25th August 2019
Established 1872. Online since 1996.

WATCH: Dozens march for second Brexit vote

, by , in Headlines, News, ST Online

 

The campaigners march along Commercial Street with placards en route to Lerwick Town Hall. Photo: Dave Donaldson

Scores of campaigners marched through Lerwick this afternoon (Saturday) calling for a second Brexit referendum.

The event tied in with another “Put It To The People” march in London, which attracted hundreds of thousands of participants.

Activists in Lerwick, led by former councillor Jonathan Wills, gathered at the Market Cross at 2pm before walking along Commercial Street and turning up Charlotte Street to reach the town hall.

Around 100 people attended a public meeting in the town hall featuring a panel including Tavish Scott MSP.

A resolution was passed urging the UK government to hold another referendum on EU membership, with the suggested options being to pursue Prime Minister Theresa May’s withdrawal deal or to remain in the EU.

See further coverage in the print edition of The Shetland Times.

About Andrew McQuarrie

View other stories by »

80 comments

  1. ian tinkler

    What a feeble effort. The Anti-Viking Energy march outnumbered this lot four to one and that was not promoted by any political party. I do not suppose former councillor Jonathan Wills would care to comment nor for that matter Gary Robinson, the former Council Political Leader. “Nota Bene”, yesterdays men to the fore as they say every picture tells a story!!!.

  2. Ali Inkster

    So after the country voted to leave these clowns think we should vote again with remain or remain on the ballot. No leave option.

  3. john ridland

    “Put it to the people”.! Thought they did 2016..!

  4. Gary Cooper

    Very proud of the Shetlands for making a stand. If only every town in the UK stood as tall. Well done Shetlands!!

    • Ali Inkster

      “The Shetlands” did they have a march there too?

  5. David Spence

    First of all, I would like to say ‘ I am European ‘.

    The Brexit fiasco is nothing more than for this government to have a trade deal with the USA, by sanctioning the EU referendum to distance ourselves from Europe and to be more culturally linked to the USA. Nothing could be further from the truth.

    The psychological brainwashing of the xenophobic political uprising has brought to the fore the extreme, darker and fascist aspects of our society and how we are slowly but surely destroying the very fabric which makes up our society of every creed, colour, nationality, gender orientation and the variety of many aspects which we regard as the makeup of society.

    Brexit, by its very nature, erodes these values we hold dear and directs us into a more extremist political way of thinking. This is not what we should be advocating for our society and our future.

    • Jan Eagle

      The last time I looked the UK was still physically attached to the continent of Europe . As well as being English , Welsh , Scottish or Northern Irish we are all European . We ‘ leavers ‘ like Europe a lot , we strongly dislike being part of the dictatorial , undemocratic , unaccountable ( lots more negative words could be written , but you get my meaning l ) European Union . OK ?

  6. John Tulloch

    The official EU view on independent Scotland/EU membership:

    “The EU is founded on the Treaties which apply only to the Member States who have agreed and ratified them. If part of the territory of a Member State would cease to be part of that state because it were to become a new independent state, the Treaties would no longer apply to that territory. In other words, a new independent state would, by the fact of its independence, become a third country with respect to the EU and the Treaties would no longer apply on its territory.”

    i.e we shall be automatically out of the EU – with “NO DEAL” – from Independence Day.

    Have the EU’s treaties changed, meanwhile? No.

    However, it’s joining rules have changed. It will take us, at least, ten years to rejoin, accepting the euro, the Common FIsheries Policy and austerity invoking budget restrictions to manage our large budget deficit.

    So why is the SNP stamping about, “greetin der een oot”, about Scots “being dragged out of the UK against their wishes”, when their defining policy, independence, will take us out, unlikely, ever to rejoin?

    Humbug!

    https://www.parliament.uk/…/EA68_Scotland_and_the_EU…

  7. Haydn Gear

    Whether or not one is in favour of Brexit, how many people truly knew what they were voting for in 2016 ? Misinformation and disinformation flew about like panic stricken puffins and some politicians loved it. So much of what was involved came to light over the time which has elapsed and STILL confusion reigns. Thank goodness the leadership during the Second World War was not as pathetic as the present incumbents are. Meanwhile, those nations over the other side of the English Channel must be wondering why the Brits are allowing themselves to be so humiliated ..

  8. johnridland

    What about the 22500 that stayed away…?

  9. ian tinkler

    Yes, Haydn, it is very sad what our political idiots are doing!. I was for Brexit, and I still am. The reason being I loathe the smothering bureaucratic horrors of the EU and the appalling way the UK has had to sever its ties with our Commonwealth friends. The lessons of history should be obvious!
    I quote from Tony Benn, “When I saw how the European Union was developing, it was very obvious what they had in mind was not democratic. In Britain, you vote for a government so the government has to listen to you, and if you don’t like it you can change it.”
    So very true today.

  10. Haydn Gear

    Spot on Ian !!

  11. Peter Hamilton

    Of the 22500 that stayed away, some stayed home and joined the 5.5m+ who have signed a parliamentary petition calling to revoke Article 50 and stay in the EU instead. It only takes a minute: https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/241584

    Voters don’t always get the chance to change the government, but they may want the chance to change their mind.

