London calling

I’ve forsaken the sun streaming into the lounge to come into the Bateman Command Bunker in the basement to launch an attack on the British Defence Secretary….

I have to confess that I didn’t read down into the detail of Philip Hammond’s latest insult to the Scottish nation which has been systematically leaked for four days now and rolled out across the media, as Hamish McDonnell outlined it would be on Headlines on Radio Scotland on Sunday morning – otherwise known as “my old show”. Sorry, Ken. (You’re making a bloody good fist of it. Have you had your efforts validated by a smear from Foulkes yet?)

I should read on, of course, because I have to take on board what my own government is saying to me and I always profess to be interested in every point of view. But, you know what? It sickens me to hear someone sneer at my country and belittle it in this way.

The gist of the Hammond pre-meditated humiliation of the Scots appears to be that London will retain the ancient Scottish regiments or what is left of them since they were decimated by Unionist governments and they will not fight for the Scots in future (and, under challenge, suddenly changed his mind!)…We won’t have enough money to pay for decent armed forces and we are such a basket case of a country that our own people won’t want to defend it. We are also such a backwater, it seems, with nothing worth defending, that no potential conscripts would bother to take part in a Dad’s Army and would prefer to join up to fight for Glorious Albion.

And this comes from our own government…from the people presenting a positive case for Union…from people who desperately want Scots to stay in Union…from the leadership who regard us as a family of nations united in the greatest union in the history of civilisation.

I know it’s propaganda and I know its purpose just as you do…to make people feel they are exposed, insignificant, dependent and unworthy so they will be grateful to a generous overlord and know their place – firmly embedded in union. (Seems to be working).

But my question is: Where is the Unionist reaction from proud Scots to this scornful, inaccurate drivel?

I have always accepted the concept of what I like to call Principled Unionism and I believe to this day that there is a strong case for two separate countries joining together as equals in a common interest. But is that what Hammond is outlining? Does that read to you like a dialogue of equals displaying respect and reasonable response to a legitimate desire for self-government?

I know he aims this mainly at defeating nationalists but I am truly intrigued to know what Scottish Unionists make of this? Is it their vision of their country? Is Scotland really such a third world basket case that they agree able-bodied Scots would rather serve in the British forces than the Scottish? Do they think that Salmond is such a charlatan that he would fail to provide the very basic personnel and equipment our country needs for its defence needs?

I know Unionists don’t want independence and are happy to see the Salmond arguments defeated – that all makes sense to me. But are Scottish Unionists so craven, so nationalistically comatose that they turn their eyes away when a crude belittling caricature of their nation is broadcast in their name? Does Scotland mean so little to them that they can’t find their voice to defend her honour? Is it asking too much that just one of them steps forward and says: “Hold on, London. I believe in Union but not at the expense of Scotland’s dignity. By all means argue the British Army is a better career option and will always attract young Scots, but don’t goad us with childish over-simplification and offensive implications about our national worth, our history and belief in Scotland. Focus your attacks on Salmond, not on Scotland, for what you risk is the wrath of a nation. Don’t take us for granted – there are a large number of Undecideds out there who need little encouragement to turn away from Westminster politics. All you do with this withering propaganda is confirm in their mind the stereotype of metropolitan arrogance as something they would love to be rid of.”

So where are you, you Unionists? Where is your voice? Does Hammond speak for you? Is this stunted cartoon depiction of Scotland what you believe? Would your forefathers nod sagely at Hammond’s witterings? Is this what the Highland battalions fought for over the centuries of Union? And the Argylls or the KOSB, my late Dad’s regiment?

Or is it time that real Scottish Unionists with intelligence and knowledge of their country’s history and culture, told these London-centric buffoons to pipe down as they are giving the game away…that what is revealed by Hammond – and by Osbourne and Balls over sterling – is that they know little of our country, take it for granted and find it too easy to casually insult us because they really do regard us as less than a nation? Taken together, they present, to my mind at any rate, a paternalistic brotherhood offering to bring us to our senses and rid ourselves of overblown notions of an importance our status and history simply doesn’t warrant.

