So they were not , on mass( what all 20 of them), physically attacking people who were at a peaceful rally. Ps the telegraph has been caught out "bending" the truth a lot lately
And have you taken a poll to prove otherwise? Or is it a case of what you think is all that matters? Most people you know? How many is that then?
no, i haven't taken a poll. however i wasn't making any statements such as yourself, saying what, and to quote you directly "the vast majority who participated" thought
how can you say "the vast majority who participated were enthused about taking part in a historic event" without polling them or asking them?
You would think the streets had been running with blood the way you are going on.
i woudn't, no
is that what you really think? if that's the view of someone supporting independence and that's typical of the type of things people supporting independence think, then that's alarming
OK, where is the proof that this overwhelming negativity has caused any long running problems in Scotland? What evidence do you have of unrest, of rioting in the streets, of communities ripped apart and the negative reactions you mention?
i never mentioned any of those kind of things. have a google for news if you think those things happened
Perhaps I should spell it out for you . Neo nazi thugs attack peaceful rally attacking young adults including young girls and show the vicious face of British nstionalism
the simple fact of the matter is that if people didn't push for, promote and campaign for the referendum and it never took place, then those things wouldn't have happened, would they?
Only thugs attack people because they hold a view different to them
As we saw. Reasonable people engage in dialogue. Of course if you have problems stringing three words together then maybe violence is your only way
and as a result of the referendum, which ultimately came from, was supported and promoted by those seeking independence, it brought out all this negativity
so in your analogy if someone exercises their democratic right to argue for something you have the right to react violently if you don't like it. Lovely. No wonder you are defending the neo nazis who stormed George Square.
wrong again. that's not my analogy at all
furthermore i'm not defending any of the negativity that came from the referendum
it's concerning how people can misunderstand such simple words
Except only one side was responsible , the Union Jack waving, nazi salute giving, Rule Britannia singing , unionists.
wrong again. as has been mentioned a few times already on the thread, the side responsible is the side who campaigned for, and got the referendum in the first place, as they wanted independence
if the referendum didn't take place, all the violence and negativity as a result of the referendum wouldn't have happened would it?
Lol the people who did not vote did not care enough about saving the union to turn up and vote. Do you dispute this?
the people who did not vote did not wish independence enough to bother voting
only a minority of people who could vote, did so for independence, yet all this negativity happened as a result of the wishes of independence supporters
and it's that negativity we should avoid by not having another referendum for a very long time
wrong again. as has been mentioned a few times already on the thread, the side responsible is the side who campaigned for, and got the referendum in the first place, as they wanted independence
if the referendum didn't take place, all the violence and negativity as a result of the referendum wouldn't have happened would it?
have a think about it. it's really simple
What you are implying is that the Unionists involved are Neanderthals who can't help their violent tendencies.
The other side of the coin seems to be the same hysteria and rhetoric from the SNP and their followers.
Somewhere in the middle lies the truth.
That is the lazy answer. The SNP has run a positive campaign while again the unionist parties have adopted fear as their strategy. You just have to look at the campaign posters to see that.
the people who did not vote did not wish independence enough to bother voting
only a minority of people who could vote, did so for independence, yet all this negativity happened as a result of the wishes of independence supporters
and it's that negativity we should avoid by not having another referendum for a very long time
You are failing to grasp simple concepts here.
In any vote only the people who voted count.
Having an opposing view to you is not negativity
Trying to stifle your political opponents views through violence means you have lost the argument.
In a democratic society , everyone has a voice and is allowed to exercise that voice .
You're basically blaming all the negativity and violence on those who desired independence?
Aye okay. >:(
In reality there was hardly any violence during the campaign despite attempts by the No side to try and overplay it which even met with reprimands twice by the Police
In response to increased press reports and comment implying increased crime and disorder as a consequence of the Independence Referendum Brian Docherty, Chairman of the Scottish Police Federation said;
“The Police Service of Scotland and the men and women who work in it should not be used as a political football at any time and especially so in these last few hours of the referendum campaign.
As I have previously stated the referendum debate has been robust but overwhelmingly good natured.
It was inevitable that the closer we came to the 18th of September passions would increase but that does not justify the exaggerated rhetoric that is being deployed with increased frequency. Any neutral observer could be led to believe Scotland is on the verge of societal disintegration yet nothing could be further from the truth.
Scotland’s citizens are overwhelmingly law abiding and tolerant and it is preposterous to imply that by placing a cross in a box, our citizens will suddenly abandon the personal virtues and values held dear to them all.
