it is inherently superior: therefore is perpetually irritated by clear evidence it isn't...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

Sean, As I ham it up on here most of the time , they may not actually all be accurate. Happy that you promote the fact that YES voters are passionate and not driven by money as unionists seem to focus on all the time. Be interesting to see if you really understand me from the myriad good and bad stuff I put on here.

PS: Let us know when the article is out. My observation is that we are more in your face , the further south you go the more they dance around things scared to offend etc and so do not show how they really feel. We are happy to just call a spade a spade and rip the mince out of each other.

It's for The Spectator.

I suspect you'll be portrayed as malcolm Antoinette, every other post a 'Turnip' insult.

Bon chance!

Let them eat turnips

Arf - Je n'aime pas les navets

Laissez-les manger des navets , ils sont savoureux avec haggis et pommes de terre en purée

You'll never convince me MrG - as many a Burn's nights celebrated in the Mess will attest.

Simon, I absolutely love it. You could console yourself with a nice dram.

No need for consolation MrG - I more than made up for it with extra helping s of cranachan.

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

Dear Dear , BT partners losing the plot big time, serious meltdown in progress.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/05/scotland-ukip-alex-salmond_n_5770734.html?1409915478

Interesting link, MarieG.

'Coburn said that the SNP's new child welfare laws to have every child in Scotland watched by a state-sponsored "named guardian" was "terrifying", and "worthy of Goebbels and Stalin". "That means a Stasi spy in every home in Scotland," he added.'

He is almost as cuckoo as you, who could take UKIP seriously with a deranged nutter like that in their party and an MEP.

So The Children and Young People Bill, doesn't include a plan for every child to have a ‘Named Person’ with the legal authority to ensure they are raised in a government-approved manner.

Is that correct?

If you cared to look at what it was it is indeed to protect children and prevent what we see happening in other countries nearby. It is to protect children and give them the right to be heard, not ignored and hidden/dismissed as we see recently.
I would not expect a cretin like yourself to comprehend that children need protection. Perhaps you prefer the Rotherham policy.

Socrates said:

malcolmg said:

Patrick said:

MikeK said:

SeanT said:

Telegraph contemplating Cameron's retirement after YES, yet denying it could happen (stupidly)

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/iainmartin1/100285383/a-tory-plot-to-remove-cameron-in-the-event-of-scottish-independence-would-be-deeply-stupid/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Look at the names mentioned as replacements, and remember what I told you about the odds on their being next PM: Osborne 25/1, Hague, 50/1.

It will certainly be a cathartic moment if YES is triumphant and would UKIP be able to keep it's name?

We are the UK and if Scotland is leaving we will, I suppose, still be the UK. Maybe 'the UK of England, Wales and NI'. Much easier just to leave well alone.

(p.s. my own view on what to do with the flag is to recognise Wales by turning the blue bits of the Union Jack green - thus giving a red, white and green flag as a nod to Wales. Dark green. British Racing Green. Jaguar green. Would look awesome and retain all the iconic design elements of our current flag.)

Patrick , hard to kid anyone that Wales or a small corner of Ireland are kingdoms.

No-one would be claiming they are kingdoms. Scotland and England aren't kingdoms either. There is one, united kingdom.

Worth noting that getting rid of Mr C at that time would not help in sorting things out post a Yes - as Mr Martin says in the DT:

"For all that it is fashionable among some Tory MPs to say that England doesn't really care, the impact of a split would be immense in terms of the potential for economic chaos and existential crisis. It is a mistake to think that the end of the Union would somehow be breezed through by the Former UK (what Boris Johnson says it should be called, think about the acronym.)

And it's there that the case for Cameron's immediate removal collapses. After a Yes vote, someone will need to guide the Rest of the UK through very messy negotiations with Scotland. If not Cameron, who?"

I find it extraordinary that Tory backbenchers should be talking of changing the captain at such a time. But, on the other hand, their implicit refusal to allow Devomax is (in my view if not everyone's) would be a key reason for a Yes.

Edit PS: and it won't help the worries/uncertainty caused by the Coalition and the Civil Service loudly claiming they have No Contingency Planning.

" Labour have far more problems with increasing Defence spending than the Tories normally would?"

When was the last time a Conservative government increased defence spending?

manofkent2014 said:

HurstLlama said:

" Labour have far more problems with increasing Defence spending than the Tories normally would?"