    • Ali Inkster

      “Voters don’t always get the chance to change the government”
      Really? I thought that was why we had elections? True it would seem no matter who we vote for out of the Lib Dems, Tories, Labour, SNP and greens we will get self serving arrogant rats who have no respect for democracy with very few exceptions. But the colour of the ties/neckerchiefs at least change.
      If we do as you suggest and ignore the votes of 17.4 million UK voters for the sake of 5.5 million random signatures we will be in a situation where your statement will be partially true, where it really won’t matter who we vote for because they will just be puppets of the eu. Then your statement should read “Voters NEVER get the chance to change the government”.
      You may be cheering the overturning of the democratic vote now, but if they get away with it we will all be losers. Be careful what you wish for you may just get it.

  12. Robert Jones

    Well, the “Put it to the People” march was in London in that there England, so I’m unsure why Quitters are making an issue of the numbers. The debate afterwards was billed as an open debate, and only one cockney Quitter spoke, so make what you like of that.

  13. Andy Holt

    Why go to the unnecessary effort of changing my mind? Parliament, the commentariat and most of the mainstream media seems perfectly happy to do that for me. And while they’re at it why not move the goal posts, change the game and rewrite the rules as you go along. Quintessentially EUropean modus operandi.

  14. Marc Petit

    The old Commonwealth friends have moved on from being dumped by Britain. For example, we Australians buy manufactured goods chiefly from Japan, China, S. Korea and USA. Nothing will change that after Brexit. These goods are cheaper and generally regarded as better.
    Our major export markets are Japan and China. That is unlikely to change either.

    British markets of old will not be returning to the past and arguments made that this will happen is extreme naiveté.

    • Ali Inkster

      The commonwealth is far bigger than Australia. Much of it developing economies expanding far far faster than Australia is or ever will. You are right though Oz will have to keep selling to China because China owns vast swathes of Ozzy industry and mining. I for one will be delighted if we have a much closer links with Australia, New Zealand but they are hardly super stars of economic growth.

      • marc petit

        Compared to other western countries we are superstars of growth (28 years of economic growth with no recession). Compared to India, china etc you are correct.
        Large sections of our country are owned by the Chinese, and that is of no particular issue in reality. Much of those bits were once owned by the UK but China has invested more $$.
        If the UK sees the rest of the Commonwealth providing markets they are mistaken too. You will be competing in Africa, the Pacific nations against China and India for sales. Good luck with that.
        In regards to just my opinion, yes obviously so, but an educated opinion from an economics teacher.
        We do import a good number of German made products such as cars and appliances but the numbers are still small compared to Japanese, S. Korean and Chinese items.
        I do not know of a single UK made item in any of my families various homes.

  15. Peter Hamilton

    Ali says “if they (MPs) get away with it (overturning the democratic vote) we will all be losers”. Boo-hiss! Really? If Boris, Farage, Rees-Mogg and chums get away with it most folk will be worse off, with the few laughing all the way to their offshore banks. And that’s the point – them taking control to profit from their vision of a backwards looking low-tax-for-the-rich Britain of biddable serfs. Ali should be careful whose bidding he is doing by defending May’s hollow deal.

    Perhaps my previous point might distress Ali less if I rephrased it. Not all of the electorate who seek a change of government achieve this at election time. That’s parliamentary elections for you, particularly under first last the post. We get one day of enjoying the freedom of maybe changing the government and have to put up with the outcome for some years before the next time.

    However, in the terms of this referendum – brought on to placate those ideologues who bankrolled lawbreaking in their dishonest campaign, well – some folk might have changed their minds 1000+ days on.

    Unlike an unpopular government, Brexit would be forever. Why not make sure we really want it?

    • Mr ian Tinkler

      Peter, you so waffle on! Ignoring your obviously obsessive-compulsive dogma, reference Boris, Farage, biddable serfs and assorted socialist claptrap, I will take issue on one point only here. Your false statement, “Unlike an unpopular government, Brexit would be forever”, that is manifest nonsense. After Brexit, Europe will still exist. The EU, on present developments, may well implode at any minute. Spain, Greece, Italy even France (yellow shirts) seem to be moving away from the suffocating mire of Brussels, Junker, Barnier and undemocratic cabals of the EU. Brexit would never be forever; It is just the start of an equitable move towards democratic change and true democracy in Europe, not the present cartel of faceless unelected bureaucratic parasites and overpaid freeloaders.

    • Ali Inkster

      You keep harping on about Boris, Nigel and Jacob as if they were the only proponents of brexit. You steadfastly ignore the other 17.4 million people because of course you obviously are so much smarter and nicer than them so their votes don’t count. What I wonder is what will the political elites decide to ignore next time we vote if they get away with it this time. How about we have a vote about the SCT and if we don’t like the outcome we vote again until we do get the result we want. Or may until they get the result they want which is contrary to what you want. How does democracy work in your fantasist mind?

    • Mr ian Tinkler

      Marc Petit, Superstars! I love Aus but economic Superstars, what planet are you on? Australia has a masive land mass, fantastic mineral resources yet is so outperformed financially by India, Canada, and with half the GDP of the UK (GDP figures 2017). As my Aus brother would say, “A few stubbies short of a six-pack. A few sandwiches short of a picnic”. Now get real your comment marc, “we are superstars of growth (28 years of economic growth with no recession)” it must have been a petit and low starting point 18 years back.

