Good news

[rob murray]

Suspect squidge is probably thinking that there will not be a time scale for another referendum fixed in the manifesto for the 2016 Parliament,(though I think maybe an "indyref#2 when the time is right" statement wouldn't hurt) but if things carry on as they are here in the UK, and I see little sign that they won't, there will probably be one in the 2020 manifesto. I, personally, hope it won't come before then, because we do need the four years and more to have workable plan Bs for everything, so Westminster can't implement Project Fear again. Last time we were asked, in the YES shop in my area, more questions than we had definitive answers for.....so now we know the questions, we have to provide clear answers....or as clear as answers, on economic matters in particular, can ever be. I only hope that in the next few years, they consult not just the politicians, party members and paid pundits, but also those who knocked on doors and manned the YES hubs and know, first hand, that the questions answered in the Q&A on the last White Paper were not the kinds of questions that most punters were asking.

I must admit, I never thought we would win last time, not even when that single poll put us ahead, and FB was exploding with optimism. I always thought that, even without the VOW, in the end, it would come down to confidence in our own abilities, plus the fear factor, which appears to be the only UK government propaganda used nowadays....and that those who were not convinced in either direction by then, would be more likely to vote for the devil they knew. I was, however, pleasantly surprised at the undecideds who came in after voting to say they had voted YES when it came to the crunch.......but obviously more took what they considered the safer option.

I would agree with your very honest summation, drop the project fear terms though, as it belittles the type of people who as you say couldn't get clear answers from the yes side so did you honestly expect people to agree and vote yes on blind faith ? ....project fear...you mean UK "defence and counter arguements", as you say, get believable answers to the real issues that worried people and still do...currency, EU membership timing and the economy dont expect rational people to swallow the nonsense and non answers that was being pumped out by Salmond at the last referendum.

[rob murray]

I would agree with your very honest summation, drop the project fear terms though, as it belittles the type of people who as you say couldn't get clear answers from the yes side so did you honestly expect people to agree and vote yes on blind faith ? ....project fear...you mean UK "defence and counter arguements", as you say, get believable answers to the real issues that worried people and still do...currency, EU membership timing and the economy dont expect rational people to swallow the nonsense and non answers that was being pumped out by Salmond at the last referendum.

Oh the vow....complete nonsense to me anything that falls out of Browns mouth from my view has to be taken with a large pinch of salt, the vow / Brown certainly influenced voters in the general election.....not.

[RWB]

drop the project fear terms though, as it belittles the type of people who as you say couldn't get clear answers from the yes side so did you honestly expect people to agree and vote yes on blind faith ? ....project fear...you mean UK "defence and counter arguements", as you say, get believable answers to the real issues that worried people and still do...currency, EU membership timing and the economy dont expect rational people to swallow the nonsense and non answers that was being pumped out by Salmond at the last referendum.

to quote yourself yesterday on the Paul Monaghan thread ...

yessers = moonies and scientoligists : brainwashed

sorry, who's 'belittling' who ?

[rob murray]

to quote yourself yesterday on the Paul Monaghan thread ...



sorry, who's 'belittling' who ?

Ok fair point

[rob murray]

Ok fair point

But come one, people voting on blind faith, swallowing 100% the party line and it is almost a cult.....but I accept that there are SNP voters who have their doubts, so apologies not all SNP voters are members of a cult but a cult has arisen around hard core yessers....where no critiscm is allowed...

[BetterTogether]

Funny how we now see people who were so vociferous during the referendum campaign that they had all the answers and gave incredibly verbose answers to every conceivable point now accepting that infact they didn't have the answers to them.
Does this mean they just plain and simply lied or where being fed information from another place that wasn't enitely truthful.
It's all very well keep harping on about " project fear " but as of yet I've not met one person who was swayed by fear or took any notice of the vow.
Those are nationalist myths perpetrated by themselves to try and explain away why the majority of people didn't vote the way they wanted.

What we should actually be asking is how many of those who voted for independence based on the lies espoused by the SNP during the campaign would have done so had the truth been known.

We haven't taken any legal advice on the EU

We Have no credible answer on currency

We Haven't a clue how much business we will lose

We Have no credible answers on the economy

We have no answers on NATO

We have no idea how many business's will relocate South

We have no idea how your mortgages, savings, pensions will be affected

Oil forecasts are purely hypothetical based on wishes and prayers

Now that is just a sample of the bare faced lies told to us by the SNP during the campaign how can we trust politicians who play so fast and loose with the truth.

Day after day after day on the org we had vicious debates with a few people sitting like oracles of all that is Independence telling everyone that had every single answer covered in minute detail.

