But which country?
“The room is full of campaign paraphernalia. A noticeboard bears pictures of staff dressed as Kitchener in ‘your country needs you’ poses.”
A fine hero for all of us, I’m sure we agree.
“During the Second Boer War, Kitchener arrived in South Africa with Lord Roberts on the RMS Dunottar Castle along with massive British reinforcements in December 1899. Officially holding the title of chief of staff, the was in practice a second-in-command and was present at the relief of Kimberley before leading the an unsuccessful frontal assault at the Battle of Paardeberg in February 1900.
Following the defeat of the conventional Boer forces, Kitchener succeeded Roberts as overall commander in November 1900. He was also promoted to lieutenant-general on 29 November 1900 and to local general on 12 December 1900. He subsequently inherited and expanded the successful strategies devised by Roberts to force the Boer commandos to submit, including concentration camps and the burning of farms.
Conditions in the concentration camps, which had been conceived by Roberts as a form of control of the families whose farms he had destroyed, began to degenerate rapidly as the large influx of Boers outstripped the ability of the minuscule British force to cope. The camps lacked space, food, sanitation, medicine, and medical care, leading to rampant disease and a very high death rate for those Boers who entered.”
Category
comment, culture, disturbing, uk politics
Trackback: trackback from your own site.
If it walks like a duck…
The polls are shifting in their favour? WHERE??????
Scarey.Imagine what this lot will do to us if Scotland votes No?
The fact that the anti independence campaign, says they were “slow to realise” that they should attack Alex Salmond, tells us absolutely everything about this anti Scottish independence, self-interest, British Nationalist cabal. No arguments on why the union is better, no points on why Scotland ‘needs’ England, nothing. Just vacuous petty and rather infantile attacks against one man, Alex Salmond, who unlike Blair McDougall, actually has a democratic mandate stronger than ANY other political leader in the entire UK.
Still no sign of that mythological and oft promised ‘positive case for the union’. Nothing but fear, fear, doom and gloom from the British Nationalist Bitter together.
McDougall claims to eschew the pursuit of personal agendas in the article.
Then a couple of paras later says BT should have attacked Salmond sooner.
Is it just me, or is there a surreal feel to this article? There definitely seems to be a bunker mentality, with emphasis on negativity and attacking Salmond. No vision of a better and greater Britain, just wallowing in an imperial past. Sad really!
Yeah, Alex Salmond, most popular politician in the UK. Personal attacks are a brilliant strategy!
From a person who has stated that it is “un-Scottish” to vote for independence.
“They are reminding people constantly that there are things to be seriously concerned about on their side”
Wow, the guy doesn’t quite get it, does he?
Trying to decide if the photo reminds me of someone trying to look contemplative and failing, or someone who’s at the centre of some scandal hiding in their house, looking outside at all the photographers. Or maybe simply someone looking out their window thinking “I wish I could go outside, but it’s just too scary.”
Oh wait, it’s all three.
I saw Stu asking about re-posting a great blog post from an Englishman who has lived in Galloway (I think) for many years. That had a lot of very positive things to say about Alex Salmond. I hope he does re-post it, because it deserves a wider audience.
It will be interesting to see the Times “Look inside the YES campaign” – I only hope it is as neutral in tone as this piece is.
I stopped buying the Times when Murdoch bought it – and I’ll never buy it again so long as he owns it – but we need more neutral journalism. Of course the readership figures in Scotland will be fairly tiny, but it makes a refreshing change from the red-toothed hatchet jobs elsewhere
Also interesting – a recognition over on the right hand side of the article that it will likely all hinge on the chimera of “Devo-plus”. The vague insubstantial hints are not going to be enough. Undecided and floating voters will need to see specific, watertight guarantees, or else it will blow up in Westminster’s faces
A guy at work just pointed out that if Blair McDougall shaved his hair off, he’d look like Uncle Fester.
“The whole nation is one big marginal constituency…”
And i thought we were at least a region!
