EthicalScottishFitba
General Category => General Discussion => Topic started by: guest19 on September 13, 2020, 09:59:26 am
-
Racist maybe I'm not sure .
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/opinions/churchill-racist-great-white-men-view-toye-opinion/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjj68SGj-brAhVSqHEKHWKUA-gQFjADegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw06rk0ugblt_MDE-eDxC6IV
Black lives matter and their opinions can gtf
I think you are a racist
You think I am a racist because I do not support an organisation that imo are racist themselves.
I abhor racism and do support other anti racism organisations.
I know you should not be calling someone such a thing. You are well out of order.
Yes, I think you are defo a racist.
Says a lot about you as a person making accusations like that. You are nasty, evil and dangerous.
One thing for sure I will never be like you.
-
Racist maybe I'm not sure .
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/opinions/churchill-racist-great-white-men-view-toye-opinion/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjj68SGj-brAhVSqHEKHWKUA-gQFjADegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw06rk0ugblt_MDE-eDxC6IV
Black lives matter and their opinions can gtf
I think you are a racist
You think I am a racist because I do not support an organisation that imo are racist themselves.
I abhor racism and do support other anti racism organisations.
I know you should not be calling someone such a thing. You are well out of order.
Yes, I think you are defo a racist.
-
Racist maybe I'm not sure .
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/opinions/churchill-racist-great-white-men-view-toye-opinion/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjj68SGj-brAhVSqHEKHWKUA-gQFjADegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw06rk0ugblt_MDE-eDxC6IV
Black lives matter and their opinions can gtf
I think you are a racist
You think I am a racist because I do not support an organisation that imo are racist themselves.
I abhor racism and do support other anti racism organisations.
I know you should not be calling someone such a thing. You are well out of order.
It's probably the most overused word in the English language. It's such an awful term to band about willy nilly and trivialises real racism IMO.
Jim Davidson is spot on in this video. No doubt he'll be called racist too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd1_gJKxUfA
Thought that pic was the snooker player Jimmy White.
-
Saw that video over the weekend.
He’s spot on.
-
Racist maybe I'm not sure .
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/opinions/churchill-racist-great-white-men-view-toye-opinion/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjj68SGj-brAhVSqHEKHWKUA-gQFjADegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw06rk0ugblt_MDE-eDxC6IV
Black lives matter and their opinions can gtf
I think you are a racist
You think I am a racist because I do not support an organisation that imo are racist themselves.
I abhor racism and do support other anti racism organisations.
I know you should not be calling someone such a thing. You are well out of order.
It's probably the most overused word in the English language. It's such an awful term to band about willy nilly and trivialises real racism IMO.
Jim Davidson is spot on in this video. No doubt he'll be called racist too.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yd1_gJKxUfA
-
Racist maybe I'm not sure .
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/opinions/churchill-racist-great-white-men-view-toye-opinion/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjj68SGj-brAhVSqHEKHWKUA-gQFjADegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw06rk0ugblt_MDE-eDxC6IV
Black lives matter and their opinions can gtf
I think you are a racist
You think I am a racist because I do not support an organisation that imo are racist themselves.
I abhor racism and do support other anti racism organisations.
I know you should not be calling someone such a thing. You are well out of order.
-
Racist maybe I'm not sure .
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/opinions/churchill-racist-great-white-men-view-toye-opinion/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjj68SGj-brAhVSqHEKHWKUA-gQFjADegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw06rk0ugblt_MDE-eDxC6IV
Black lives matter and their opinions can gtf
I think you are a racist
-
Racist maybe I'm not sure .
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/opinions/churchill-racist-great-white-men-view-toye-opinion/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjj68SGj-brAhVSqHEKHWKUA-gQFjADegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw06rk0ugblt_MDE-eDxC6IV
Black lives matter and their opinions can gtf
-
A brilliant war leader . Was a product of the times. No diversity courses for Mr Churchill to ‘ get educated’ on in those days.
Voted out after the war to be re voted in 4 years later iirc. I doubt he would have took to Twitter when the British public voted him out after the war and bemoan how the public had let him down after’ saving’ them
He wasn’t keen on the Jarrow marchers or their Ilk. My uncle was on one such march and he wanted to put the army on them at Leicester. My mother always told me that but countered it by telling me he was a brilliant war leader and we’d all be goose stepping if it wasn’t for Mr Churchill
-
As a kid he was loved by everyone and looked up to .
