Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I kinda genuinely believe(d) that any sensible adult would realise there are offensive people on both sides. I also believe(d) that no one would surely fall for the "cyber nats" schtick outside of the Daily Mail and BBC. Point one - I agree, but perceive an extra depth of nastiness by some of the keyboard warriors purporting to be Nationalists. Point two - I read more than one newspaper and my views of the BBC are that is far from unbiased, but I don't think they are making up stories about death threats? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1320Lichtie Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Alex Salmond will have gotten more death threats through the post than Santa gets at Christmas AFJ but youll no see that on the front page of The Sun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ira Gaines Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Yes and no. I find an incredible lack of information from both sides when it comes to the "important stuff". Anyway, aren't politicians, (who are almost people), meant to sway your vote? 1) There's plenty of stuff to be found on the internet, mainly biased but there's enough from both sides on all of the issues to be able to make a judgment based on that. 2) Yes, they're supposed to sway your vote, but at the end of the day, it's up to you to decide what's best for Scotland, and that decision can't be made on the back of "I don't like those people". It's simply far too important for that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Alex Salmond will have gotten more death threats through the post than Santa gets at Christmas AFJ but youll no see that on the front page of The Sun. I'll never see anything on the front of the Sun mate as I wouldn't read the filthy rag but, facetiousness aside, I doubt a politician as astute as Eck would fail to make political capital out of death threats. In fact I would expect any politician to use it to their advantage. Not that it would excuse any moron who made death threats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 ^^^ You're a decent guy. I just thought you wouldn't fall for the cybernats nonsense. I'm blushing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speckled tangerine Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Am being pushed towards the No camp by the number of absolute zoomers like the cyber nats, and their sheer unadulterated nastiness and inability to allow others to have views different to their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivo den Bieman Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I don't agree really that the "threats" are from one side more than another. On the No side there have been thuggish MPs threatening violence (google the charming Iain Davidson), unionist extremists calling for "lists" to be made of Yes voters, let alone the death threats regulalrly recived by Alex Salmond. Let alone some of the more menacing noises being emitted by the Orange Order and ludicrous calls for "partition" of Scotland in the event of a Yes vote. Of course there have been utterly idiotic Yes supporters who have embarrassed the cause too, but I don;lt think you can reasonably make the case that the idiots and threatening knuckle draggers all come fromthe Yes camp. Far from it, in fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Point one - I agree, but perceive an extra depth of nastiness by some of the keyboard warriors purporting to be Nationalists. Point two - I read more than one newspaper and my views of the BBC are that is far from unbiased, but I don't think they are making up stories about death threats? It all depends where you look mate. I GUARANTEE you there has been an equal amount of abuse from both sides, but it depends who's doing the reporting, doesn't it? http://bellacaledonia.org.uk/2014/06/12/spin-and-smear/ http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jun/14/better-together-mistakes-scottish-independence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I don't agree really that the "threats" are from one side more than another. On the No side there have been thuggish MPs threatening violence (google the charming Iain Davidson), unionist extremists calling for "lists" to be made of Yes voters, let alone the death threats regulalrly recived by Alex Salmond. Let alone some of the more menacing noises being emitted by the Orange Order and ludicrous calls for "partition" of Scotland in the event of a Yes vote. Of course there have been utterly idiotic Yes supporters who have embarrassed the cause too, but I don;lt think you can reasonably make the case that the idiots and threatening knuckle draggers all come fromthe Yes camp. Far from it, in fact. I categorically didn't; I said that it was my perception that there was an extra depth of nastiness on one side. No side is blameless - that much is evident. Just to be perfectly clear, I believe ANYONE making threats of violence or death to another because of their political views should be arrested and charged, no matter what side they are on. Too many people hide behind keyboards and say things to others that they wouldn't dare say to them face to face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivo den Bieman Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Am being pushed towards the No camp by the number of absolute zoomers like the cyber nats, and their sheer unadulterated nastiness and inability to allow others to have views different to their own. This rather implied otherwise. Sorry if I misread it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I categorically didn't; I said that it was my perception that there was an extra depth of nastiness on one side. No side is blameless - that much is evident. Just to be perfectly clear, I believe ANYONE making threats of violence or death to another because of their political views should be arrested and charged, no matter what side they are on. Too many people hide behind keyboards and say things to others that they wouldn't dare say to them face to face. Agreed, but that's social media for you. And it can be no way implied that it's more Yes supporters than No. A completely skew whiffed MSM may have something to do with it, I suspect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 This rather implied otherwise. Sorry if I misread it. Perhaps I should have mentioned that I was aware that both sides were guilty, but I do perceive a particular depth of nastiness among some, suggesting that they don't want/allow others to have a view unless it matches theirs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ad Lib Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Have you changed your opinion since the last poll? "Yes": Wee Bully Have you swung from one side to the other since the last poll? "Opinion has not changed.": Wee Bully Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Agreed, but that's social media for you. And it can be no way implied that it's more Yes supporters than No. A completely skew whiffed MSM may have something to do with it, I suspect. I'm not bothered about those vehemently arguing their case, because that's what you do when you believe in something passionately, be it yes or no, but those making threats of violence need to be charged. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Perhaps I should have mentioned that I was aware that both sides were guilty, but I do perceive a particular depth of nastiness among some, suggesting that they don't want/allow others to have a view unless it matches theirs. How would you say this is being perceived? Is it personal experience, or what you have seen or read in the media? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Confidemus Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I'm not bothered about those vehemently arguing their case, because that's what you do when you believe in something passionately, be it yes or no, but those making threats of violence need to be charged. I completely agree mate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 How would you say this is being perceived? Is it personal experience, or what you have seen or read in the media? Just some of my perceptions through the media, conversations in work, and general observation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivo den Bieman Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 Perhaps I should have mentioned that I was aware that both sides were guilty, but I do perceive a particular depth of nastiness among some, suggesting that they don't want/allow others to have a view unless it matches theirs. true enough. I would also like those caught threatening violence charged and hopefully jailed if convicted. It wiz awnly banter is no defence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Audaces Fortuna Juvat Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 true enough. I would also like those caught threatening violence charged and hopefully jailed if convicted. It wiz awnly banter is no defence. Now we're agreeing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ayrmad Posted June 27, 2014 Share Posted June 27, 2014 I'm not bothered about those vehemently arguing their case, because that's what you do when you believe in something passionately, be it yes or no, but those making threats of violence need to be charged. Yes they do but your reasoning for voting NO is not the best use of your democratic vote, you like myself may be required by kids or grandkids to declare how and why you voted in this referendum, I voted for one side because both sides had an idiot element might not appear to be too impressive to them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.