The whole thrust of the article and indeed Mr McDougall’s comments appears to be an argument based on aggression and attack. The politics of grievance, something they are fond of tarring the independence vote with on a daily basis. He seems completely oblivious of just what he is saying about UK politics in general.
If you have no argument, then play the man.
The only thing that photograph says is ‘lonely’.
I still do not get why 47% or thereabouts would vote No to
our country running its own affairs.
Why would anyone think being run by Westminster is
better than what we could do by ourselves and for ourselves?
And as far as people would vote Yes if they thought they would be
£500 better off I would say the way things stand with Westminster
things will only get worse with a No; how can Independence make
us any worse off? Just grow a pair and Vote Yes; the consequences
of a No vote are unimaginable!
Macart: If you have no argument, then play the man.
article: ‘chestbumps’
Must… resist….
Any changes to the style, substance or detail of independence on offer by the SNP pales into absolute insignificance compared to the complete failure of the Unionist parties to come up with ANYTHING to offer in the event of a No vote. We get periodic chatter promising that they will promise something, but nothing actually on the table. They should pay more attention to their own glaring deficiencies.
Even if they do put firm offers on the table, these will differ for each party and, whichever party wins the next UK general election, Scotland will once again be subject to the whims of Westminster as to which powers we will actually be ‘awarded’. At the end of the day, there will be NO GUARANTEE that they will devolve further powers, and Scotland will have NO SAY in what these powers would be. They would of course be chosen to suit Westminster, London and the SE of England.
@Craig P
Mind you if I was in that office I wouldn’t fancy chest bumping Mr McDougall either.
Re voting No to running own affairs – this comment at the weekend indicates part of the mountain still to climb:
I’m really disappointed by the Scottish parliament. I thought we would get a system where they all worked together. But these politicians are no different to the rabble at Westminster. So I’m sorry but because of that I’m for the union…..
I’ve got a year to work on that one. The daughter aiming for university in a few years, and the possible cost of the fees may be a good place to start. More importantly I’m putting this one down to the boorish guff from PMQs that seems to put off the female voter. That and Labour’s attempts to match it in Edinburgh.
@gavin
Exactly. Watching the Five Live debate it’s clear many will be convinced to vote YES when they realise it’s the only way to get the sort of political change they want.
Anas Sarwar at the end of the debate saying there will be a living wage, end to zero hour contracts etc etc if the UK remains must sound more and more hollow to the undecideds.
“…more powers AFTER a No vote”. Surely nobody is so naive as to believe that?
Regarding the photo, maybe he is about to measure for curtains. A portent?
again, more obsession with Alex Salmond and little else, not even a peep on a positive case for the union (or any case for it). Once again these people don’t see Scotland anything more than a constituency, a region at best. In their minds Scotland hasn’t existed as a country since 1706, and never will again as long as that position favours the Party.
The fear is down to money, get that sorted and prove that the electorate of all backgrounds will be better off by ££££s and the NO vote will be reduced to hardcore BritNats.
Anas Sarwar at the end of the debate saying there will be a living wage, end to zero hour contracts etc…
Sarwar is now Top Liar in the BritNat camp, he can’t possibly offer or guarantee anything and he should be pulled up on it, just as he announced that the Labour Party would abolish the Bedroom Tax recently, total fantasy!
There can be no prospect of further devolution with a No vote. People must ask why the UK gov is so determined to hold onto Scotland which as they claim gets more than it puts in? The answer is it’s not true, but losing anymore control thro more Devo is as bad for them as us getting full control. That’s why Devo plus was not an option and it’s why it won’t happen if we vote no!
VOTE YES!
blair mcdougal wants to attack. best form of defence
I’ve been horses de combat for the past week or two, but what’s all this about devo powers? Last I’d heard was unspecified promises of possible powers, possibly to be debated and conversed over at an unspecified time in the distant future.
Or has that changed?
