Sturgeon is complaining about political dirty tricks...but of course the SNP wrote the manual on how to use them….claiming that the leak of the memo is a dirty trick is a dirty trick in itself as she makes wild claims about who is to blame and the reasons why…far less credible claims than the memo itself….and all about diverting attention from the contents that are, as Norman Smith says ‘devastating’ for her.
This is the SNP that tried to jerrymander the referendum by allowing 16 year olds to vote in the hope that the young, naive and idealistic youth would turn out in their droves for the SNP.
This is the SNP that stopped Scottish voters living in the rest of the UK from voting.
This is the SNP that tried to recruit Muslim extremists from the Muslim Brotherood as SMPs to win the ‘ethnic’ vote.
This is the SNP that spun wild tales of vast oil wealth that would fund the Glorious National Socialist Republic.
This is the SNP whose supporters physically attacked another politician to stop him talking and launched vicious internet attacks on anyone who was against independence.
This is the SNP which has stirred up racist animosity against the English for its own political purposes.
This is the SNP that made sinister threats against businessmen who also spoke up for the Union….warning of a ‘day of reckoning’.
This is the SNP that claimed it wanted independence but it turns out that all they wanted was power for themselves as we see them manoeuvring for political influence in league with the ‘English’ parties.
This is the SNP that helped run a false flag operation pretending to be Labour people that wanted independence….one of whom admitted she was a long-term SNP activist who switched to Labour just a few months ago with the aim of undermining the party over the referendum.
And of course this is the untrustworthy, shameless and dishonourable SNP that reneged on the referendum result and now tries to deny the Scottish people their right to be part of the United Kingdom as they voted for.
The SNP are a bunch of political carpet baggers and charlatans who will lead the Scots to ruin using the same old tricks that the Nazis used to beguile and con the German people with a lot of flag waving dreams of a nation reborn.
Many may wish the BBC were biased against the SNP.
Unfortunately for them they are not…..if they are why are they hiding the fact that senior SNP figures told a BBC journalist that they might prefer a Cameron government?
‘The BBC has learned………………….’
To listen to Hope not Hate, when they make up photoshop lies that benefits the Labour party..
http://nopenothope.blogspot.co.uk/2015/04/hope-not-hate-photoshop-facebook.html#disqus_thread
The SNP and Scottish Labour – both take their campaign ideas from “The Godfather Trilogy” and “The Sopranos”. That claim is not so whimsical as it seems as both parties are rotten with corruption. They are like two Mafia families fighting a turf war.
Alan once again displays his total lack of ignorance:
“This is the SNP that tried to jerrymander the referendum by allowing 16 year olds to vote…………”
A change agreed by the UK Government and approved by the Scottish Parliament.
“The SNP that stopped Scottish voters living in the rest of the UK from voting………”
The electorate was agreed with the UK Government. The electorate, like all others, was based on residency and not nationality.
“The SNP that tried to recruit Muslim extremists from the Muslim Brotherood……….”
Well it would not be an Alan opinion without some mention of Muslims!!
“The SNP that spun wild tales of vast oil wealth…………………”
Scotland, the only country in the world where oil resources would be a burden!!
“The SNP whose supporters physically attacked another politician to stop him talking and launched vicious internet attacks on anyone who was against independence.”
A politician was struck by an egg. Any comment on the physical attacks by Unionists in George Square after the referendum? Any comment on the internet abuse from Unioists.
Tweets by BritNatAbuseBot
“The SNP which has stirred up racist animosity against the English for its own political purposes.”
Despite the fact that many SNP MSP’s are English you continue to peddle this lie. And lets not discount all the English resident in Scotland who voted Yes and the others who vote SNP.
“This is the SNP that claimed it wanted independence but it turns out that all they wanted was power for themselves as we see them manoeuvring for political influence in league with the ‘English’ parties.”