Seems it was all no more than hot air and wishful thinking.

On the most important consitutional issue most have ever voted on they have to accept one side the SNP lied to them over and over and over again.

On every form of media known they lied then lied some more.

And people seriously think they are a party to fit for power.

[RWB]

we all know who you're against, but who are you in favour of ?

if not SNP, then who do you think should be running Scotland ?

[BetterTogether]

we all know who you're against, but who are you in favour of ? if not SNP, then who do you think should be running Scotland ?

Currently I'd prefer the lib dems to SNP

[rob murray]

Funny how we now see people who were so vociferous during the referendum campaign that they had all the answers and gave incredibly verbose answers to every conceivable point now accepting that infact they didn't have the answers to them.
Does this mean they just plain and simply lied or where being fed information from another place that wasn't enitely truthful.
It's all very well keep harping on about " project fear " but as of yet I've not met one person who was swayed by fear or took any notice of the vow.
Those are nationalist myths perpetrated by themselves to try and explain away why the majority of people didn't vote the way they wanted.

What we should actually be asking is how many of those who voted for independence based on the lies espoused by the SNP during the campaign would have done so had the truth been known.

We haven't taken any legal advice on the EU

We Have no credible answer on currency

We Haven't a clue how much business we will lose

We Have no credible answers on the economy

We have no answers on NATO

We have no idea how many business's will relocate South

We have no idea how your mortgages, savings, pensions will be affected

Oil forecasts are purely hypothetical based on wishes and prayers

Now that is just a sample of the bare faced lies told to us by the SNP during the campaign how can we trust politicians who play so fast and loose with the truth.

Day after day after day on the org we had vicious debates with a few people sitting like oracles of all that is Independence telling everyone that had every single answer covered in minute detail.

Seems it was all no more than hot air and wishful thinking.

On the most important consitutional issue most have ever voted on they have to accept one side the SNP lied to them over and over and over again.

On every form of media known they lied then lied some more.

And people seriously think they are a party to fit for power.

Suspect that people were being fed information that wasn't entirely truthful.

[BetterTogether]

Suspect that people were being fed information that wasn't entirely truthful.

Maybe those guilty can be put in the dock after they've finished with Alistair Carmichael as that seems what SNP voters think is an appropriate recourse and they are now setting a precedent with him. Could be good for the country to see politicians who lie dragged through the legal system certainly would cleanse the SNP ranks somewhat.

[Oddquine]

I would agree with your very honest summation, drop the project fear terms though, as it belittles the type of people who as you say couldn't get clear answers from the yes side so did you honestly expect people to agree and vote yes on blind faith ? ....project fear...you mean UK "defence and counter arguements", as you say, get believable answers to the real issues that worried people and still do...currency, EU membership timing and the economy dont expect rational people to swallow the nonsense and non answers that was being pumped out by Salmond at the last referendum.

It wasn't the YES side who named it, according to the MSM. It was coined by Better Together insiders themselves.....we just adopted it as truth.

What else anyway could you call the scare stories about international agencies like the EU and UN, and foreign Governments turning us into Billy No Mates; about no foreign embassies and as a result, if we go abroad there is more chance of our children being abducted or forced into marriage; no access to Great Ormond Street Hospital; the gross exaggeration of the cost of setting up Government Departments, many of which we have the nucleus of already; pensions not being safe (stories Conservative MSPs were still telling people on the street the day before the referendum); the stories regurgitated from 1979, re border/passport controls etc; not to mention the more ridiculous ones......... No Strictly or Doctor Who; bombing Glasgow Airport, our relations in rUK becoming foreigners, having to drive on the wrong side of the road, the pandas being repatriated, the rUK annexing Faslane, or the more contradictory ones, depending on who was talking, like you won't get to join the EU, but you will be forced to join the Euro; we will be a third world economy because the Labour Party overspent on the Edinburgh Trams and the building of Holyrood; and a lot more besides, but Project Fear?

Each one on its own might have been surmountable, as a lot of it was certainly idiotic, if the YES side ever got a fair chance to respond to them in the same media which was bombarding us daily with, all too often, lies and misrepresentation, but when the headlines everywhere in the MSM pretty well every day for two years was variations on the "you are doomed if you don't hold on tight to our hand" theme....of course it is going to impinge. It can't help but impinge. It was all designed to impinge.It is going to impinge because, as Goebbels said “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over”, or, if you like “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." Why else do PR and advertising companies and jobs exist if the majority of the general public world wide aren't gullible enough to fall for their productions and buy into what they are selling, be that a product, a service or a the belly-burps of a UK Government?