(I will return in future to this because it’s exactly what the British Government’s legal advice says).

If this assault on national self-respect continues without objection by compliant Unionists, they will vote No with shame on their shoulders. They will be recorded  by history as the Unionists without the guts to stand up for Scotland even as they opposed independence. Vote No, if you must…it is your right…but don’t do so meekly with the jeers of British supremacists ringing in our nation’s ears. Stand up to them first and explain why you make the choice you do. Presumably you make your choice for Scotland…it’s just that, to the rest of us, it doesn’t sound like it. It sounds like you’re being led by a braying cabal of nation-taunters and haven’t the nerve to answer back.

Facebooktwittergoogle_plusredditpinterestlinkedinmailby feather

0 thoughts on “London calling

  1. Well done. A scathing and accurate denunciation of the weaknesses inherent in ‘Scottish’ Unionism.

  2. “Sir” George Robertson, once (can you actually believe it!) head of NATO doesn’t think Scotland has anything of worth. NO culture or language that would differentiate us from the rest of the UK, so nothing worth defending really. These “Brits” are what will win us our country back.

    None of them wil speak up for Scotland, because to do so might jeopardise their own position or career. Scotland really doesn’t matter to them, only their UK gravy train matters, so any belittling of Scotland is acceptable to maintain their status quo.

  3. Succinctly put, Dr Bateman. Well done. Very well done. Keep up the great work!

  4. “It sounds like you’re being led by a braying cabal of nation-taunters and haven’t the nerve answer back.”

    Priceless…and will be borrowed,thanks Derek

  5. I suspect you’re asking for something that will never come, Derek.

    People don’t arrive at the position of supporting Scotland’s membership of the union through a rational thought process. They don’t use logic to decide that they think Scotland is better off in the union than as an independent nation with all the powers of a normal country. It is a belief. It is dogmatic. And like any other belief system, its proponents retain that belief by ignoring evidence that exposes the holes in their dogma.

    It would seem reasonable for Scots of any shade to take offence when their country is being talked down like this, but we’re not dealing with reasonable people here. Their belief must be absolute. Once they start questioning things their “own side” is saying, then that belief stops being absolute. Then they start noticing other problems with the arguments being put forward by their fellow unionists. Before you know it, they’ve stopped being a believer and they start using reason. Once that happens, they’re just a small step away from being a Yes.

    So to stop that happening, they instead just go along with it, convincing themselves that it doesn’t stop them being a “proud Scot”.

    • Spot on. A visit to Better Together facebook page shows that in spades! Hence the blocking of reasoned debate and the increasingly angry comments.
      Information is power, there’s no doubt about that.

      • Kevin McKenna’s transition from a dyed-in-the-wool unionist (even comparing Scotland to North Korea, if I remember correctly) to a full-on supporter of independence (even coming to the march in September, I believe), is a perfect example. A crack opened up in his belief in the union, and those sort of cracks are akin to a crack in the window of a submarine.

  6. .. a searingly honest deconstruction of the failing unionist project: “nationalistically comatose”…love it!

  7. It was well expected from a P45 minister. It’s what they don’t say that worries; carriers without planes-seems the (as yet to be announced) plan is for those hellish drones (murder from afar, without conscience). I think of Stirling Council (hide the Saltire in case it causes offence) when you speak of the shame that those who do down their country and nation (Scotland a Nation, UK a State- and what a state!). Look forward as always to your next contribution, thanks.

  8. Young Scots join the’ UK Armed Forces’ because there’s no other choice ( apart from the Foreign Legion).
    I’d have joined a Scottish based squadron if it had been available. Like thousands of others I went ‘doon sooth’ for training and put up with the usual ‘porridge wog’, ‘sweaty sock’, ‘jock twat’ etc taunts. We gave as good as we got but it was usually a couple of us against the rest of the squadron.
    Scots ( like Fijians etc) can still enroll for the rUK military after independence if it’s illegal wars and glory that they’re after. Most will opt to join the Scottish Forces as defence of your own country is far more fulfilling than killing some foreigners overseas somewhere. Foreigners who are no threat to us.