Really – that is why Independence remains a key aim for the SNP. Until such time why should the SNP not seek to forge alliances with parties to ensure the best outcome for their constituents. You complained long enough about Scotland returning labour MP’s to Westminster!!
“The SNP that helped run a false flag operation pretending to be Labour people that wanted independence….one of whom admitted she was a long-term SNP activist who switched to Labour just a few months ago with the aim of undermining the party over the referendum.”
An old story widely discredited.
“The untrustworthy, shameless and dishonourable SNP that reneged on the referendum result and now tries to deny the Scottish people their right to be part of the United Kingdom as they voted for.”
If by renaging on the Referendum result you mean that the SNP did not disbandand and simply go away then you are correct. However, the SNP are a recognised party within the UK and the electorate are free to vote for them. Do you have a problem with democracy Alan?
“The SNP are a bunch of political carpet baggers and charlatans who will lead the Scots to ruin using the same old tricks that the Nazis used to beguile and con the German people with a lot of flag waving dreams of a nation reborn.”
When you resort to comparing a legitimate UK Political party to the Nazis you have lost the argument before it even starts.
“……. senior SNP figures told a BBC journalist that they might prefer a Cameron government?”
Which part of “lock the Tories out of Government” is difficult for you to understand.
Heh, heh – Alan once again displays his total lack of ignorance..
I’m sure he’ll feel really insulted by that comment !
For “ignorance” read “knowledge” – but you carry on concentrating on the typo’s as opposed to the content!!
What, Albaman – no sense of humour ?
Dear, oh dear, oh dear.
Mind you, mis-typing ‘knowledge’ so that it comes out as ‘ignorance’, you really have to work hard at !
Some ‘typo’ alright. ;D
It’s those fat fingers and magic autocorrect that so troubles some very proud of their superior keyboardsmanship. I thought the extra apostrophe in homage to another was a nice touch, though.
The post is still bullshit though. But I guess your interest in grammar only arises when it suits. Not unique of you though.
That’s what happens when you buy your computer keyboard from the 99p shop.
And, as for debating ‘content’ ? What, you mean like
“The SNP that tried to recruit Muslim extremists from the Muslim Brotherood……….”
Well it would not be an Alan opinion without some mention of Muslims!!
“The SNP that spun wild tales of vast oil wealth…………………”
Scotland, the only country in the world where oil resources would be a burden!!
Oh dear – the overwhelming logic of your arguments – not !
Comments, like the ones above, pulled from some ‘drivelbase’, or deflection from the point being put, are not ‘content’, and are definitely not worth debating.
Try harder, you might one day arrive at a coherent argument.
Which part of “……. senior SNP figures told a BBC journalist that they might prefer a Cameron government?” do you not understand Albaman?
Which part of Sturgeon ‘confessed that she’d rather see David Cameron remain as PM (and didn’t see Ed Miliband as PM material).’ do you not understand Albaman?
You can’t prove she didn’t say it, and nor can she…but there is ample evidence to suggest she probably did say the fateful, ‘devastating’, words.
Repeatedly shouting ‘she denies it’ all day long proves nothing….whereas the words of your own SNP senior figures tell a different tale to that “lock the Tories out of Government” line Sturgeon peddles.
“You can’t prove she didn’t say it, and nor can she…….”
Go on Alan, prove she did say it!!
Well how about a memo of the meeting taken by an experienced and reliable civil servant who spoke to the French Consul general who was at the meeting?
How about senior SNP figures telling the BBC that they might prefer to have a Tory government?
“Well how about a memo of the meeting taken by an experienced and reliable civil servant ……………………”
You missed out the key point Alan – your experienced civil servant was NOT at the meeting!!
But hey, in your view someone who was not there is to be believed over all those that were there!!!
Let me know the next time you are having a meeting – without attending I will then write up some notes for you.
Those that were there…such as the French Consul General who made the original claim?
No Alan, a civil servant said the French Consul General said something that when published the Consul General denied!!