Later on in my life I've got mixed feelings about him now.
-
Racist maybe I'm not sure .
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://edition.cnn.com/2020/06/10/opinions/churchill-racist-great-white-men-view-toye-opinion/index.html&ved=2ahUKEwjj68SGj-brAhVSqHEKHWKUA-gQFjADegQIBBAB&usg=AOvVaw06rk0ugblt_MDE-eDxC6IV
-
Churchill was force of nature and an exceptional leader, but you could say the same of Che Guevara. Or Adolf Hitler or Pol Pot.
He had a very dark side and was a non-reluctant mass murderer of civilians for many years.
-
War hero Churchill.
But made some bad decisions
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.heraldscotland.com/opinion/13198730.why-churchill-was-detested-by-many-scots/&ved=2ahUKEwi_qfSdjubrAhWCsHEKHTpiDxEQFjAAegQIAxAB&usg=AOvVaw0ObxsJtpSaTNJ3s2Sy-eJR
-
It’s going to be Hootsville Arizona when we win. 😎
-
I personally would not seek to spin or whitewash Scotland’s past, but Unionists are always keen to do this regarding Britain’s past for some reason.
History is mildly interesting, but also largely irrelevant. I don’t see any connection between history and my desire for political independence for Scotland. The Act of Union is historic I suppose, but that’s about it.
My aspiration for an independent Scotland is entirely rooted in practicality and that the status quo is unsustainable and does not work.
It’s a demonstrable practical fact that countries who become independent perform better for their people. And it’s also a demonstrable fact that every country who has become independent were told by the parent state that they didn’t have what it takes.
Unfortunately for unionists, in 2014 the leaders of Better Together and the vow makers all admitted that Scotland is entirely viable. They argued instead the cultural angle and made promises that have not been kept.
There will be a reckoning for that, and unionists who laughed and jeered and gave it “get it up ye” at every turn since 2014 will have their own medicine to take. This time though, it’ll be for keeps.
There's hardly been any 'get it up ye' from the Unionists really, certainly not compared to the sneering, virtue-signalling and general nastiness from Nationalists.
When we voted No in 2014, the only thing the Nats could really seize upon were the scenes at George Square, which lets face it, were a 2 way thing and were done as a reaction after Nationalists had hogged the square for days, even in their own minds renaming it.
Can you imagine the behaviour that would have taken place if the Nationalists had won? The gloating, jeering, rubbing-face-in-it behaviour of Nationalists at the counts of the 2015 general election was deplorable, toxic even.
Mate, it's not even worth thinking about if the separatists had one. They are a horrible, nasty bunch.
The country would be absolutely **** in every way and not worth living in.
-
I personally would not seek to spin or whitewash Scotland’s past, but Unionists are always keen to do this regarding Britain’s past for some reason.
History is mildly interesting, but also largely irrelevant. I don’t see any connection between history and my desire for political independence for Scotland. The Act of Union is historic I suppose, but that’s about it.
My aspiration for an independent Scotland is entirely rooted in practicality and that the status quo is unsustainable and does not work.
It’s a demonstrable practical fact that countries who become independent perform better for their people. And it’s also a demonstrable fact that every country who has become independent were told by the parent state that they didn’t have what it takes.
Unfortunately for unionists, in 2014 the leaders of Better Together and the vow makers all admitted that Scotland is entirely viable. They argued instead the cultural angle and made promises that have not been kept.
There will be a reckoning for that, and unionists who laughed and jeered and gave it “get it up ye” at every turn since 2014 will have their own medicine to take. This time though, it’ll be for keeps.
There's hardly been any 'get it up ye' from the Unionists really, certainly not compared to the sneering, virtue-signalling and general nastiness from Nationalists.
When we voted No in 2014, the only thing the Nats could really seize upon were the scenes at George Square, which lets face it, were a 2 way thing and were done as a reaction after Nationalists had hogged the square for days, even in their own minds renaming it.
Can you imagine the behaviour that would have taken place if the Nationalists had won? The gloating, jeering, rubbing-face-in-it behaviour of Nationalists at the counts of the 2015 general election was deplorable, toxic even.