    • Well said Jock. I’m way too old now but whilst I never truly fancied the UK forces as a youngster, I would have jumped at the chance to serve my own country. I still would if there was a Home Guard for old knackers nudging 50 in the new Scotland!

  9. Of unionist Scots – ‘stand up to them first and explain why you make the choice you do’. No, don’t bother, let’s see you for the cowards, traitors and money-grubbers that you really are.

  10. Derek, this article, and particularly the final paragraph, should be required reading for anyone leaning towards or planning to vote No. In fact, it should be required reading for everyone. Thanks for this excellent blog!

  11. The same spineless Unionists will be trying to cash in on the ‘glory’ of the Commonwealth Games next year.
    But they will be honouring nations which have become Independent of Britain, and did so by expressing their nationalism and belief in self-government. Flying symbols of their individuality as nations. Competing for their countries.
    What from our Unionists. Those who believe Independence is a virus, and publicly declared that. How else does a country become Independent except through some self belief, a national pride.
    The say the only national pride we should show is in Britain, because that is what the Union is; Britain.
    On the international stage, you are either a country or you are not. The United States is one country at International events, it doesn’t compete as 52 different states.
    If the Unionists truly believe in the Union, they cannot support Scotland at the Games( or Wales or Northern Ireland, or England).
    Who are they going to get to present the medals, if there is a Scotland athlete? It would be rank hypocrisy for any Unionist politician to do this. Of course rank hypocrisy is standard among the we-are-British politicians and media(Scotland branch).

  12. Derek,
    Do you think you will be asked on to a future BBC Question Time? We’d love that!

  13. I’ve spent a fair chunk of time on a number of sites in the past two years. I have to say I’m struggling to think of any conversation I’ve had with a unionist in that period who has had anything good to say about Scotland’s ability to survive on its own merits, the Scottish government or pertinent points that independence supporters may have in their favour. In fact they tend to be religiously following the Hammond/Westminster bible. I include ‘proud Scots’ unionists in that description. You know, the ones who right up front tell you how proud and patriotic they are, right before they launch into how uniquely weak and incapable their homeland is of surmounting any difficulty it may encounter.

    Much like yourself I do believe there are ‘principled’ unionists out there, its a bit like looking for bigfoot though. The circumstantial evidence for their existence is compelling, but no one has hard physical proof or clear images. At this point you have to ask, just how principled can you be and let the likes of a Hammond or Moore insult your homeland on an ongoing basis without reply? This has been week in, week out hammering for some time now, but most especially since 2011. The silence of these principled unionists has been deafening whenever there’s been a ministerial release or some select committee report issued from Westminster. If they exist at all its time for them to stand up and be counted even for the sake of their own arguments.

  14. Is it in Westminster’s power to say what will happen to Scottish battalions? It may be an anachronism but is not the QUEEN the Commander-in-Chief of the UK forces and will have an opinion on Scotland retaining caps and badges in an Independent country of which she will still be Queen?

  15. The Unionist lack of respect for Scotland was shown when Alex Salmond, as First Minister, went to the United States in April for the celebration and recognition of Scottish heritage there.
    It was as if he hadn’t gone. Apart from a BBC Scotland ‘journalist’ visiting a few weeks before to try to illicit negative comments from US officials, asking repeatedly if there would be bad feeling shown to Scotland over the release of Magrahi, and would it have consequences when the FM was there. The officials wouldn’t bite on that.
    Because of the almost complete lack of coverage, I contacted the FM asking, partly jokingly, if he’d had a good trip because the media hadn’t reported it. (There was the ovbious negative stuff from Labour and reported in the media of the cost).
    I received an itinerary of his trip. There were many engagements, lectures, meetings; all concerning improving trade and highlighting the contribution Scotland had made to US history. Explaining the case for Independence. It was a visit of substance.
    The media of any other country would, with some pride, have covered the discussions, the lectures at Princeton, the trade discussions. The crass, craven, small-minded, bitterness of the Unionist press wouldn’t allow them to raise themselves up and see what it meant for Scotland. It might have made Alex Salmond look good.
    The spineless, useless media stayed silent.