Better together had no counter arguments which did not consist of words which actually meant "we're not going to co-operate, and will encourage everybody else we have influence with not to co-operate, so you will face x,y or z consequences" or " you can't afford to do x,y or z, because these figures based on how much your share of our bloated Government machinery and war mongering propensity is, shows clearly you can't." Or if they did, nobody on here offered them at the time.

Most of the questions were less about independence per se...more about the minutiae of how some of the bits which could have been termed the SNP manifesto for after independence would impinge on their lives....not so much about the big things, bar maybe the state pensions, though most of them were happy enough when they read the letter from the Pensions minister...and, in our area, defence, with a fair few coming in to ask, if we voted for independence, would they be able to transfer to the Scottish Defence Force. However, most people who are not firmly in one camp or the other, wanted more to know the effect on them as individuals, and that was what wasn't answerable, as so much depended on how vindictive the Westminster Government was going to be during negotiations..and their attitude during the run-up did not bode well for a quick and harmonious outcome.....which is why we need time to sort out a Plan B before indyref#2 in case Westminster does pouting and huffing.

[rob murray]

It wasn't the YES side who named it, according to the MSM. It was coined by Better Together insiders themselves.....we just adopted it as truth.

What else anyway could you call the scare stories about international agencies like the EU and UN, and foreign Governments turning us into Billy No Mates; about no foreign embassies and as a result, if we go abroad there is more chance of our children being abducted or forced into marriage; no access to Great Ormond Street Hospital; the gross exaggeration of the cost of setting up Government Departments, many of which we have the nucleus of already; pensions not being safe (stories Conservative MSPs were still telling people on the street the day before the referendum); the stories regurgitated from 1979, re border/passport controls etc; not to mention the more ridiculous ones......... No Strictly or Doctor Who; bombing Glasgow Airport, our relations in rUK becoming foreigners, having to drive on the wrong side of the road, the pandas being repatriated, the rUK annexing Faslane, or the more contradictory ones, depending on who was talking, like you won't get to join the EU, but you will be forced to join the Euro; we will be a third world economy because the Labour Party overspent on the Edinburgh Trams and the building of Holyrood; and a lot more besides, but Project Fear?

Each one on its own might have been surmountable, as a lot of it was certainly idiotic, if the YES side ever got a fair chance to respond to them in the same media which was bombarding us daily with, all too often, lies and misrepresentation, but when the headlines everywhere in the MSM pretty well every day for two years was variations on the "you are doomed if you don't hold on tight to our hand" theme....of course it is going to impinge. It can't help but impinge. It was all designed to impinge.It is going to impinge because, as Goebbels said “The most brilliant propagandist technique will yield no success unless one fundamental principle is borne in mind constantly - it must confine itself to a few points and repeat them over and over”, or, if you like “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it." Why else do PR and advertising companies and jobs exist if the majority of the general public world wide aren't gullible enough to fall for their productions and buy into what they are selling, be that a product, a service or a the belly-burps of a UK Government?

Better together had no counter arguments which did not consist of words which actually meant "we're not going to co-operate, and will encourage everybody else we have influence with not to co-operate, so you will face x,y or z consequences" or " you can't afford to do x,y or z, because these figures based on how much your share of our bloated Government machinery and war mongering propensity is, shows clearly you can't." Or if they did, nobody on here offered them at the time.

Most of the questions were less about independence per se...more about the minutiae of how some of the bits which could have been termed the SNP manifesto for after independence would impinge on their lives....not so much about the big things, bar maybe the state pensions, though most of them were happy enough when they read the letter from the Pensions minister...and, in our area, defence, with a fair few coming in to ask, if we voted for independence, would they be able to transfer to the Scottish Defence Force. However, most people who are not firmly in one camp or the other, wanted more to know the effect on them as individuals, and that was what wasn't answerable, as so much depended on how vindictive the Westminster Government was going to be during negotiations..and their attitude during the run-up did not bode well for a quick and harmonious outcome.....which is why we need time to sort out a Plan B before indyref#2 in case Westminster does pouting and huffing.

Sane people laughed at pandas...Dr WHo.... driving on the other side of the road.... youve summed it all up in your qoute..... "However, most people who are not firmly in one camp or the other, wanted more to know the effect on them as individuals, and that was what wasn't answerable,..totally agree with you... ECONOMY CURRENCY EU and why, as was this the case Salmond couldnt answer these big issues and damaged your cause immeasurably ? I suggest that you now recognise that the majority of the no camp were no because 1 The big issues were avoided /not answered b Salmon blatantly told falsehoods c The economic predictions as based on volatile oil prices were unbelievable d Wanted to retain British citizenship.

[roshep]

Go back to bed Redsnapper.