So the case for staying in the Union is, ‘Alex Salmond is a bastard?’
why do people say they dont like salmond ? i dont get that. i love the man and his team
Missed all the fun on Radio 5 live (working)
How did the vote go with the DK’s in the audience ?
“How did the vote go with the DK’s in the audience ?”
Yes gained 4 overall by the end, No gained 3. (Out of 60-odd undecideds.)
Kithener /Boer war – Quite ….. nothing but pure brittania nonesense what a numpty.
“slow to realise” that they should attack Alex Salmond ??
Where is the positive case ??? Opportunity to put it … but then again if the prime Minister cant be arsed.
Always a wee bit bitter in the comment.
Patriotism in question ? He protesteth to much for me. Another Proud Scot (Brit)
I smell fear in this piece; the tide may be turning after all.
heraldnomore says: (file under lost cause – waste of space)
“I’m really disappointed by the Scottish parliament. I thought we would get a system where they all worked together. But these politicians are no different to the rabble at Westminster. So I’m sorry but because of that I’m for the union…..”
I think you can take it they aren’t sorry, becuase they were happy enough with the same rabble coming from Westminster and are going to be voting for the same anyway.
The Key – I’m for the union (always were and always will be) hope its not a freind because they dont sound too bright and just a we bit opinionated.
@callmedave
7 so called undecideds moved – 3 to BT 4 to YES, those that moved to YES seemed however to at least have a coherent reason for doing so.
More lies, this time unquantified if we should be silly enough to trust these Unionist desperadoes.
If there was any advantage for Scots in this they’d be trumpeting it from roofs and spelling it out via their tame media.
Another Tory trojan horse on offer – maybe – perhaps – could be- yawn.
‘Slow to realise’ that they should attack Salmond? Utterly untruthful: a posture of innocence. The strategy of mounting personal attacks on Salmond has been used for years by the Labour Party, of which MacDougall is a long-time member and employee. If ‘Better Together’ has not itself appeared to attack Salmond as often, it is not because it did not think of it, but because it can do it through the Labour Party. What McDougall is reported as saying here is so disingenuous, but typical: so many Labour politicians and officials seem to live lives of habitual, instinctive dissemblance.
@Juteman
Why yes, yes that’s about it in a nutshell. Mind you as far as they’re concerned that’s a positive case.
I’m quite prepared to concede BT folk ‘love Scotland’. The late Alan Clarke MP and absentee landlord absolutely adored Eriboll.
@David
I like the fella too and that’s coming from someone who wouldn’t trust a politician as far as he could throw one. Although in the case of the Labour front bench I wouldn’t mind giving it a try.
Its fair to say I think its the most effective government we’ve had in Scotland since the parliament was reconvened.
they might love scotland but dont love our people
i would trust salmond, no reason not to
The more obvious lies from Better Together have angered the management of BBC Scotlandshire, as they feel these may benefit the Yes campaign.
Labour in Scotlandshire probed – Anus exposed – Salmond smeared
link to bbc.scotlandshire.co.uk
I stopped reading the Times article at the bit where they tried to normalise the term “Project Fear” as just a harmless insider joke that diabolical humourless Nats (they are doing it deliberately!) leaked to use against them. About the third paragraph in I think, still, with some MSM articles I don’t even make it past the headline.
Blair McDougall can keep saying this stuff all he wants. Doesn’t make it true. You can tell he’s worried. Despite his lies, the shift from Don’t Know to Yes is starting to snowball.
And he knows it.
dont know if im biased or not but he looks to me like a greedy gluttonous self man
Other than his preferring Star Trek Voyager over Deep Space Nine I think he’s great.
Deep Space Nine is the best one though.
Bill C is right – there is indeed a surreal quality to this piece. McDougall’s view of the campaign is so unrealistic, and smacks of posturing rather than confidence.
I thought it was rather nice of The Times to point out that he had worked on Labour election campaigns and David Miliband’s leadership bid. As the last outcome was a Tory government and Ed Miliband, then that should give us some confidence for his BT efforts.