At this time it is more important than ever that individuals be they politicians, journalists or whoever should carefully consider their words, maintain level heads and act with respect. Respect is not demonstrated by suggesting a minority of mindless idiots are representative of anything. One of the many joys of this campaign has been how it has awakened political awareness across almost every single section of society. The success enjoyed by the many should not be sullied by the actions of the few.
Police officers must be kept free from the distractions of rhetoric better suited to the playground that the political stump. If crime has been committed it will be investigated and dealt with appropriately but quite simply police officers have better things to do than officiate in spats on social media and respond to baseless speculation of the potential for disorder on and following polling day”
it is quite ironic the only violence that actually took place was after the No side won and a group of nazi saluting unionists organised by Rangers fans group Vanguard Bears decided to storm George Sq
the people who did not vote did not wish independence enough to bother voting
only a minority of people who could vote, did so for independence, yet all this negativity happened as a result of the wishes of independence supporters
and it's that negativity we should avoid by not having another referendum for a very long time
I disagree for many reasons.
Scotland being independent is a long time political viewpoint. It wasn't dreamt up a few years ago. Therefore, there are people alive who always wanted the chance to vote for that and being in a union was always contrary to their political wishes. From their perspective there was negativity before and now things are more positive since the possibility seems closer. To try to rob them of that viewpoint is undemocratic and authoritarian. Taking the independence question off the agenda wouldn't dispel any negativity (which I don't think has been the general outcome anyway), it would seek to silence people and that is not a positive quality in any society trying to call itself free and democratic. The right to a political viewpoint is (or should be) the cornerstone of any modern democratic society.
We had a referendum and the No side won but this does not mean that those voting Yes should now just shut up. Politics simply doesn't work like that. Labour aren't going to disband if they lose the general election. People don't do abrupt changes in their political beliefs just because they get outvoted. It just doesn't work like that. To try to make it work like that would not be a positive thing at all (and wouldn't work).
Scotland has 5 million odd people. We had a high profile referendum and as far as I know nobody died. There were a few arrests but compared to the number of voters they were next to nothing. People can handle political discussion and voting and referendums. The only ones who can't are the small minority of thugs (of all persuasions) which all societies have and we shouldn't be dictated to by them. We have them now in a union, we'd have them not in a union, England has them, Wales has them, Papua New Guinea has them, everyone has a minority of idiots. The vast majority of voters were reasonable and peaceful, law-abiding people and that's worth remembering. Now more of them are more politically aware and that's a good thing as well.
I personally saw no problems in my home town during the full campaign. The only reference to it was a few campaign posters around town and one drunk guy in the shop singing but even that wasn't an incident. The rest of the people in the shop just rolled their eyes and kept their heads down. You get more trouble on a normal weekend here. It certainly wasn't the French Revolution.
And I happen to think a referendum isn't needed any time soon either, but for different reasons to you. Not because I think people's political views should be stifled, or that that might be a positive thing (a bizarre assertion - what kind of society do you want to live in?) but because it just isn't practical any time soon, coming so soon after the last one. We just had one referendum and unless anything major changes in the world then I can't see any justification for another right on the heels of it that would likely bring a similar result.
Isn't that also the SNP stance? I thought they hadn't included independence referendums in their G.E. manifesto and were quite happy to act within the current union for the next term?
wrong again. as has been mentioned a few times already on the thread, the side responsible is the side who campaigned for, and got the referendum in the first place, as they wanted independence
if the referendum didn't take place, all the violence and negativity as a result of the referendum wouldn't have happened would it?
have a think about it. it's really simple
You sound like you fear change.
Don't you believe in people's right to seek something better? People have been doing that since the beginning of time. Granted it doesn't always have a positive outcome, but it's inbuilt into the human race to try , to evolve. When we stop trying to better ourselves, we stop moving forward.
Comments
So they were not , on mass( what all 20 of them), physically attacking people who were at a peaceful rally. Ps the telegraph has been caught out "bending" the truth a lot lately
Twots.
They are like the Sealed Knot idiots down here.
I saw it with my own eyes!!!
I've never heard of them either.
no, i haven't taken a poll. however i wasn't making any statements such as yourself, saying what, and to quote you directly "the vast majority who participated" thought
how can you say "the vast majority who participated were enthused about taking part in a historic event" without polling them or asking them?
it's just something you've made up, isn't it?
yes you are wrong. what i said is factually correct, isn't it
i woudn't, no
is that what you really think? if that's the view of someone supporting independence and that's typical of the type of things people supporting independence think, then that's alarming
i never mentioned any of those kind of things. have a google for news if you think those things happened
the simple fact of the matter is that if people didn't push for, promote and campaign for the referendum and it never took place, then those things wouldn't have happened, would they?
is that a simple enough explanation for you?