For simplicity – the person who was alleged to have made the comment denied ever saying it!!!
Your whole case rests on Sturgeon and the French denying what was reported to have been said.
Where’s your proof that they are not lying? You have none at all. You claim the civil servant wasn’t in the room and therefore he/she must be lying….and yet you were not in the room but are relying on Sturgeon’s and the French diplomatic denial…where’s your proof? How is it that your third hand claim is more reliable than a civil servant who was classed as expreienced and reliable and whose report was otherwise apparently accurate and uncontroversial….how did he/she get one part so wrong?
Sturgeon will lose enormous credibility if the charge sticks and the French have put a diplomatic foot in their mouth interfering, however unintentionally, in a foreign general election…no wonder denials are flying around.
But no proof other than their denials…..but there is evidence of the words being spoken…..unless you are still claiming the civil servant is a liar…are you?
According to you Albaman people who have a lot to lose if found out are speaking the truth but a backroom civil servant who could have had no idea this would blow up like this is declared a liar by you….your crystal ball must be incredible.
What are the winning lottery numbers for next week?
So, your view is that the 3 people in attendance are all liars and the one person who was not present is telling the truth.
“…. there is evidence of the words being spoken …..” you really do miss the point. All those who were present deny the report from the person who was not there!!!
Even for you Alan this is pushing things a bit far!! If I were to post notes of a discussion you had with 2 other people (when not being in attendance) would you agree with my version or yours?
That’s your case for the defence? Sturgeon, a politician, is not lying because she says she’s not, but a civil servant is a liar because he/she wasn’t in the meeting? And yet he/she was briefed by the French Consul!
You weren’t at the meeting nor at the debrief between the civil servant and the French consul…and yet you claim indepth knowledge…how so? How is it you know so much when not in the room and not briefed by anyone, and yet you can definitely say the civil servant is a liar?
Where’s your evidence Sturgeon isn’t lying?
Why not answer that question? Provide the evidence that she’s telling the truth, real evidence not just the repeated assertion of your dogmatic belief in the mistress’s voice.
You have none do you?
“You weren’t at the meeting nor at the debrief between the civil servant and the French consul…and yet you claim indepth knowledge…how so?”
The same can be said of you can it not.
No doubt you agree with the evidence of the one person not actually there (as opposed to the 3 who were) because you don’t like Nicola Sturgeon.
Hope you never get picked for jury service if this is an example of how you come to a decision.
So an intelligent, trained and experienced civil servant who can read, write and put a coherent sentence together is incapable of reporting accurately the briefing that the French Consul gave him/her according to you Albaman whose own direct experience of the matters in hand is zero.
If your boss’s secretary came down to your cubby hole and said the boss would like you to go out and fetch her a bite to eat, say a slice of haggis and a wee dram of the Irn Bru, would you be incapable of processing that order because you weren’t in the room when your boss told the secretary what she wanted and you only received the order second hand via the, very lovely I’m sure, secretary?
And you still haven’t replied to my question about providing the proof that Sturgeon is telling the truth? Faith alone may cut it in the Kirk but not here.
Albaman….Did like your reference to the Jury as some sort of vindication for your point of view…but isn’t the point of the jury that they are 12 good men and true who judge guilt or innocence on evidence relayed to them via witnesses who were on the scene of the crime at the time or can convincingly present evidence that indicates what happened and by whom? I know the legal system is different in Scotland Albaman but even there the jury doesn’t actually have to have personally witnessed the crime….So I’m unsure what point you are making with that example…you didn’t think that through did you as it more backs me up than you?
The civil servant didn’t actually have to be in the meeting…only to consider the ‘evidence’as presented to him/her by a reliable witness…one French Consul General.
The fact the Consul now denies it means nothing….the French still say they won Waterloo…which is why they have a train station named after the great victory….oh…no, they don’t, do they.
Listen, guys – neither of you is ever going to convince the other of their viewpoint on this topic – it’s all down to who you believe and trust.