  16. John Tuloch

    @Mark Petit,

    Thanks for that, very interesting.

    Do you think that the Australia-Japan Economic Partnership is helpful by removing tariffs from Japanese goods imported into Australia and vice versa for your agricultural exports to Japan?

    Whereas having no trade deal with the EU presumably means that goods from both parties are subject to tariffs? The EU is very protective of its agriculture.

    I’m assuming Australia would find a UK trade deal helpful by removing UK tariffs on your agricultural produce e.g. fruit and wine, and making British goods much cheaper to Australians than they are now?

  17. Mr ian Tinkler

    What a wonderful attitude and comment from Marc Petit, “These goods Japan et al) are cheaper and generally regarded as better (than UK).” as our goods are all manufactured under EU protocols and Marc claims are clearly poor quality, just another really good reason to move on. I quote, World Financial Review ” Australia has become one of the first countries to finish signing off trade deals with Britain” and The Financial Times, “Australia to fast-track UK trade pact in event of no-deal Brexit” so you see petit comments from Mr Petit, are just that and no more.!!

  18. Peter Hamilton

    So, Boris Johnson has now changed his mind. Let’s respect his right to do so, but couldn’t the public have done so too?

    And May took her deal twice to the Commons, (with no joy) but she won’t take it once to the commoners.

    At least you know where you are with the Tories – kind of.

    Only 7% of voters think May’s deal is a good deal, but we are meant to shut up and swallow it, if her party can back it, if she’ll go.

    How dare anyone speak up against this insulting nonsense?

  19. Peter Hamilton

    Ali’s alt-right guided jibes are remarkably handy.

    Non-fantasist Ali draws a telling distinction between self-interested Boris Johnson, Nigel Farage and Jacob Rees-Mogg on one hand, the “political elite” on another hand, and the millions who fell for the demonstrable (and amply demonstrated) lies of the Brexit campaign cheats on yet another hand still. I am not of course forgetting those voters. I’m pointing out who misled them and why.

    To adapt Roald Dahl:

    Ah, Ali, you must never trust
    these laddies from the upper crust.

    Does he really not see that they are political and elite? It’s troubling.

    Ali might care to note I am not calling him a member of the alt-right here, but if he continues to unthinkingly parrot their offensive arguments conclusions will be drawn.

    Non-obsessivecompulsive Ian might similarly do well to dwell on the benefits of avoiding ad hominem arguments. Whilst he has managed at times to play the ball not the man, Ian sadly is more than habitually inclined to foul, and thereby be judged foul in turn. If he repeatedly takes the same self-defeating approach and expects a different result… well conclusions may also be drawn.

    Can’t these lads raise their game?

    • Ali Inkster

      Again with Farage Mogg and Boris you really do seem to be obsessed. Plenty of lies on both sides with remain going into overdrive since they lost the vote. We voted to leave and since then parliament has done everything it can to overturn that result.
      Fact is Leaving now with no deal is what we were promised and what we voted for. the problems since the referendum are in part imaginary and part creation of project fear.
      BMW have stated a no deal brexit will not affect their plans in any way and any “just in time” problems will be ironed out within a matter of weeks, Business is ready for WTO it is politicians that fear a future without the eu to provide a nest egg when the public get wise to their lies. The ports have said there will be no delays with a no deal brexit. The head of the RCN has stated there will be no problems getting medicine with a no deal brexit ( any problems experienced so far are down to stockpiling due remain scaremongering).
      Again you only want democracy if people vote the way you tell them. That’s not democracy

    • Ali Inkster

      peter has got it wrong again there was no cheating in the leave side

      “What started out as a witch-hunt by the political establishment in what they thought was the largest political scandal investigating Cambridge Analytica and Goddard Gunster’s alleged involvement in the Leave.EU referendum campaign, has today been proven to be false. Instead, the Electoral Commission fined us on technicalities and an overspend of £50,000, not the £70,000 originally presented by them on £7 million overall spend. The fines were reduced and the Judge accepted the technical breaches were ‘mistakes’ rather than calculated wrong-doings and crucially held there were ‘no findings that Leave.EU had been dishonest.’””

  20. ian tinkler

    “Peter, you so waffle on! Ignoring your obsessive-compulsive dogma, reference Boris,” .Please, Peter, this is not about Boris. It is about 17.4 million voters. What do you not understand about that?
    .
    .
    .

  21. Peter Hamilton

    Does Ian mean the 17.4m who were lied to by self-serving cheats?

    Ian might be interested in this from the Chair of The British Medical Association’s Public Health Medicine Committee:

    “The people” were never informed about Brexit.
    So they cannot have consented to it.
    The referendum result was NOT “the will of the people” – certainly not following the revelations since.