you are completely wrong
and as a result of the referendum, which ultimately came from, was supported and promoted by those seeking independence, it brought out all this negativity
and that's a simple fact
wrong again. that's not my analogy at all
furthermore i'm not defending any of the negativity that came from the referendum
it's concerning how people can misunderstand such simple words
wrong again. if that's what you think, you are wide of the mark
wrong again. as has been mentioned a few times already on the thread, the side responsible is the side who campaigned for, and got the referendum in the first place, as they wanted independence
if the referendum didn't take place, all the violence and negativity as a result of the referendum wouldn't have happened would it?
have a think about it. it's really simple
which in a nutshell means that less than a third of people in scotland who could vote, voted in favour of independence
and all this negativity and violence happened as a result of those who wished independence
the people who did not vote did not wish independence enough to bother voting
only a minority of people who could vote, did so for independence, yet all this negativity happened as a result of the wishes of independence supporters
and it's that negativity we should avoid by not having another referendum for a very long time
No, it isn't. No matter how many times you defend the Unionist thugs.
What you are implying is that the Unionists involved are Neanderthals who can't help their violent tendencies.
I agree.
The other side of the coin seems to be the same hysteria and rhetoric from the SNP and their followers.
Somewhere in the middle lies the truth.
That is the lazy answer. The SNP has run a positive campaign while again the unionist parties have adopted fear as their strategy. You just have to look at the campaign posters to see that.
What a load of twaddle.
You're basically blaming all the negativity and violence on those who desired independence?
Aye okay. >:(
You are failing to grasp simple concepts here.
In any vote only the people who voted count.
Having an opposing view to you is not negativity
Trying to stifle your political opponents views through violence means you have lost the argument.
In a democratic society , everyone has a voice and is allowed to exercise that voice .
In reality there was hardly any violence during the campaign despite attempts by the No side to try and overplay it which even met with reprimands twice by the Police
it is quite ironic the only violence that actually took place was after the No side won and a group of nazi saluting unionists organised by Rangers fans group Vanguard Bears decided to storm George Sq
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bx7oGzHCYAI8eNO.png
I disagree for many reasons.
Scotland being independent is a long time political viewpoint. It wasn't dreamt up a few years ago. Therefore, there are people alive who always wanted the chance to vote for that and being in a union was always contrary to their political wishes. From their perspective there was negativity before and now things are more positive since the possibility seems closer. To try to rob them of that viewpoint is undemocratic and authoritarian. Taking the independence question off the agenda wouldn't dispel any negativity (which I don't think has been the general outcome anyway), it would seek to silence people and that is not a positive quality in any society trying to call itself free and democratic. The right to a political viewpoint is (or should be) the cornerstone of any modern democratic society.
We had a referendum and the No side won but this does not mean that those voting Yes should now just shut up. Politics simply doesn't work like that. Labour aren't going to disband if they lose the general election. People don't do abrupt changes in their political beliefs just because they get outvoted. It just doesn't work like that. To try to make it work like that would not be a positive thing at all (and wouldn't work).
Scotland has 5 million odd people. We had a high profile referendum and as far as I know nobody died. There were a few arrests but compared to the number of voters they were next to nothing. People can handle political discussion and voting and referendums. The only ones who can't are the small minority of thugs (of all persuasions) which all societies have and we shouldn't be dictated to by them. We have them now in a union, we'd have them not in a union, England has them, Wales has them, Papua New Guinea has them, everyone has a minority of idiots. The vast majority of voters were reasonable and peaceful, law-abiding people and that's worth remembering. Now more of them are more politically aware and that's a good thing as well.
I personally saw no problems in my home town during the full campaign. The only reference to it was a few campaign posters around town and one drunk guy in the shop singing but even that wasn't an incident. The rest of the people in the shop just rolled their eyes and kept their heads down. You get more trouble on a normal weekend here. It certainly wasn't the French Revolution.
And I happen to think a referendum isn't needed any time soon either, but for different reasons to you. Not because I think people's political views should be stifled, or that that might be a positive thing (a bizarre assertion - what kind of society do you want to live in?) but because it just isn't practical any time soon, coming so soon after the last one. We just had one referendum and unless anything major changes in the world then I can't see any justification for another right on the heels of it that would likely bring a similar result.
Isn't that also the SNP stance? I thought they hadn't included independence referendums in their G.E. manifesto and were quite happy to act within the current union for the next term?
You sound like you fear change.
Don't you believe in people's right to seek something better? People have been doing that since the beginning of time. Granted it doesn't always have a positive outcome, but it's inbuilt into the human race to try , to evolve. When we stop trying to better ourselves, we stop moving forward.