  16. Unionist politicians in Scotland put party before country, every time its that simple.

  17. SCEED300 Actually you’ve got something there, in this cultureless society maybe we should start something ourselves. Say a small award ceremony ,held in Edinburgh every year( but not in summer too many folk head there for KrispyKreme) ,get a few well known faces , Nigel Farage,Nick Griffen,David Starkey.They’ll show us real British culture that will make Lord Robertson proud of us. We could promote the ceremony as the Award for Real Scots Ethos or ARSE for short.This would surely be welcome by all those ‘really proud to be Scottish’ Unionsts .
    I can already picture lord Robertson in his tartan trews ,evening jacket and bow tie ,being photographed proudly ,saying “How proud I am to be the first recipient of the ARSE award,especially to have been awarded this honour by my peers, I know many of my colleagues would be pleased to receive the same recognition “

  18. Readers may wish to try a game of Unionist but-spotting. It has nothing to do with bare backsides. Anyone who, from a Unionist or British nationalist position, claims to have Scotland’s interests at heart will start their argument thusly:

    “now, I’m as proud a Scot as anyone else…, but – and then comes the sting.

    Seasoned players may like to bet on the number of seconds before the ‘but’ appears.

  19. Very cutely put PQs; I like the concept of the ARSE, but feel it would be more truly Scottish if it was the ERSE Award!

  20. Excellent again Derek, thank you. It just goes on and on and It is indeed a wonder that a nation can be so cowed that it accepts such insults, or so one would be led to believe by the media. I think it’s way past time for some official anger.

  21. Unionists, certainly the more die hard ones, are generally not interested in Scotland. They latch on to all the cliches that the UK media expounds about what happens here. They will go on about deep fried mars bars and dismiss independence supporters as Bravehearts. They pretend to be culturally sophisticated and cosmopolitan, but actually just parrot what others say about Scotland. They see London as their capital city, not Edinburgh. To be a Scottish Unionist you have by definition to be against Scottish self government, certainly independence. This essentially means that you can not allow Scottish identity to get too powerful (yikes don’t look at the census results!), you teach as little Scottish history as possible, you deny that there is any such thing as Scottish culture (George Robertson), and you have to disparage anyone who is politically positive about Scotland’s potential (which is mostly why Salmond gets so much abuse in particular). I genuinely feel that there is a element of Unionism here which despises Scotland. They like being part of what they still see as a world power. Scottish Unionism is in many cases just another form of British nationalism.

  22. Brilliant article Derek. Any chance of you e-mailing copies to the likes of Alan Cochrane, Severin Carrell, Alistair Darling and the two LibDumplings Alastair Carmichael and Danny Alexander, to name but five? On second thoughts, don’t waste your time, it would be like feeding caviar to pigs.

  23. You must feel much better after that Derek, by God I do. I wish I could craft words like you. Well done. I am going to copy and paste this on to the DT comments pages. I bet they take it down.

  24. Don’t want to steal your thunder Derek but haven’t the Westminster mandarins produced a white paper which claims that there never was any union between equals but a takeover of Scotland by England.
    What union ?
    That is certainly the attitude shown by most of the London establishment.

  25. macgilleleabhar

    Hi Derek. Thanks for giving your time and skill in writing this blog.
    Am I alone in thinking that these London politicians are trying to goad us into voting Yes?
    I ask this because each time I read newspaper articles reporting speeches by Hammond etc. I soothe my anger by visualizing a ballot paper with a box marked “Yes” complete with my mark on it. Then I visualize Alec Salmond on Sept 19th 2014 with the biggest grin imaginable!
    It’s good therapy.