When was the last time a Conservative government increased defence spending?

Oh Hurst I didn't say they had but they'd have less trouble doing so

Fair enough. As an aside it would seem Cameron is living up to his Heir to Blair reputation by taking on more military commitments whilst at the same time cutting the resources available. The UK he says will provide the HQ and 25% of the new NATO rapid reaction force for Eastern Europe, including forward staging of equipment. He really does want to take his part on the world stage, but like Blair he doesn't want to pay for it.

Toms said:

malcolmg said:

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness, following my earlier observation re the disputed Rhineland, Frenchness is the Islam of nationalities. Believes it is inherently superior: therefore is perpetually irritated by clear evidence it isn't...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

Sean, As I ham it up on here most of the time , they may not actually all be accurate. Happy that you promote the fact that YES voters are passionate and not driven by money as unionists seem to focus on all the time. Be interesting to see if you really understand me from the myriad good and bad stuff I put on here.

PS: Let us know when the article is out. My observation is that we are more in your face , the further south you go the more they dance around things scared to offend etc and so do not show how they really feel. We are happy to just call a spade a spade and rip the mince out of each other. There is nothing bad or violent in it , but it does come across as scary at times if you are not used to it.

We had a quiet and deep colleague from the extreme north of Scotland, bespectacled, bearded and ginger. Rather forward myself, one day over lunch I mentioned that he seemed a very quiet sort. After a pause he said it was cultural and that I thought he was quiet I should meet his brother.

I suppose I was far too generalist , but in my experience, Scottish tend to be more blunt in their discussions. You are correct that we will have our full spectrum and plenty shrinking violets. I accept the reprimand.

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

Dear Dear , BT partners losing the plot big time, serious meltdown in progress.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/05/scotland-ukip-alex-salmond_n_5770734.html?1409915478

Interesting link, MarieG.

'Coburn said that the SNP's new child welfare laws to have every child in Scotland watched by a state-sponsored "named guardian" was "terrifying", and "worthy of Goebbels and Stalin". "That means a Stasi spy in every home in Scotland," he added.'

He is almost as cuckoo as you, who could take UKIP seriously with a deranged nutter like that in their party and an MEP.

So The Children and Young People Bill, doesn't include a plan for every child to have a ‘Named Person’ with the legal authority to ensure they are raised in a government-approved manner.

Is that correct?

If you cared to look at what it was it is indeed to protect children and prevent what we see happening in other countries nearby. It is to protect children and give them the right to be heard, not ignored and hidden/dismissed as we see recently.
I would not expect a cretin like yourself to comprehend that children need protection. Perhaps you prefer the Rotherham policy.

So, Coburns 'a cuckoo' for raising a topic that's actually true?

No he is mentally deranged to portray it and the other topics as he does. Any moronic halfwit dribbling about Nazis etc is obviously not very bright and indeed is very like yourself. You may indeed be that halfwit.

It's a shame that you consider it perfectly acceptable, and amusing, to continually joke about mental illness, and disability. But not surprising.

Dear Dear , you have the violins out now. Go get a life, that guy is either not the full shilling or a comedian and that is no joke.

Carswell says he is cocking no snoops.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/douglascarswellmp/100285132/i-am-not-standing-for-ukip-to-cock-a-snook-at-the-conservative-party/

Plato said:

Karma

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

As stupid as ever I see, I am very proud of what I am and proud to be Scottish, you cringe if you want to

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

TheWatcher said:

malcolmg said:

Dear Dear , BT partners losing the plot big time, serious meltdown in progress.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/09/05/scotland-ukip-alex-salmond_n_5770734.html?1409915478

Interesting link, MarieG.

'Coburn said that the SNP's new child welfare laws to have every child in Scotland watched by a state-sponsored "named guardian" was "terrifying", and "worthy of Goebbels and Stalin". "That means a Stasi spy in every home in Scotland," he added.'

He is almost as cuckoo as you, who could take UKIP seriously with a deranged nutter like that in their party and an MEP.

So The Children and Young People Bill, doesn't include a plan for every child to have a ‘Named Person’ with the legal authority to ensure they are raised in a government-approved manner.

Is that correct?

If you cared to look at what it was it is indeed to protect children and prevent what we see happening in other countries nearby. It is to protect children and give them the right to be heard, not ignored and hidden/dismissed as we see recently.
I would not expect a cretin like yourself to comprehend that children need protection. Perhaps you prefer the Rotherham policy.