-
I personally would not seek to spin or whitewash Scotland’s past, but Unionists are always keen to do this regarding Britain’s past for some reason.
History is mildly interesting, but also largely irrelevant. I don’t see any connection between history and my desire for political independence for Scotland. The Act of Union is historic I suppose, but that’s about it.
My aspiration for an independent Scotland is entirely rooted in practicality and that the status quo is unsustainable and does not work.
It’s a demonstrable practical fact that countries who become independent perform better for their people. And it’s also a demonstrable fact that every country who has become independent were told by the parent state that they didn’t have what it takes.
Unfortunately for unionists, in 2014 the leaders of Better Together and the vow makers all admitted that Scotland is entirely viable. They argued instead the cultural angle and made promises that have not been kept.
There will be a reckoning for that, and unionists who laughed and jeered and gave it “get it up ye” at every turn since 2014 will have their own medicine to take. This time though, it’ll be for keeps.
Nope we do not want to whitewash our past. That is exactly what nats want.
The status quo does work and works very well in Scotlands favour. We are part of one of the most successful unions ever.
Independence is unsustainable and would bankrupt the country and its people.
And it should have been forgotten and moved on from since 2014 but the nasty nats cannot accept democracy unless it goes their way. You have proved that with your last sentence. Ftsnp 🇬🇧
Anyone criticises Churchill and you guys wet your pants.
The tears and snotters I’ve seen with that are remarkable.
Our greatest leader ever 🇬🇧
-
I personally would not seek to spin or whitewash Scotland’s past, but Unionists are always keen to do this regarding Britain’s past for some reason.
History is mildly interesting, but also largely irrelevant. I don’t see any connection between history and my desire for political independence for Scotland. The Act of Union is historic I suppose, but that’s about it.
My aspiration for an independent Scotland is entirely rooted in practicality and that the status quo is unsustainable and does not work.
It’s a demonstrable practical fact that countries who become independent perform better for their people. And it’s also a demonstrable fact that every country who has become independent were told by the parent state that they didn’t have what it takes.
Unfortunately for unionists, in 2014 the leaders of Better Together and the vow makers all admitted that Scotland is entirely viable. They argued instead the cultural angle and made promises that have not been kept.
There will be a reckoning for that, and unionists who laughed and jeered and gave it “get it up ye” at every turn since 2014 will have their own medicine to take. This time though, it’ll be for keeps.
Nope we do not want to whitewash our past. That is exactly what nats want.
The status quo does work and works very well in Scotlands favour. We are part of one of the most successful unions ever.
Independence is unsustainable and would bankrupt the country and its people.
And it should have been forgotten and moved on from since 2014 but the nasty nats cannot accept democracy unless it goes their way. You have proved that with your last sentence. Ftsnp 🇬🇧
Anyone criticises Churchill and you guys wet your pants.
The tears and snotters I’ve seen with that are remarkable.
-
I personally would not seek to spin or whitewash Scotland’s past, but Unionists are always keen to do this regarding Britain’s past for some reason.
History is mildly interesting, but also largely irrelevant. I don’t see any connection between history and my desire for political independence for Scotland. The Act of Union is historic I suppose, but that’s about it.
My aspiration for an independent Scotland is entirely rooted in practicality and that the status quo is unsustainable and does not work.
It’s a demonstrable practical fact that countries who become independent perform better for their people. And it’s also a demonstrable fact that every country who has become independent were told by the parent state that they didn’t have what it takes.
Unfortunately for unionists, in 2014 the leaders of Better Together and the vow makers all admitted that Scotland is entirely viable. They argued instead the cultural angle and made promises that have not been kept.
There will be a reckoning for that, and unionists who laughed and jeered and gave it “get it up ye” at every turn since 2014 will have their own medicine to take. This time though, it’ll be for keeps.
Nope we do not want to whitewash our past. That is exactly what nats want.
The status quo does work and works very well in Scotlands favour. We are part of one of the most successful unions ever.
Independence is unsustainable and would bankrupt the country and its people.
And it should have been forgotten and moved on from since 2014 but the nasty nats cannot accept democracy unless it goes their way. You have proved that with your last sentence. Ftsnp 🇬🇧
-
I personally would not seek to spin or whitewash Scotland’s past, but Unionists are always keen to do this regarding Britain’s past for some reason.