  26. I’m certain that Principled Unionism exists, but they’re the type who are pushing for massive social change within the UK itself (usually a Federal system), so I’m not sure what their response would be to Hammond’s remarks – mostly because the UK defence system right now is appallingly weak. We have hundreds of ships, thousands of soldiers, and tons of military hardware spread out to the point of uselessness across multiple theatres, to the point where a Russian fleet can shelter at Rosyth without British navy presence for THREE DAYS until a battered soon-to-be-decommissioned boat was sent up from Portsmouth. Right now, not only is Scotland laughably incapable of protecting itself, the UK itself is – after all, if Scotland is part of the UK, then that means the UK didn’t have any means of intercepting and assisting the Russian ships in their own waters, only a few miles from the mainland. That reflects abominably on the UK’s capabilities.

    That, I think, is the biggest irony regarding Hammond: he’s making pronouncements about the inability of the Scots to protect themselves while blissfully ignoring the very real question of whether the UK is in ANY position to judge which country is capable of self-defence. It’s misdirection, a load of bluster about the supposed might of the UK war machine which cannot even outfit its soldiers in basic kit and leaves its own homeland practically unguarded.

  27. As usual Derek, an excellent cutting and restrainingly emotional response to the Westminster drivel. God help us if we vote no next year.

  28. A bonny bit of writing Mr Bateman. Pleasure to read it and very encouraging to folk like us who are astonished at the patronising and threatening nature of the NO campaign. Westminster politicians! The neighbours from hell more like.

    Scotland has not been ‘extinguished’ as written in 1707 and with your help Scotland’s voice shall be heard.

  29. If these Unionists are going to come over all aggressive now, does that mean I can rule out being love bombed by Lamont and Baillie???

  30. There are 54 reasons why Scotland can manage it’s own affairs. Its called the commonwealth. 54 completely independent nations that for some reason decided to keep the Queen, and for a certain period of time, keep the pound. Though most left the sterling zone by 1971. Somehow these nations not only thrived but were able to form armies and navies, and in some cases, develop these into forces that would make the UK armed forces look positively anaemic. (though that’s not too hard to do these days) We could talk about the republic of Ireland, who also saw the UK “keep” its regiments. Well they say keep, but what they kept was the name. Ireland would do away with the monarchy by 1935 and would leave the commonwealth by 1949. It would still keep using sterling until 1971 when sterling became in essence a fiat currency. In other words Ireland like the commonwealth of nations managed to do all the things, that Osborne, Cameron, Hammond and Better together claim that Scotland can’t do.

    Why don’t they defend Scotland from these attacks? It was mostly what turned me from a No, Don’t Know, Hell Yes! voter in the space of 1 year. My thinking, (yes I have that condition were I think for myself) was that if you have to lie to that extent, knowing it to be a lie, then something has gone seriously wrong somewhere. Maybe its a lack of perspective? The union is 300yrs old after all. Maybe its as Colin Kidd said in Union & Unionisms, that the success of the Union from the 30’s til the time of thatcher, was to become so banal that no one bothered to look at it, let alone question it. Or is it perhaps fear? A fear that if you talk Scotland up, Scots might just think that although the Union has done well for us, its perhaps time to leave. So their decision to look away is down to them fearing change more than the traducing of their own country ? If it is that, then that makes them truly wretched in my books.

    Today there was another Tory talking about Scotland. Ruth Davidson, leader of the Scottish Conservatives. Today she called on English Tories to talk up the benefits of Union to Scotland. This is the same woman who went before the English Tories and told them how 80% of Scots contributed nothing to the economy. Thats not 80% of voters, that’s 80% of the population of Scotland, men, women and children. The Tories have been telling themselves this hoary old bromide for the best part of 30 yrs, as a way of explaining away the slow and no so unusual death of their party in Scotland.
    So here she is again, with the same set of Tories and without the slightest sense of irony appeals to a party to appeal to a nation that she herself had shamelessly attacked.

    To vote no is your right, but to do so while hiding behind a bully who is picking on your own people? Call the UK whatever you like at that point, but never call it united.