I thought it was rather nice of The Times to point out that he had worked on Labour election campaigns and David Miliband’s leadership bid. As the last outcome was a Tory government and Ed Miliband, then that should give us some confidence for his BT efforts.
And the Tories are funding his new role…
Maybe they looked at his CV and thought ‘Perfect’.
Blair McDougall and his No Camp are so fixated with Alex Salmond, they don’t even notice that they are being overtaken and overwhelmed by the rest of the Yes Campaign. Long may it continue.
Regarding Anus Sarwar, well what can you say about this chap, after listening to Willie Rennie’s nonsense this morning, the BBC subject us to even more nonsense a couple of hours later by allowing Mr Sarwar to take part in an independence debate in Glasgow. I would love a stenographer to copy exactly what he contributes to any debate, then have it read back to him and get him to explain what he has just said. Of all the times I have heard him on telly or radio, I have never once heard him commit Labour to any policy whatsoever.
Brilliant, read this…
link to derekbatemandotnet1.wordpress.com
Then follow it up with this….
link to nationalcollective.com
“Croose London Scotties wi their braw shirt fronts
And aa their fancy freens rejoicin
That similah gatherings in Timbuctoo,
Bagdad – and Hell, nae doot – are voicing” – Hugh MacDiarmid
The unionists believe that by ridiculing Salmond, they can win the referendum, because their problem is that they have very little arguement to fight against Independence.
Thats me banned from the Scotsman now, didnt say any nasty words or get into any spats, only ripped a few unionists to bits with their anti bagpuss strategy!
Derek Bateman is certainly exacting revenge upon his former employer.. great stuff!
What a repellant man McDougall is. Here’s another reason to add to the list of reasons to vote “Yes”- It would end his political career and we would be spared the prospect of enduring “Lord McDougall” in the future.
@ Scottish Skier
“Tories … maybe they looked at his CV and thought ‘Perfect'”.
On the evidence of Cameron’s lame submission to yesterday’s Sunday Herald, I’m edging towards your theory that the Tories (UK HQ, anyhow) are actually trying to lose the referendum. It’s the only explanation that can begin to explain their bizarre contributions so far.
why do people say they dont like salmond ?
I don’t get this either, can they give us the actual reasons for hating Salmond? He seems pretty sound to me, the polar opposite to the lib-lab-cons.
Still no positive case for the ‘union’ from any of the anti-Independence lot, when they come up with any perhaps they will regain some respect, until then they should shut up and stop attacking and demonising A Salmond, the Democratically elected leader of the Scottish Government.
Gizzit
It does not matter what they do, what they promise, even to the requested Devo Max limit.
It will NEVER be enough, we are now on the right path, no amount of bribery real or falsely promised powers will suffice.
We are now in the mindset that nothing BUT independence will do ! They will learn that in 2014!
Just a thought, does Blair MacDougall have a vote in this referendum?
Has anyone asked?
“Just a thought, does Blair MacDougall have a vote in this referendum?
Has anyone asked?”
I was interested that he chose to make an issue out of living and bringing his children up in Scotland. As far as I know, before he was hired by BT he lived in London. I wonder if the move is permanent?
heraldnomore …You could ask them for evidence that its the same as its clearly not. Tories asking for more Police before accepting budget and getting it was a nice sign of working together for good of everyone. Sadly Labour asking for 10’000 apprenticeships then still abstaining when given 25’000 apprenticeships says more about Labour than Holyrood as a whole.
Come 2016, we can demand the Parliament we want to see, not just accept the parliament that Westminster give us, thats the difference, see Revs piece earlier regards Scots vote being irrelavent for Westminster outcome.
My main thought on the 5 Live debate was ‘how soon can Victoria Derbyshire take up a job at BBC Scotland?’ as she shot Sarwar down for answering a question with five off topic of his own.
Lindsay – Makin’ Tosh.
Perhaps Alex S. should take on this personal attack by emphasising that next year it is a referendum not an election, that Independent Scotland will democratically elect a Government which may not include him, and that he would rather see that happen than stay inside UK.