History is mildly interesting, but also largely irrelevant. I don’t see any connection between history and my desire for political independence for Scotland. The Act of Union is historic I suppose, but that’s about it.
My aspiration for an independent Scotland is entirely rooted in practicality and that the status quo is unsustainable and does not work.
It’s a demonstrable practical fact that countries who become independent perform better for their people. And it’s also a demonstrable fact that every country who has become independent were told by the parent state that they didn’t have what it takes.
Unfortunately for unionists, in 2014 the leaders of Better Together and the vow makers all admitted that Scotland is entirely viable. They argued instead the cultural angle and made promises that have not been kept.
There will be a reckoning for that, and unionists who laughed and jeered and gave it “get it up ye” at every turn since 2014 will have their own medicine to take. This time though, it’ll be for keeps.
The only person to say we are ‘too wee, too stupid’ etc was John Swinney.
No one has said Scotland can’t be independent.
It’s the cost to everyone in Scotland that’s the issue.
The Nats need to front up about it as they are going nowhere until they do.
It’s not difficult.
-
I personally would not seek to spin or whitewash Scotland’s past, but Unionists are always keen to do this regarding Britain’s past for some reason.
History is mildly interesting, but also largely irrelevant. I don’t see any connection between history and my desire for political independence for Scotland. The Act of Union is historic I suppose, but that’s about it.
My aspiration for an independent Scotland is entirely rooted in practicality and that the status quo is unsustainable and does not work.
It’s a demonstrable practical fact that countries who become independent perform better for their people. And it’s also a demonstrable fact that every country who has become independent were told by the parent state that they didn’t have what it takes.
Unfortunately for unionists, in 2014 the leaders of Better Together and the vow makers all admitted that Scotland is entirely viable. They argued instead the cultural angle and made promises that have not been kept.
There will be a reckoning for that, and unionists who laughed and jeered and gave it “get it up ye” at every turn since 2014 will have their own medicine to take. This time though, it’ll be for keeps.
-
I urge you all to give this a watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kOvGdmcypE&t=2s
Presenter by my favourite Historian; Neil Oliver.
He gets it spot on as usual, explaining Scotland's role in the creation of the Ku Klux Klan.
A narrative is often portrayed by Nationalists that the British empire did lots of harm across the world but no good, and that Scotland was somehow a squeaky clean wee land who was only involved through association. The fact of the matter is, Scots are really no different from the people of rest of the UK, culturally, linguistically and in terms of deeds and actions, desipte the attempts of revisionist Nationalists.
From the Nazi foundations of Scotland's largest party, to our creation of the KKK, to the failed attempts to colonise Panama by slavery, to our clans murdering, torturing and raping each other.. how can folks go along with the mantra of England being historically bad but Scotland being historically great?
If we are allowed to call the Union Flag the butchers apron then what do we call the Saltire? Hitler's hanky? The Ku Klux Kloth?
That's an insult to Hitler and the klan 😂
Like it though 👍
The flag of our country has been permantly tarnished for me. Will not have it on any item of clothing I wear.
Can't even buy the new Dee top because it has that flag on it 🙁
-
Be great if he could go back to university and get a degree in british history .
A bit of studying should do .
-
I urge you all to give this a watch:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5kOvGdmcypE&t=2s
Presented by my favourite Historian; Neil Oliver.
He gets it spot on as usual, explaining Scotland's role in the creation of the Ku Klux Klan.
A narrative is often portrayed by Nationalists that the British empire did lots of harm across the world but no good, and that Scotland was somehow a squeaky clean wee land who was only involved through association. The fact of the matter is, Scots are really no different from the people of rest of the UK, culturally, linguistically and in terms of deeds and actions, desipte the attempts of revisionist Nationalists.
From the Nazi foundations of Scotland's largest party, to our creation of the KKK, to the failed attempts to colonise Panama by slavery, to our clans murdering, torturing and raping each other.. how can folks go along with the mantra of England being historically bad but Scotland being historically great?
If we are allowed to call the Union Flag the butchers apron then what do we call the Saltire? Hitler's hanky? The Ku Klux Kloth?