  31. Incisive analyses as ever.
    However, on a lighter note, I have just come in after watching “Sunshine on Leith” at the local cinema in Burton on Trent.
    If anyone south of the border sees this film and doubts the reality of a separate, vibrant, distinctive, humourous, diverse and caring culture existing and thriving north of the border then they can only be sad, insular and possibly deranged Mail or Telegraph readers.
    For those of us who agonize over the naysayers derisive comments in the media we should occasionally remember that the vast majority of people remain ambivalent or uninterested in the day to day “banter” of these blogs and it is, hopefully, through the media of film and drama rather than newsprint that many undecideds opinions will be swayed towards the ‘righteous’ path. .
    At any rate, I have a couple of English friends who watched along with us and they almost wish they were Scottish this evening, having enjoyed it so much
    No votes this time, but perhaps highlighting a genuine and positive response to our ‘separatism’ in contrast to the fear,antipathy and ignorance fueled by Westminster propaganda and deceit.
    The Proclaimers music could prove to be a most valuable motivator for independence.

  32. Jings, Derek, it’s a testament to your professionalism that your broadcasts didn’t reveal your real, really.

    Anyhoo, I’m a wee bit disapppointed (but hardly surprised) to see you reducing the level of debate to ‘Did you spill my pint?’ chippiness.

    Speaking as somebody who believes Scotland’s future is best served within the UK I’d just like to say that I consider Scotland confident enough to brush off anything anybody says about it. I have enough faith in Scotland’s dignity not to be too worried about what a Tory says about it and don’t think it necessary to rush out to defend its honour.

    But then again I believe Scotland is strong enough to stand up for itself in the UK.

    I do wish those who support separation shared my confidence in my country.

    • “I have enough faith in Scotland’s dignity not to be too worried about what a Tory says about it”

      The article isn’t about ‘A’ Tory, Liberal, Labour – it’s about those representing Scottish constituencies.

      I can understand politicians from elsewhere standing up for their neck of the woods, fight their corner – it’s why they were elected. So I can understand why Philip Hammond et al come out with the likes of yesterday’s nonsense propaganda.

      What bothers me is when politicians representing Scottish constituencies, who are meant to represent us, fight our corner, get the best deal etc seem to be not just OK with, but even pleased to inform us, and worse, the rest of the UK, how hopeless we are.

      The leader, in the Scottish Parliament, of a political party went south last year to their UK conference and announced (standing up for Scotland) that only 12% of Scots made a net contribution to the national economy – forgetting? to mention that if you applied the same criteria to the rUK you would come up with much the same figure. (for a proper demolition job see here - This Scottish representative deliberately set out to misrepresent and demean her own country – and seemed pleased to do so.


      • The only folk who are saying Scotland is hopeless are SNP politicians who claim we are so feeble we can’t stand up for ourselves within the UK.

        It’s pathetic and I really wish they would stop talking their country down – of course we are not too wee or too stupid to be part of the UK.

      • The SNP are talking Scotland down? You are the very definition of the term cognitive bias. The SNP continually talk of Scotland’s ability to stand on its own two feet with or without the Union. They feel that Scotland is being held back by the Union & at times actively attacked through idiotic policies and statements. Thats a hundred miles away from saying Scotland is hopeless.

        You say Scotland and stand on its own within the Union? The next time anyone from the conservative party, the lib-dems or indeed labour talk again of Scotland learned helplessness from feeding itself to defending itself, I expect to see you leading the charge to refute them.

  33. Hi Derek dont know if you caught GMS this morning and the Alistair Darling interview, another car crash from Darling whilst under moderate questioning. It was the failure of Gary Robertson to press Darling on the issue of the Scottish bank bailout scare, a big favourite of unionists, but now widely discredited, which was telling. Why is the BBC in Scotland not interested in nailing this lie? There was also an opportunity to ask Darling about his estimate of 2bn barrels of oil reserves nonsense, but no.
    Is it all down to poor resources and research, or are they feart of upsetting those in control at PQ.