Might persuade a few doubters…not Labour eejits of course.
“why do people say they dont like salmond ?
I don’t get this either, can they give us the actual reasons for hating Salmond?”
If Mother Theresa resurrected and joined the Yes campaign, within a week the SMSM would have most of the dependency mentality contingent calling for her to be burned at the stake.
“I’m really disappointed by the Scottish parliament. I thought we would get a system where they all worked together. But these politicians are no different to the rabble at Westminster. So I’m sorry but because of that I’m for the union…..”
on the other hand you WILL be able to vote them out if you don’t like them, something you can’t do with certainty at Westminster. It should also be explained that it is the Westminster system which has contaminated Holyrood via the Unionist parties whose main function is to demonise the party in power rather than co-operate in advancing policies which would benefit Scotland
Sounds like a “hear no positive, see no positive, leave me alone because it’s all too scary” mindset at work here, but someone who is absolutely convertible if you can get them to consider what type of future they would like for themselves and their children, and then look at the outcomes of a Yes vs a No vote in that context. All too many people are so unused to thinking for themselves in a political sense, that the referendum debate is actually a very steep learning curve for them. Some may be a bit thick, others may be very bright indeed, but most are amenable to reasoning when their own personal future is linked to the referendum outcomes. As time goes on, thanks largely to digital media and this site in particular, we see an increasing exposure of the cock-ups and lies perpetrated by LAB (particularly SLAB) , Cameron’s lot, and….(what was the other lot called again?) as well as BT and the MSM, and how they all work against the interests of the Scottish people.
So fear not, get out there and challenge guff like this, because opinions will ultimately change when confronted by reason, understanding, optimism and hope. There is so much material on this and other sites that can be used in the battle for minds; it only remains for each and every one of us to get tore in!
MacDougall is indeed worried. There is a shift from don’t know to YES. There will also be a shift from the soft NO’s to YES once the financial facts are known.
The very idea that Blair McDougall would or could attack Alex Salmond is a joke, he has absolutely no balls to do that. Instead any attack on the First Minster would be done by a proxy, some fool who wouldn’t know any better !!! has anyone see Johann Lamont lately.
I agree with another poster their is certainly a degree of bunker mentality within that article.
Hail Alba.
By the way David Cameron and Nick Clegg are reducing public spending, and aid to the disabled and most vulnerable in society.
It seems it wont be long before the “Scorched Earth Policy” is introduced into the UK.
As a newbie (2nd post) I find MacDougall a clown. I am looking forward to reading the times article tomorrow to see how the Murdoch press Intelligentsia (sp) treat the yes campaign.
Apart from the lies and bitterness of the BT team that Rev so eloquently exposes which has pushed me into the Yes camp there’s something nasty about the way they attack Mr Salmond all the time rather than telling us why their opinion is correct.
Maybe wee Alec is a fat balding buffoon but he’s at least playing fair and treating the people of Scotland with some respect rather than his components. Cant they see there is more to the yes campaign than one man?
I also think that using the term “project fear” as an inside joke tells us more about the better together team than we really need to know.
Doug Daniel that’s a slur on the good name of Uncle Fester, MacDougall looks more like a twisted Uncle Buck IMHO.
for components read opponents
O/T Caught part of a discussion on the EBC in Scotland at the weekend, a sub editor from the Times, who seems to be one of their favourite forelock touchers, mentioned a recent UK social atitudes survey which he claimed showed a very distinct hardening of opinion/atitudes of English people towards Scots and Scotland.
I can’t find anything of this nature being issued recently, any one know what he was going on about??
‘Why do people say they don’t like Salmond?’
(1) Opponents dislike him because he’s too clever, knowledgeable, and articulate, and is promoting a cause they disagree with. They can’t win an argument with him.
(2) Most unionist journalists and broadcasters dislike him for the same reasons, and they always come off second best, which injures their ego: they like to think of themselves as ‘holding politicians to account’.