    Peter M B English
    https://www.bmj.com/content/361/bmj.k2821/rr-2

  22. ian tinkler

    “Ali’s alt-right guided jibes”, O dear me Peter Hamilton! Are you so short of reasonable argument that you are reduced to petulant personal insult? Just what a hypocrite you have become! Do I need to remind you of your past fatuous comments with regard my critique of some of Shetlands Greenie boys and Viking advocates? You should read “Matthew 7:3-5 ” Ref: Peter Hamilton March 19th, 2019 17:57 Shetland Times (https://www.shetlandtimes.co.uk/2019/02/18/sustainable-makes-plea-to-councillors-over-vikings-plans-to-increase-turbine-size)

  23. Ingrid Wishart

    Thank you for asking the people to vote again. Can we also put it to the people in Shetland if they still want to live inside a windfarm? How many times do we get to vote?

  24. Peter Hamilton

    Past comments on referendums from David Davis MP could soothe or enrage frustrated Leavers. Speaking to parliament in 2002 he said:

    “There is a proper role for referendums in constitutional change, but only if done properly. If it is not done properly, it can be a dangerous tool…
    Referendums should be held when the electorate are in the best possible position to make a judgment. They should be held when people can view all the arguments for and against and when those arguments have been rigorously tested. In short, referendums should be held when people know exactly what they are getting…
    We should not ask people to vote on a blank sheet of paper and tell them to trust us to fill in the details afterwards. For referendums to be fair and compatible with our parliamentary process, we need the electors to be as well informed as possible and to know exactly what they are voting for.”

    theyworkforyou.com says former Brexit Minsiter Davis received £60,000 for 20 hours work for JCB this year, and that he generally voted against a statutory register of lobbyists. Coincidence? Maybe not.

    Does Ian still insist rich and powerful Brexit-backers aren’t out for themselves?

  25. Peter Hamilton

    ERG’s Rees-Mogg today re-tweeted neo-fascist German AfD party leader. Disgraceful unapologetic reveal. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-47770959

  26. Mr ian Tinkler

    “neo-fascist German AfD party leader” revolting female, but elected to the German Parliament, I repeat elected!!! Now, Peter, can you see the reason we need out. Even you must now see what the E Union is doing with its Proportional Representation and revolting political systems. Neo-Nazi elected into the German Parliament, enough said.

  27. Peter Hamilton

    Fascism cannot be defeated by nationalist-navel gazing. The far-right are cooperating across Europe, trying to heighten a sense of crisis and undermine confidence in the institutions which they hope to control.

    Ian’s approach isn’t simply ahistoric. It is dangerously naive. His phrase “revolting female” normalises misogyny.

    Recognising the threat, not allowing ourselves to be divided and working with our neighbours to the greater good is the only way to keep the far-right at bay; internationalism, standing together, kindness, respect.

    It is less than two years since Farage was speaking at an AfD rally. Ian should be more skeptical about the real motives of the brains behind Brexit. The David Davis’s quote shows they knew what they were about. Rich financiers, newspaper magnates and populist politicians have schemed together to break electoral law, lie to and manipulate the public to bring Britain to this precipice.

    Meanwhile all some have had to add is jeers. That said, Ian did manage to make his last ill-considered contribution without needless insult. Hopefully, now that he can see who has been pulling his strings, he will be able to accept he has been had.

    The referendum wasn’t won. It was stolen. Dangerous days are ahead.

    • Michael Garriock

      ……and who keeps the far left, or even just the left for that matter, at bay?

  28. Mr ian Tinkler

    Extreme left, extream right. Two sides of the nast extremist coin There is no difference, the sad thing is what Alice Weidel said was and is perfectly true on this occasion. If the European Union’s (EU) Brexit negotiating strategy had been reasonable , way back when Cameron was rebuffed before the referendum Brexit may never have been voted for. The reality “the brains behind Brexit” or rather the driving force, that would be Tony Blair, Osbourne, Cameron, Junkers, Barnier, Tusk, Salmond. Sturgeon et al. They are the ones that did so much to alienate the UK public. They are still doing just that.

    • ian tinkler

      A prime example today from Junker, “12 April is the ultimate deadline for approval of the Withdrawal Agreement by the House of Commons,” Juncker told the European Parliament. “A ‘no-deal’ at midnight on the 12th of April is now a very likely scenario. It is not the outcome I want. But it is an outcome for which I have made sure the EU is ready.” Just food for thought does that mean Junker has a special place in Hell reserved as Tusk previously intermated?!!!

  29. Peter Hamilton

    Er, dunno Michael. Of late the whiter-than-white far-right have distracted the nation away from dwelling on the harms of austerity with a divisive, dishonest Brexit campaign that’s resulted in unparalleled spikes in hate crime, Muslims attacked at prayer, Europeans and U.K. born citizens told to go back to where they came from, malicious devices left of train tracks, a plot to murder an MP and the murder of another.

    The left largely seem intent on taxing the rich, investing in public services, ending poverty, housing the homeless, reducing demand on food banks and educating the ignorant. If that ever becomes a problem I’ll give Michael’s question some thought. Until then equating the left with the far right doesn’t seem quite fair.

    Btw. has anyone heard Ian describe Farage as a repulsive male? Farage might be described a repulsive person or man but never a repulsive male. For some reason the term “female” in Shetland social media is chosen as a pejorative.

    There is quite a bit of work to be done before the repulsive elements of the present era are behind us.