  34. Those who say Scotland is better off staying in the Union so remind me of a friend I have who for years stayed with a partner who constantly belittled her. She had no self confidence and just couldn’t conceive of the idea that she would be capable of living on her own. That’s what being in an unequal relationship does. (She eventually made the break and although it took a while she’s now happy and confident again). Great blog Derek, makes my day!

  35. A good reply from MrG above – answering my point succinctly and with devastating logic.

    I realise now how I have been misled by those advocating independence and will rethink my position.

  36. “Or is it time that real Scottish Unionists with intelligence and knowledge of their country’s history and culture,…”

    Well there’s your problem right there – if you were Scottish, and in possession of intelligence, and a knowledge of your country’s history and culture, you wouldn’t be a Unionist. You just wouldn’t. There simply is no argument, from Scotland’s point of view, which could possibly persuade a critical thinker of the benefits of the continuation of such an arrangement. It could only ever be persuasive from the English point of view. That is why we are seeing only erroneous and scaremongering ones – they simply don’t have any better arguments.

  37. Interestingly, while clearly a very long way from supporting Independence, the (UK) Defence Committee had already poured scorn over many of the UK Government “headline ideas” systematically leaked ( see published 11 September 2013.

    The extract below might also show that since an Independent Scotland does not change the level of threats to defence and security to rUK, then perhaps we will not have so many things that we need to be defended from. Particularly as they also point out: Scotland would have direct control of 1/12 of the MoD assets (and the supply of money to keep them running).

    Implications for the security of the remainder of the United Kingdom

    154. From a defence perspective, setting aside the serious questions which would arise regarding the future of the nuclear deterrent, Scottish independence would also result in the remainder of the UK facing the loss of vital personnel, bases and equipment, representing as much one twelfth of current assets. There would be a consequent loss of capability, particularly in the short term. The rUK Government would face a difficult decision about how to manage this shortfall when the financial resources available to do so would be reduced to a similar degree. This raises the very real prospect that the rUK would face the same level of threats to its defence and security as the UK faces today, but with Armed Forces which were less capable and resilient.

  38. Scotland has stood up for itself in the UK, and the people who did the standing are the SNP, who have now run rings round the London toffs and gained the referendum for Scotland that they screeched at us we were not legally permitted to have. The London bully boys have been secured back in their box. The days of London telling Scotland what to do are gone forever thanks to the SNP.
    In 1995, Robertson said that “Devolution will kill Nationalism stone dead” while he was Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland. This quote was designed to assuage fears that devolution would provide a greater platform for the Scottish National Party (SNP). Robertson’s quote has been frequently recalled, after the SNP won the Scottish Parliament elections with a massive landslide in 2011.
    Well Georgie boy you were detached from reality then as you are now. Your appearance at Abertay University to debate with Stewart Hosie was proof if we needed it just how degenerate your mind is. ( view here
    You claimed to these students that you were the leader of the Labour party in Scotland, that was a lie you were the secretary.
    You claimed that the SLAB alliance abolished bridge tolls another lie.
    But you saved your most disgusting lie until near the end, when comparing Scotland to the Catalans and Flemish independence movements you sneered that they have a language and culture and that Scotland has non of that. What a revolting man you are. No wonder the students voted overwhelmingly in favour of the proposition. Overturning a pre debate vote against.Keep it coming Georgie boy you are a hero in the Yes camp.
    George Robertson is typical of the unionist politicians who have been riding the Scottish gravy train down to London for 3 centuries. Who can forget the “feeble fifty” Labour MPs who sat on their greedy hands whilst Thatcher ripped in to Scotland. The only time they raised their voice in anger was when they abolished Strathclyde region that famous Labour created Labour fiefdom.
    So Grahamski GIRUY.

  39. The New Lab bloke posting from Falkirk demonstrates that Irony is alive and well and scraping a living in Falkirk, home base of Eric Joyce, and Ed M’s favourite location in Scotland.

Leave a Reply