Why don’t you both agree that no amount of ‘he-said, she-said’, and re-iteration of the same arguments over and over again is actually convincing the other in the slightest ?
Sorry – my coat’s the blue one at the back….
” Labour’s Douglas Alexander deletes tweets saying Nicola Sturgeon backs Tories
Shadow foreign secretary backtracks on hotly disputed claim that SNP leader told French ambassador she’d prefer David Cameron as prime minister”
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/06/labours-douglas-alexander-deletes-tweets-saying-nicola-sturgeon-backs-tories?CMP=share_btn_tw
Conclusive proof eh Albaman?…oh hang on, wee Dougie says…“What we do know is that the Tories are desperate for the SNP to do well, and the SNP are telling voters across Britain to vote for anyone but Labour.”
Mike Gapes, who is standing for Labour in Ilford South. “There is, privately, an SNP agenda that wants Cameron to stay in office because it would speed up a second referendum on independence.”
Good to know that these Labour candiates know what the SNP and Tories are doing – probably explains why they are clueless about what their own party is doing.
Alababum,
What happens when one person tells lies about another person, is that the latter sues the former in court for defamation of character
Why isnt that ugly scottish poison dwarf from the national socialist party of scotland suing ppl if she didnt say what she is alledged to have said?
answers pretty simple….she said what is being reported she said and shes now in damage limitation mode
you scottish national socialist fascists really are despicable creatures, in fact i’d like to call you the scum of the earth, but thats disrespectful to scum
why dont you go and book into a hotel room with scott
Good to see that you are following DV’s request for respectfull posts.
Albaman, that’s the first posting of yours (5.05pm 6/4/15) that I agree with wholeheartedly. My feeling is that Labour must be involved with little operation somewhere along the line because they are the only party in Scotland who could benefit from this story.
Thanks for taking the time to rebut Alan’s points. All it takes is a little time and effort.
I don’t think you really needed to though, nobody sane could possibly take this post seriously. Its the hysterical rant of someone on the edge. He also needs an editor – the ‘young youth’ indeed.
My (Scottish) spouse tells me the SNP have forever been known as the Tartan Tories.
Labour has depended on the forty-odd Scottish Labour MPs to keep them in power over England, while Scottish Tony allowed them to spending English taxpayers money in Scotland through devolved entitlements not available to the English. This slippery relationship has got to end.
Cameron bodged the chance to decapitate Labour through failing to support Independence (for England)
The sooner we rid ourselves of this vile political class, all of them, the better. You know what to do on May 7th. Go purple.
“Labour has depended on the forty-odd Scottish Labour MPs to keep them in power over England………….”
40 Seats do not an election win. Where did the other 300+ seats come from?
“Cameron bodged the chance to decapitate Labour through failing to support Independence (for England) ”
Must have missed that Referendum!!
Your support of the SNP is……um……unsurprising.
Nah – retired civil engineer in Kirkcaldy – he’s probably Cyclops Broon’s neighbour.
Never been a civil engineer, not retired and never lived in Kirkcaldy. I have passed through it on the train if that is any consolation.
Talking about trains – I am sure an English Parliament would be willing to continue to help finance lines to Edinburgh and Glasgow. We have mutual interest in doing so – on fair terms. ( Is “fair” a word the SNP understands ?(
Nowt else though.
It has all become tiresome. Scotland needs to become independent as soon as possible and govern itself without English interference.
The Scots do not like us and that is obvious. it is like a bad marriage. best ended for both our sakes.
If the SNP props up a minority Labour Government and votes on devolved matters then that is a recipe for trouble. Reality again and something that has to be faced.
I would find it abhorrent to have a bunch of Scottish MPs decide my future whilst reserving the future of their voters to themselves.
Too bloody right. Independence now! For England.
End subsidies to Scotland.
What you vote for, you get.
Goodbye.