    Meanwhile the rich are set to increase their share of global wealth from 48% to 60% by 2030.

  30. Peter Hamilton

    So there it is, in his own words: Ian Tinkler endorses a far-right approach to Europe.

    Non-revolting Ian attacks the leader of German’s AfD, then agrees with her. He holds that Cameron wasn’t given enough concessions by the bad EU to feed his far-right Tories, and that Cameron is also to blame.

    You can’t weaken fascists by giving them what they want. Its not in the nature of the beast.

    Labour MP Rosie Cooper, target of a neo-Nazi murder plot, was praised in the House of Commons yesterday by the Home Secretary and the Leader of the House. In her speech she thanked the organisation “HOPE not hate” who campaign against racism and fascism, who helped to save her life.

    The People vs “the elite”? State of Hate 2019, is the title of HOPE not hate’s recent report into far-right extremism in the UK. https://www.hopenothate.org.uk/research/state-of-hate-report-2019/

    The title highlights the far-right’s aim to create the sense of alienation which Ian so willingly feeds.

    Ian has outed himself. Little more needs said, other than that at least with PR the far-right do their work in plain sight. In the UK they lurking within the Conservative Party and tell themselves they’re free thinkers.

    • Ali Inkster

      Dennis Skinner, Tony Benn, George Galloway, Kate Hoey etc etc etc according to Peter these are far right racists for wanting to leave the undemocratic eu

    • Ali Inkster

      According Bernie Sanders, an open door immigration policy is incompatible with a welfare state. According to Peter this makes him a far right fascist.

    • Ian Tinkler

      It is such a shame Peter Hamilton has to lie so. His words “So there it is, in his own words: Ian Tinkler endorses a far-right approach to Europe. Ian has outed himself.” Please, Peter, make an effort at simple honesty! The fact I agreed with a few words from Alice Weidel does not wed me to her views and rancid opinions which you are not so very stupid as not to know. So stop being so pathetic and be a little less disengeneous.

  31. Ian Tinkler

    O dear me, Peter is rather wandering off the point with his petit and puerile criticisms. I do not regard Farage as a repulsive male, I share some of his, although not all. Now if you want a repulsive male look to John S Bercow’s comments on a repulsive male, Alt-Right football thug and ex-convict Tommy Robinson,. Bercow’s words in the House” Tommy Robinson as “a loathsome, obnoxious, repellent individual”. Now there we have a repulsive male (Robinson) on the right; sadly there are more than enough violent and repulsive Marxist–Leninist terrorism, both male and female on the left. As I previously stated, extreme left and right, opposite sides of the same nasty coin. Revolting females and revolting male are plenty on both sides. Revolting people of both genders exist, only Peter with his pseudo-political correctness would make such a facile and infantile observation as, “His (Ian’s) phrase “revolting female” normalises misogyny.

  32. Ian Tinkler

    Peter Hamilton, for your information, I do not regard Farage as a repulsive male, I indeed share some of his views, although not all. Now if you want a repulsive male look to Alt-Right, football thug, Tommy Robinson. To mimic House Speaker, John S Bercow, “Tommy Robinson is “a loathsome, obnoxious, repellent male. There are repulsive males and females on both sides of the political spectrum. Gender is not an issue! Only you, Peter Hamilton with your pseudo-political correctness would make such a facile and infantile observation referencing my comment about a truly revolting female.. One whom is an active racist, white supremacist, elected to serve in a European parliament.

  33. Peter Hamilton

    What explains right-minded Ian’s double standards? Doesn’t he realise Farage and Weidel are both far-right extremists?

    The issue of how the referendum was stolen by dishonest xenophobic manipulation may help here. Farage claims it was his campaign poster, which was widely condemned as racist, that he took pride in revealing during the campaign, wot won it for Brexit: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/news/nigel-farage-says-controversial-anti-migrant-poster-won-the-referendum-for-brexit-1-9404360/amp

    It appears there is little to set Weidel and Farage apart except that one is a bigoted German woman and the other a bigoted English man.

    Hopefully Ian will want to reconsider his appreciation of Farage.

    • Ian Tinkler

      I have no particular appreciation of any politician however I would just say I appreciate honesty, not your strongest gift Peter Hamilton! Farage and Weidel are not the same politicians as any reasonable person can see. Just because they do not share your own particular brand of left-wing zealotry does not make them right-wing bigots. I would advise you to look at the definition of a bigot and then take a long hard look in the mirror! (Bigot: a person who is intolerant towards those holding different opinions.)

  34. Ian Tinkler

    Before anyone states the obvious, I am intolerant of racists, Islamophobics, sectarianism and anyone who subverts democracy with disinformation and dishonesty. Sadly there is plenty of all that sh1t around. If that makes me intolerant towards those holding different opinions, if they are those as mentioned earlier, I rejoice in that.

  35. Peter Hamilton

    Will Ian really not condemn Farage’s racist anti-migrant poster ?

    What evidence does Ian have to show Farage and Weidel are not the same brand? It’s a poster the AfD would have been equally proud of.

    Is Ian really now saying Weidel is not a right-wing bigot? It’s no time since he said she was “revolting”. It’s a word I’d rather apply to Farage’s poster and the views it represents. How does Ian justify applying it to Weidel if not for behaving in ways similar to Farage?

