Jump to content

British Nationalist Media Hysteria re #ScotRef


Guest

Recommended Posts

Slightly off-topic but one of British nationalism's biggest buffoons is to become an immigrant. Good riddance to the bag of bile.
 


Hungary of all places. They do hate refugees though so fair play.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 230
  • Created
  • Last Reply

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/782658/london-terror-atack-snp-minister-meltdown-holyrood-suspension

Express were right on it yesterday using yesterday's events to have a dig at the SNP.

Horrible shower.

In the interests of balance, the likes of Wings and Peter Bell were having a fucking nightmare on Twitter yesterday after Parliament was suspended for the day.

Heads gone reactions like that do absolutely f**k all positive for the independence cause. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Karl Fletcher said:

http://www.express.co.uk/news/uk/782658/london-terror-atack-snp-minister-meltdown-holyrood-suspension

Express were right on it yesterday using yesterday's events to have a dig at the SNP.

Horrible shower.

In the interests of balance, the likes of Wings and Peter Bell were having a fucking nightmare on Twitter yesterday after Parliament was suspended for the day.

Heads gone reactions like that do absolutely f**k all positive for the independence cause. 

Why the f**k should Scotland suspend her parliament because of an incident that happened in London?
Remember, it didnae happen in Westminster parliament, it happened nearby.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In the end they were right to suspend parliament but, the language of some in the media, Andrew Fucking Neil especially was reprehensible.

 

As was Murdo, Ruth and Kez tweeting it should be stopped after the business committee agreed to continue and while they met again.

 

Murdo raising a Point of Order made my skin crawl, vermin.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

In the end they were right to suspend parliament but, the language of some in the media, Andrew Fucking Neil especially was reprehensible.

 

As was Murdo, Ruth and Kez tweeting it should be stopped after the business committee agreed to continue and while they met again.

 

Murdo raising a Point of Order made my skin crawl, vermin.

 

 

Why?

The incident in London didnae take place in parliament.
It happened nearby.

Why did we no suspend parliaments in the UK when the atrocities happened in Paris and Berlin and elsewhere.
Efter a' we're still all part of the EU.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Wee Willie said:

Why?

The incident in London didnae take place in parliament.
It happened nearby.

Why did we no suspend parliaments in the UK when the atrocities happened in Paris and Berlin and elsewhere.
Efter a' we're still all part of the EU.

 

 

Because the motives of the attacker weren't immediately apparent and an attack on Westminster could've been part of a coordinated attack on other parliamentary bodies? In the interests of safety at the very least it was the sensible thing to do. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Wee Willie said:

Why?

The incident in London didnae take place in parliament.
It happened nearby.

Why did we no suspend parliaments in the UK when the atrocities happened in Paris and Berlin and elsewhere.
Efter a' we're still all part of the EU.

 

Although it's not really the point, part of the incident did happen within the parliamentary complex.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Wee Willie said:

Why?

The incident in London didnae take place in parliament.
It happened nearby.

Why did we no suspend parliaments in the UK when the atrocities happened in Paris and Berlin and elsewhere.
Efter a' we're still all part of the EU.

 

Because like it or not, whether it was appropriate or not, having 2/3rds or more of the chamber checking twitter and messaging their pals to see if they're alright is not conducive to a well ordered or meaningful debate.

My preference would have been for it to continue but, that would have left any result wide open for criticism, rightly or wrongly. And we need to fucking nail this to the wall this time, no room for error and a vote in favour on Tuesday will do fine.

Will be interesting/vomit inducing to see who the first is to say "after everything that has happened over the last week, now is not the time to be causing further divisions, when in the face of terror we must all be pulling together." etc

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, NotThePars said:

 

Because the motives of the attacker weren't immediately apparent and an attack on Westminster could've been part of a coordinated attack on other parliamentary bodies? In the interests of safety at the very least it was the sensible thing to do. 

No.  In the interests of safety, and with no specific intelligence of any threat to HR the safest thing to do is to keep people in the chamber and continue as normal .

Not everyone run outside and try calling the WM switchboard and do interviews with scared faces on and f**k all information. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regardless of the debate that was happening, it is the policy of Holyrood to suspend debates in these situations. For a number of reasons, including the fact that theres a chance that they could have come under attack too (regardless of the liklihood its the general policy until the exact situation is known). Also because theres no chance of a debate when people have their minds elsewhere as is natural.

I was rather keen to see the votes cast yesterday, but there's absolutely no call for complaint in this case.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

No.  In the interests of safety, and with no specific intelligence of any threat to HR the safest thing to do is to keep people in the chamber and continue as normal .

Not everyone run outside and try calling the WM switchboard and do interviews with scared faces on and f**k all information. 

 

Fair enough. The other reason to suspend it, and what's been borne out in the media despite it being suspended, is that it can be easily be used as ammunition against the SNP and the independence campaign if we're seen to carry on oblivious to the suffering of our fellow Britons.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Londonwell said:

Although it's not really the point, part of the incident did happen within the parliamentary complex.

 

20 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

Because like it or not, whether it was appropriate or not, having 2/3rds or more of the chamber checking twitter and messaging their pals to see if they're alright is not conducive to a well ordered or meaningful debate.