(3) Some women seem to dislike him because they’re suspicious of someone who appears to know too much, perceiving the exercise of such intellect as a trait which would be unattractive and threatening in a personal relationship.
There is a great bit where they refer to “Not only talking to supporters and pursuing personal agendas – as he believes his opponents are doing”.
Remind me, which campaign had a public meeting to launch PF Glasgow, that was so public it was invited members only, all ticket, and held at an undisclosed location?
McDougall’s Self – Praising Flour (aka ‘Fakaris Flour’).
Excellent for making puddings and pork pies.
Not suitable for humble pie.
Possibly Uncle Fester, though I can’t help but see him as Max the Blue Meanie.
Re. Anas. Quack, quack.
It’s not really a cause for merriment but Kitchener’s career came to an abrupt and unexpected end in Scotland. His body was never found.
And like most other things about the pro-tory, blood-money subsidised Better Together campaign, those “your country needs you” iconic posters and images are phoney. Says it all really –
‘Your Country Needs You’ – The myth about the First World War poster that ‘never existed’
The Telegraph
02Aug 2013
link to telegraph.co.uk
Blair looks like a Bond arch-villain about to do something fiendish with a remote control, and deploy corny dialogue not even Anas Sarwar could match –
“You see, Mr Salmond, you can’t kill my dreams. But my dreams can kill you. Time to face destiny.”
sneddon
Uncle Buck. LOL! Very apt but a bit tasteless perhaps? Let’s not descend to BT’s level.
My mistake sneddon. I thought you were talking about Uncle Ruckus.
link to imdb.com
In the article he says that to maintain credibility you shouldn’t pretend to be something your not,did he ever clarify his brought up by a single parent statement or did he just blank it like normal?
Chick McGregor ……….
Mother Theresa was not a very nice person.
“I think it is very beautiful for the poor to accept their lot, to share it with the passion of Christ. I think the world is being much helped by the suffering of the poor people.”
She would have fitted nicely into the ConDem cabinet.
I was interested that he chose to make an issue out of living and bringing his children up in Scotland. As far as I know, before he was hired by BT he lived in London. I wonder if the move is permanent?
‘The idea that people like me who live in Scotland and [are] bringing their family up in Scotland…’
I had a double-take at that too. As far as I can make out he came straight from London to take on this job. He had been there, as a SpAd and UK Labour apparatchik ,since 2004, with a year or so during that time, 2009-ish, in Rwanda working for the Tony Blair Africa Goveranance something or other.
‘..but the way to maintain credibility is not by pretending you’re something you’re not.’
“Project Fear, a sobriquet given to the campaign”.
Given, or taken?
Some of you are wondering why people don’t ‘like’ Mr. Salmond? It’s because he reminds them of their own shortcomings, and he makes them look at themselves and countenance their small mindedness.
Some human traits are truly awful.
They took Jesus Christ and nailed him onto a bit of wood for telling people to love one another.
Some of you are wondering why people don’t ‘like’ Mr. Salmond? It’s because he reminds them of their own shortcomings, and he makes them look at themselves and countenance their small mindedness.
That unionist politicians don’t like Salmond is obvious, but what bothers me more is when my friends, most of whom are normally quite intelligent, lump Salmond in with the Goves, Kellys, and Alexanders of the world. The other day, one of my pals (indy-skeptic) posted something about David Cameron, then said something about Salmond not getting his “claws” into us yet. After that they then professed they’d like the Tories shot to the moon. It’s such a false equivalency I can’t quite fathom it.
Case in point, Artist Taxi Driver put together a list of his “Top Forty Creepiest Vile Despicable Politicians in UK Today”: in every single one of them, you could directly point to a policy, quote, or bill which they’ve had a direct role in, which has actively harmed the people of the UK:
link to youtube.com
Some of our favourites are on the list.
While checking for Mr B Mcdougall residency status, does anyone know if flipper when he flipped the last time make his main home Edinburgh or is that a holiday home?