    I would not think any less of Ian were he to show himself capable of changing his mind about Farage as fresh information emerges. Any reasonable person would.

    Perhaps Ian yet believes Farage was never a racist. Presumably Ian doesn’t simply find Farage’s views tolerable because he (Farage) as a white British nationalist is an all round good bloke?

    Where does Ian stand on Farage’s warm embrace of the views of Le Pen ?

    Will Ian really not condemn that poster, if not the man behind it? It’s ok to be intolerant of racism Ian, it really is.

  36. Ian Tinkler

    I consider your silly poster, I do not like it at all! I also dislike some of the dishonest troop on the photos on this blog. For example Gary Robinson for his dishonest campaign for the Council (Aith School, Windfarm). Jonathon Wills for his dishonest statement that I alone held up Viking Energy (if only). Yes Peter, it, however, takes more than one poster to show the merits of a person. I recommend Farage for his stand against Islamophobia and leaving UKIP, once UKIP bedded Tommy Robinson. If Farage is Xenophobic he has a strange choice for a wife and girlfriend (Hungarian wife, French Girlfriend!!!) I condemn most of all your dishonesty and false statements above.

  37. Peter Hamilton

    Weidel, Farage and Tinkler all agree “If the European Union’s (EU) Brexit negotiating strategy had been reasonable, way back when Cameron was rebuffed before the referendum Brexit may never have been voted for.“

    Weidel, Farage and Tinkler have a shared appreciation of what is reasonable – giving the far-right what they want. Cameron got concessions, just not enough to appease the far-right ERG tail that’s been wagging the Tory dog and Farage. It’s really not the EU to blame for getting us into this mess, but that is what Tinkler, Farage and Weidel want us to believe.

    Cameron should have stood up to those on his right like John Major did before him. Instead he appeased them and somehow Europe is to blame? This buckpassing feeds into a neo-fascist narrative.

    Rees Mogg called Weidel’s speech “interesting”. What’s interesting is that Tinkler falls for an argument Rees Mogg highlighted and then tried to distance himself from. What’s interesting is that Ian blames mainstream politicians, not the far-right for alienating the public. Can he really not see their game? “Farage and Weidel are not the same politicians”. Really Ian? Do you still think that?

  38. Peter Hamilton

    It is not yet clear whether politically correct Ian needs to learn more about Farage before he will condemn him in the same terms as he did “revolting female” Weidel. The facts suggest both deserve an equal opportunity to wither under Ian’s singular brand of enlightened scorn.

    Ian may or may not be revolted by Farage’s thoughts on the prospect of having Romanians for neighbours or on Farage’s anti-Semitic attacks on George Soros. Ian will likely recall seeing posters defaming that philanthropist during Ian’s own well publicised whoop whoop visit to Hungary. These posters, which portray Soros as an untrustworthy Jewish money lender, were paid for by Hungary’s far-right racist party which has taken control of the Hungarian media and parliament. Anyone wondering whether Farage differs much from Weidel need wonder no more.

    If Ian is looking for revolting enemies of democracy he could look back at the various characters I have provided him with information about over the last few months in the not quite Pygmalion hope that, underneath it all, Ian is a rational human being who can be reasoned with, and can therefore change both his mind and potentially even his unapologetically needlessly confrontational counterproductive approach.

    • Ian Tinkler

      Peter@s obsession seems now to be about me now!. My “Whoop whoop” visit to Hungary was not an SOE mission but to a Hungarian friends wedding! Hungarian political posters, I understood not one; all were in Hungarian! (quite why Peter regards my visit as relevant here is beyond me!). Peter talks about antisemitic views. Peter’s beloved Labour party has well publicised anti-semitic views that appear far worse and more contemporaneous than any comment Farage may or may not have made. I note Peter claims that Hungary has a far-right racist party, well Peter that is all part a parcel of the EU and I understand was democratically elected. The thing that I find amusing here is Peter so compulsively obsessively references, his words, “neo-fascist”! It may interest him to hear I have received threats of violence from ” neo-fascist right wingers online” of which a police response resulted. (crime number issued etc.). Now Peter, just calm down a bit dear, I visited the USA also. I understood their posters and did not honour Trump, although I find him about as obnoxious as Corbyn, however an improvement on Salmond, Whoop whoop!!! Both have so very much in common.

  39. Ian Tinkler

    Trump, Salmond so very similar. just note their alleged courtship rituals (Go grab pussy boys). Trump pays the girls silence with his own funds, Salmond uses crowdfunding and sits on his own £millions, wonderful man to represent Scotland.

  40. Peter Hamilton

    Ian’s approval of Farage is the matter at hand. Farage attending an AfD rally should be enough to concern Ian. Farage distancing himself from Tommy Robinson scarcely makes Farage Mr. Clean.

    To be clear, it was Farage’s poster, not mine, and to call it “silly” trivialises Farage’s use of racist tactics in the referendum. This period saw a spike in racially motivated assaults and other hate crimes: a serious matter.