My preference would have been for it to continue but, that would have left any result wide open for criticism, rightly or wrongly. And we need to fucking nail this to the wall this time, no room for error and a vote in favour on Tuesday will do fine.

Will be interesting/vomit inducing to see who the first is to say "after everything that has happened over the last week, now is not the time to be causing further divisions, whe in the face of terror we must all be pulling together." etc

 

18 minutes ago, williemillersmoustache said:

No.  In the interests of safety, and with no specific intelligence of any threat to HR the safest thing to do is to keep people in the chamber and continue as normal .

Not everyone run outside and try calling the WM switchboard and do interviews with scared faces on and f**k all information. 

 

14 minutes ago, SodoffBaldrick said:

Regardless of the debate that was happening, it is the policy of Holyrood to suspend debates in these situations. For a number of reasons, including the fact that theres a chance that they could have come under attack too (regardless of the liklihood its the general policy until the exact situation is known). Also because theres no chance of a debate when people have their minds elsewhere as is natural.

I was rather keen to see the votes cast yesterday, but there's absolutely no call for complaint in this case.

Fair do's tae the lot of ye but if the vote had gone our way in 2014 then London Westminster would be in a foreign country.
Would ye still expect a Scottish Parliament to be suspended.

On the other hand dae ye think that the UK Parliament would be suspended if an incident occurred near the Scottish Parliament?

it is the policy of Holyrood to suspend debates in these situations.
If that is true then why the uncertainty in parliament as to suspend or no?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Wee Willie said:

 

 

 

Fair do's tae the lot of ye but if the vote had gone our way in 2014 then London Westminster would be in a foreign country.
Would ye still expect a Scottish Parliament to be suspended.

On the other hand dae ye think that the UK Parliament would be suspended if an incident occurred near the Scottish Parliament?

it is the policy of Holyrood to suspend debates in these situations.
If that is true then why the uncertainty in parliament as to suspend or no?

Whether Westminster would do similar is irrelevant. For the reasons already made it was the right decision.

The point that if we voted yes in 2014 is also irrelevant because well we didn't. 

I've no idea why you've got a problem with this. The debate and vote will go ahead next week. Sometimes other more important events over shadow things. MSP's from across the chamber had friends and colleagues caught up in yesterday's incident.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, SodoffBaldrick said:

Not sure I'm afraid. Big Alec was on the radio last night saying that its exactly what should happen as it was policy. I've been scouring the parliment website for anything to back this up, but can't.

That's what puzzles me.
If it is policy tae suspend then why uncertainty in Holyrood.

28 minutes ago, NotThePars said:

 

Fair enough. The other reason to suspend it, and what's been borne out in the media despite it being suspended, is that it can be easily be used as ammunition against the SNP and the independence campaign if we're seen to carry on oblivious to the suffering of our fellow Britons.

I suppose that makes sense but call me a cynic.
Somehow I cannae see (if the situation was reversed) T. May standing up in the UK Parliament and saying we will suspend parliament to show solidarity with our Scottish friends.

12 minutes ago, Londonwell said:

Whether Westminster would do similar is irrelevant. For the reasons already made it was the right decision.

The point that if we voted yes in 2014 is also irrelevant because well we didn't. 

I've no idea why you've got a problem with this. The debate and vote will go ahead next week. Sometimes other more important events over shadow things. MSP's from across the chamber had friends and colleagues caught up in yesterday's incident.

I don't have a problem but I like tae shit stir at times and this is one of the times.
I feel uncomfortable when all the P&Bers are singing frae the same hymn sheet.
Ergo I'll sing a different song.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Wee Willie said:

I don't have a problem but I like tae shit stir at times and this is one of the times.
I feel uncomfortable when all the P&Bers are singing frae the same hymn sheet.
Ergo I'll sing a different song.

I'm sure you're a decent guy but maybe choose your oportunities to 'stir shit' more wisely than a terror attack on our fellow citizens. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fair do's tae the lot of ye but if the vote had gone our way in 2014 then London Westminster would be in a foreign country.
Would ye still expect a Scottish Parliament to be suspended.
On the other hand dae ye think that the UK Parliament would be suspended if an incident occurred near the Scottish Parliament?
it is the policy of Holyrood to suspend debates in these situations.
If that is true then why the uncertainty in parliament as to suspend or no?

Willie, I like you as a poster and you are never scared to nail your colours to the mast.
But, in this case I think you are completely wrong.

"If we had voted yes in 2014........."
If my auntie had baws, she'd be my uncle.

The facts as known at the time were that there was an attempted attack at one of the seats of power in the U.K., it's only sensible that business is suspended elsewhere until the full facts were known.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, Londonwell said:

I'm sure you're a decent guy but maybe choose your oportunities to 'stir shit' more wisely than a terror attack on our fellow citizens. 

point taken but it's just the hypocrisy that gets tae me.
If you'll pardon the expression, but it's the shit that's spouted by some that is OTT
It was posted earlier about some silly c**t saying that Mrs Windsor was only half a mile away from the incident.
And some mathematical genius posted that if the terrorist had a blade half a mile long then she would be in trouble.
My kind of guy.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...