So, Coburns 'a cuckoo' for raising a topic that's actually true?

No he is mentally deranged to portray it and the other topics as he does. Any moronic halfwit dribbling about Nazis etc is obviously not very bright and indeed is very like yourself. You may indeed be that halfwit.

It's a shame that you consider it perfectly acceptable, and amusing, to continually joke about mental illness, and disability. But not surprising.

Dear Dear , you have the violins out now. Go get a life, that guy is either not the full shilling or a comedian and that is no joke.

Just think of all those Spectator subscribers reading the choicer posts from an example of the common Nat.

Better than the usual jackanory rubbish they usually get.

perdix said:

O/T reports of Farage meeting Murdoch in New York.

Interesting, because the Sun was vehemently anti-UKIP in this year's elections.

Toms said:

malcolmg said:

Toms said:

malcolmg said:

SeanT said:

Re indyref, I've been commissioned by the Spectator to do a piece on national character, vis a vis Scottishness and Englishness, following my earlier observation re the disputed Rhineland, Frenchness is the Islam of nationalities. Believes it is inherently superior: therefore is perpetually irritated by clear evidence it isn't...

I hope malcolmg won't mind if I use some of his remarks as illustrations of a certain type of Scottishness.

Sean, As I ham it up on here most of the time , they may not actually all be accurate. Happy that you promote the fact that YES voters are passionate and not driven by money as unionists seem to focus on all the time. Be interesting to see if you really understand me from the myriad good and bad stuff I put on here.

PS: Let us know when the article is out. My observation is that we are more in your face , the further south you go the more they dance around things scared to offend etc and so do not show how they really feel. We are happy to just call a spade a spade and rip the mince out of each other. There is nothing bad or violent in it , but it does come across as scary at times if you are not used to it.

We had a quiet and deep colleague from the extreme north of Scotland, bespectacled, bearded and ginger. Rather forward myself, one day over lunch I mentioned that he seemed a very quiet sort. After a pause he said it was cultural and that I thought he was quiet I should meet his brother.

I suppose I was far too generalist , but in my experience, Scottish tend to be more blunt in their discussions. You are correct that we will have our full spectrum and plenty shrinking violets. I accept the reprimand.

I sometimes suffer from extreme garrulity, especially when high on caffeine.

I have to say the level of posts on here by the frothers does lead me to posting lots of rubbish. The variability of the discussions on here between intelligent people and the drivel by the frothers is incredible. It is easy just to reply with absolute rubbish, lazy I admit but otherwise I would just give up and leave. I hope that I manage to enlighten the cretins just a little bit now and again. The standard of posting and knowledge of Scotland on here is shocking.

Simon Jenkins joins Monbiot as another upper middle class Englishman who hates his country
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/sep/04/scottish-independence-yes-vote-leaner-meaner-scotland

Hats off to Polly Toynbee though, at least she has the guts to stick up for the union

Canadian PM Stephen Harper backs the union http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-29059118

Danny565 said:

perdix said:

O/T reports of Farage meeting Murdoch in New York.

Interesting, because the Sun was vehemently anti-UKIP in this year's elections.

So was the times

The fearsome SLAB electoral machine is finally getting into its stride.

'Scottish independence:Govan closes doors to Lamont

SCOTTISH Labour leader Johann Lamont got the wrong No vote today when she took to the SNP heartland -- and was met with closed doors.
The MSP for Glasgow Pollok made a ‘behind enemy lines’ visit to Govan, in deputy leader Nicola Sturgeon’s Govan constituency, to argue the pro-Union case with voters.
But despite an army of Labour supporters knocking doors, only three residents engaged in conversation with her - while several even came outside to return the leaflets pushed through their letter boxes.
The weak response from SNP voters got worse when a pensioner refused to even discuss with Lamont how she would be voting on the 18th.
But Lamont later insisted it had been a successful exercise and not a waste of her time.'

http://tinyurl.com/p3dflk9
(it's the Scotsman in case anyone thinks there's some bias in the piece)

Why would they report this (if true), surely that just kills any potential mission? We know that they have internet access, although I doubt they are sitting looking at half naked celebs on the Daily Rant website, the info will be conveyed through other source as it is now on one of the worlds most visited websites.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2744873/Primed-ready-rescue-British-hostage-night-time-raid-SAS-squadron-alert-David-Cameron-order-high-risk-mission-bring-home-aid-worker.html

Hague is technically the most senior member of the Cabinet after Cameron.