    Ian’s poster boy’s racism cannot be disproven by his choice in partners. The French and Hungarians are not regarded as lesser humans by those who think that revolting way. Farage’s abuse of Romanians – which even The Sun called racist – is another factor Ian chooses to ignore, and we don’t need to consider what Farage means by “defending Judeo-Christian values”.

    For Ian, Farage now saying Farage isn’t Islamophobic is good enough. Considered together with everything else Farage has said and done that is a pretty low bar. No amount of evidence will enable Ian to realise he has been taken in by a member of the far-right.

    Of course pointing all this out to Ian sees him again calling me obsessive. Doesn’t make him right about Farage though.

  41. Andrew Holt

    Reading (wading) through this stream, the phrase “dialogue of the deaf” springs to mind. The truth of the matter is that the whole process is now out of our hands. We voted, parliament ratified our choice, the government agreed to act. Sadly these authorities are institutionally incapable of delivering on their promises. The bigger debate to my mind is around how faith in the democratic process can be restored. At present there is a chasm that has opened up between those entrusted with leadership and the led.
    A more positive role in the enacting of decisions on important topics of vital national interest needs to be found for the voters. Just casting our ballot once every few years for a representative of a political party and them going off to Westminster, Edinburgh or Brussels has been revealed by the present crisis to be nigh on meaningless. Once chosen and having shipped out the MP, MSP or MEP develops different priorities. The acquisition, maintenance and development of power takes precedence over local concerns and often personal ethical and moral concerns are sublimated to the service and survival of the Party. The present political stramash is the perfect example of what I am talking about. Mud slinging and arguing is getting us nowhere. Let’s look for the way forward.

    • Shuard Manson

      Careful Andrew. Well argued points are rarely welcomed here. Try being more extreme and ill informed, clueless but convinced YOUR opinion is the only correct opinion. Then tear the opposing opinion up for toilet paper.

    • James Sinclair

      Mr Holt, this is the best on-the-button analysis that I have ever read on the Brexit process. The Brexit debate has laid bare a much deeper political crises, that is ,the existential crises of future democracy in the UK itself and I do fear for that future .

  42. David Spence

    I am intrigued as to the motive behind Brexit, and what advantage this would be to the Conservatives and their agenda??

    What political advantage would there have been in leaving the EU as opposed to remaining for the Conservative Party, and is this the real reason why there was an EU Ref. (there was only 4% difference between leave and remain) in the first place?

    Was the EU Ref. politically or economically advantageous to the Conservative Party regardless to what the people of the UK voted for?????

    The people voted, but did they vote knowing what the aftermath would be in its entirety????

    • Michael Garriock

      The advantage to the Tories, in the short term at least, was to shut up those on the right who were agitating, causing a divided party/defecting to further right associations/attracting further right sympahisers/support. It backfired on them though, they didn’t expect ‘Leave’ to win, they were relying on ‘Remain’ winning to silence the dissent. ‘Leave’ winning caused the whole establishment to descend in to a silent panic they’re still in shock and denial from, hence the total pigs ear of the last few months

      I voted believing ‘Leave’ in the belief it meant exactly that, close the door, walk away, build a wall up the middle of the North Sea/Channel, call it what you like. Back to pre ’73 status for everything, no exceptions, no bits and pieces held on to and dragged with us that have been conceived while part of the EEC/EU.

      I did not know we were going to end up stuck in an eternal country destroying limbo that Westminster has dragged us in to and seem hell bent on keeping us in.

      Only politicians could try and convince the public they’re acting in the national interest while doing everything to destroy the country.

      • David Spence

        I totally agree with your comments, Michael. It certainly has put the Conservatives into a situation where it has caused division and political mayhem within the government as well as affecting, to a degree, other political parties.

        It has also weakened the basis for leaving the EU, and the aftermath, politically and economically, and the mess which has occurred thereafter.

        On the outset, from what I know, it did not make economic sense to leave the EU, based on the feedback, prior to the EU Ref; from many British companies trading within the EU, and the possible damage it would cause? I believe 65% of British trade was directly with the EU, and now this figure could be vastly reduced as a consequence?

        We are, the UK, in uncharted waters, so to speak, and it could, possibly, take years to smooth out or cause greater calamity with the EU. I hope the future relationship with the EU, does not have a negative impact on trading relationships………………time shall tell, as they say.

        It has put the future of the EU in doubt, as other countries within the EU, also wanting to have referendums??

  43. Peter Hamilton

    A big problem was using a referendum to answer a complex question.

    Should we ban smoking in public places…? Yes/No. Easy.

    Should we leave the EU? It’s not as simple as some pretended. Did it mean leaving in every respect? It wasn’t entirely a Yes/No question. Were all the knock-on consequences clear from the start? No.

    Some politicians are reluctant to harm the economy. Most believe Parliament is sovereign. Switzerland takes many decisions by referendum. Britain doesn’t.

    The public were sold a lie from the outset – that politicians would put the result above the national interest. They were sold others later, including by “trustworthy” Farage.

    For some, not cutting our nose off to spite our face is a matter of principle.

    For others, we can only get Britain back to its former splendour by going it alone – which might not turn out to be that viable.