Mary-Doll has as much plausibility as Albaman. All gob with w whining accent.
“This is the SNP that tried to jerrymander the referendum by allowing 16 year olds to vote in the hope that the young, naive and idealistic youth would turn out in their droves for the SNP.”
Plaid Cymru want the same. I think the Labour party do too. They claim it is in the interests of ‘democracy’. BO**OCKS!
Democracy is good, but only if the majority (or all) of voters understand what they are voting for. When it comes to young people, then it’s more a case of mob rule. I say that as a self-judgement – because I had some strange ideas on how to run the country when I was a teenager.
Unfortunately, some people just don’t grow up and vote blindly for the party that promises the most cherries rather than the most opportunities. And judging by the polls, millions of people still need to grow up!
Sturgeon is now trying to play on the UK-wide political stage where the spotlight is more searching, rather than on that of Scotland, where SNP lies and intimidation can win out. She can’t twist the facts and rely on a compliant media, nor a baying mob of supporters who believe that anything the SNP say must be true.
Scotland seems like one huge rotten borough where the sitting tenant is now switching from labour to SNP. Its future looks pretty bleak to me and despite the ridiculous comments of SNP stooges like Albaman, this is the Scots own fault and nothing to do with the English, despite the arrogant, condescending attitude of the Salmond-Sturgeon gang towards us.
Rotten Borough would only describe the 4 council areas in Scotland out of 32 who voted for independence , Glasgow City, North Lanarkshire ,Dundee and West Dumbarton. The other 28 some quite emphatically voted NO THANKS.
I prefer the 28 – 4 result but all you hear about is this 45%…..a large proportion coming from these “Rotten boroughs”.
Perception is all and the SNP makes no bones about it’s desire to leave the UK. So we believe it. Despite the 28 to 4 result if the SNP sweeps the board in the GE then this perception of Sottish hostility will become universal. That will doom the union. The SNP is badly led. It is parochial in the worst sense and does not seem to grasp that voting on devolved matters in the UK parliament is about as undemocratic as you get. Mind you the SNP did not really accept the result of the referendum so it’s latest threat is not a surprise.
Immediate independence for Scotland is the only feasible solution to the coming crisis. The SNP gets what it wants and the rest of the UK is well rid of it.
Ever get the feeling that when toddlers are indulged, they get worse?
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/steerpike/2015/04/labour-slam-media-for-asking-legitimate-questions-at-tony-blair-event/
Seems the Conservative and UKIP faithful express their concerns on one way, but SNP & Labour may be prone to dialing it up a bit further.
Not sure that is such a smart play, as there may be some journos who leave their politics at the door, but don’t take kindly to be told where they can go once allowed inside.
But no, this does not mean the BBC must be getting it about right. It just means that they are expected to cave even more if Ed’s going to get in and swing the licence fee guarantee, which sounds about as massive a conflict of interest as can be imagined.
“The SNP and Immigration – An open door to England?”
http://www.migrationwatchuk.com/press-release/411
Also:
“It’s about time we talked about immigration . . .
“Michael Fallon was forced to retract his talk of being ‘swamped’ by migrants, but Andrew Green believes a debate about the impact on our society is essential”
(Oct 2014)-
[Excerpt]:-
“Sadly, the BBC – the main and most influential source of news for the British public – has consistently failed in its duty to inform the public about immigration, in terms of both the immediate as well as the long-term impacts. Breezy admissions of this from outgoing director-generals distract from what has clearly been a failure of duty. You could argue that any serious discussion of this topic would be made for radio and hopeless on television. But never in the 13 years since MigrationWatch was founded have I heard a radio programme set out the case against mass immigration. Instead, the process of selection, whether conscious or otherwise, has ensured that the case in favour of immigration permeates the BBC’s output. I recall that one of its executives told a newspaper: ‘We were slow on the story. We probably didn’t like what he was saying…’”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/11193707/Its-about-time-we-talked-about-immigration….html