Note that Hague is the First Secretary of State. He specifically retained that title when he gave up being Foreign Secretary.

Per Number 10 website:

1. Cameron
2. Clegg
3. Hague
4. Osborne
5. May
6. Hammond

https://www.gov.uk/government/ministers

TheWatcher said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Why would they report this (if true), surely that just kills any potential mission? We know that they have internet access, although I doubt they are sitting looking at half naked celebs on the Daily Rant website, the info will be conveyed through other source as it is now on one of the worlds most visited websites.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2744873/Primed-ready-rescue-British-hostage-night-time-raid-SAS-squadron-alert-David-Cameron-order-high-risk-mission-bring-home-aid-worker.html

It's hardly a surprise - kidnappers would be expecting some kind of reprisal or attack anyway.

Daily Mail loves a good military gung ho story too

I am sure the hostage takers are expecting a rescue mission, as the west have been messing about for so long talking about this, it just seem irresponsible on the Daily Mail to post this.

I still don't understand why Labour have been so incompetent with the No campaign. If Scotland were to become independent it would be sad for the Tories as they are a unionist party at the core, but they would learn to live with it, for Labour it would be an absolute disaster, the core of the Labour party comes from Scotland as do almost a fifth of their MPs. I find it difficult to believe that Labour could win a majority or even the most seats in Parliament without Scottish MPs, the Tories have come up against the same problem since 1997 after the remaining vestiges of the party in Scotland were wiped away and replaced with a tide of red.

I really don't understand why Labour haven't done better, there are a lot of positives for Scotland being in the union beyond the pound which Darling has been stuck on like a broken record. It looks like there may be enough voters ready to take the risk of just doing it anyway regardless of the risks laid out by the No side. Instead of constantly going on about the negatives of independence no one has set out the positives of being in the union, of which there are many.

I am personally in favour of Scottish independence, I think after this campaign a No vote would be a very hollow victory and I don't think Scotland would be the same afterwards, there is too much bad blood between the unionists and independentists for things to return to normal. The only way Scotland grows as a country socially is to go ahead with independence, moving forwards as part of the union in the case of a No will create a lot of bitterness and resentment on the Yes side which I don't think will be good for Scotland or the union. I think the No side will deal with a loss much better, again because of the positive vision being sold by the Yes side, there is still a lot to look forwards to in an independent Scotland after all.

However, going back to my central point, how has Labour let it even get this far? Their tactics have been awful from the off and no one seems to have taken a step back and tried to fix the errors, they are still hammering away with the negative message. The other part is that Labour seem almost embarrassed to speak up for the union. It may have been an English Navy that ruled the seas, but it was Scottish engineers that made it happen. Labour seem to be embarrassed by Scotland and England's shared history because it does involve a lot of conquest, but it is what it is and not making more of that has been one of the central failures. Together Scotland and England are stronger than apart, history has shown that to be a fact, Labour needed to do more on what the two nations have achieved together as a single country rather than be embarrassed about an imperial past.

glw said:

HurstLlama said:

The reason why the military is far less capable than ever is because there is far less of it.

The military may be smaller, and spending has gone down, but saying that it is less capable than ever is a hell of a stretch. The equipment we do have is much improved, and our armed forces are now obviously very experienced due to Iraq and Afghanistan.

Having equipment and no soldiers isn't very useful and nor is it capable. The government has overspent on procurement at the expense of a conventional military, that is a mistake. They should have canned all of the Labour overhang in 2010 and better armed the existing army rather than spending so heavily on ships and planes that won't come into service until 2018 or armoured vehicle and tanks until 2022.

saddened said:

HurstLlama said:

glw said:

HurstLlama said:

The reason why the military is far less capable than ever is because there is far less of it.

The military may be smaller, and spending has gone down, but saying that it is less capable than ever is a hell of a stretch. The equipment we do have is much improved, and our armed forces are now obviously very experienced due to Iraq and Afghanistan.

A ship, aeroplane or soldier can only be in one place.

What do you want the military to be capable of? How much force projection do we need?

Personally I would like to see the armed forces big enough and sufficiently well equipped to defend our island and essential trade routes against a capable modern enemy and if necessary conduct a very limited forced insertion for hostage rescue/evacuation.