    But there is financial itself interest at work for the pro-Brexit mega-rich who want a low-tax Britain, and they don’t mind turning up the volume on intolerant rhetoric to strengthen their position. Brexit or not, they’ve now strengthened their position – worrying given their aims and the repulsive means they willingly embrace.

    • Ali Inkster

      You mean the mega rich that made their fortune by evading tax and suing the NHS because they didn’t get a contract? folk like Richard Branson the prominent remoaner. Or geldof who lives in the UK tax free under non dom status?

      • ian tinkler

        Or Osbourne, Cameron, Salmond, Blaire!! I wish I was poor like them!

    • Michael Garriock

      It was a simple question. Only those who do not like the result try and pretend otherwise.

      “Should the United Kingdom remain a member of the European Union or leave the European Union?”

      If “leave the European Union” somehow, as you try to convince us, can be interpreted as only leaving certain bits of the EU, then the same must also apply to the alternative choice of “remain a member of the European Union” and it be interpreted as only remaining within certain bits of the EU. Which would have made asking the question in the first place meaningless and pointless, as regardless which way anyone chose to vote it meant the same thing.

      “Leave the European Union” and “remain a member of the European Union” can only be interpreted one way, as per the dictionary definition, as the question contains no caveats.

      Besides, being the good old Socialists that they are in their mission to list, label and micro manage everything, you’re either a full member of the EU or you’re not. There is no mechanism or precedent to sorta half leave, but not leave everything, like you suggest.

      Fully in, or fully out, them be the choices.

    • Ian Tinkler

      Another the pro-Brexit mega-rich Torie Peter, ” The former Respect Party leader and Bradford West MP tweeted that he would supporting the Brexit Party “for one-time only” as he wants to secure the UK’s departure from the EU.” Head out of tail end time perhaps!!!

  44. Peter Hamilton

    I think Michael will have to agree it doesn’t appear to be a question Parliament wanted this answer to! Fully in or fully out: thems not the choices no more.

    It’s a really big tangle because ultimately for the U.K. it is Parliament that is sovereign. For Scotland apparently it is the people that’s sovereign, so there may be a clash ahead.

    I’m not sure how many people voted to break up the U.K. Maybe the only solution now will be to have a confirmatory vote.

    • Michael Garriock

      “Fully in or fully out: thems not the choices no more”.

      Really? What are the choices then? Like I said above, those are the only two available where the EU is concerned. Which is a goodish chunk of the reason some of us voted out, you either accept everything that Brussels dictates, or reject everything Brussels dictates, participating in the things that work in your country and rejecting those which don’t isn’t an option. The EEC/EU worked up to a point while some level of give and take was possible with such things, now that its not, the EU are on a fast track to implosion/civil war, whichever arrives first.

    • Ian Tinkler

      “Nigel Farage’s new Brexit Party has surged into first place in opinion polls ahead of the European Parliament elections next month.” O dear Peter, do you still really feel the UK electorate are so ignorant after all the BREXIT debates of the last few years? or are you so special and clever to know best? https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/brexit-party-polls-eu-election-farage-labour-conservatives-latest-a8874361.html

  45. Peter Hamilton

    “What are the choices?” No idea, but, from the news, No-Deal is now No-Go.

    Sorry if folk were misled, but why is no-deal seemingly now no-go? Its because we vote for MPs, and they do what they think they should, not what we want.

    It’s a sair fecht, but most MPs seemingly want to spare the country needless economic damage the people didn’t knowingly vote for. That’s then doing their jobs btw.

    Lets wait and see now if a compromise emerges that Parliament can live with, or if they can agree a question they need to put to the people.

    MPs are our representatives, put there to do what they think is best. They are not our servents put there to mindlessly do our bidding. This key fact allows them the wriggle room they need to change their minds once the facts change.

    This reality behind our representative democracy illuminates the lie that was Cameron’s “advisory referendum” which, funnily enough, he promised to obey.

    You’ve got to love those Tories… or not. No-deal was a fake promise, which, happily for some, still distracts attention from the many harms of needless austerity. Let’s face it, Brexit never really meant Leave.

  46. Ian Tinkler

    Maybe the times really are changing. The Tories are in the process of self-destruction, Corbyn’s labour has never been more extream, proven racist/anti-semitic with a gutless leader failing on so many levels. The Liberals more or less wiped out, the Greens one MP has a Ph, D in Elizabethan sexual practices and the SNP leader under investigation for breaking the Ministerial code and former leader and strong man on , charges of alleged attempted rape and multiple sexual assaults! All at the same time as the eco Lunatics are super glueing themselves to trains. Hard to make that lot all up. The one good point is that UKIP having jumped into bed with Tommy Robinson and his anti-Islamic White supremacists are being wiped out by Farage and the Brexit party. Well, every cloud has a silver lining. Strange times indeed!!!

    • Stuart Hannay

      Strange times indeed – the founder of The Brexit Part had to resign last month for racist and anti-Islamic statements. And these are the new ‘moderates’?

      • Ali Inkster

        Aberdeen university has just shown the same islamiphobia by taking the sultan of Brunei’s degree from him for being a good muslim and implementing islamic law in his country.

  47. Ian Tinkler

    For the benefit of some, especially Peter Hamilton and David Spence, one of your very own, wealthy Torie and meg rich man, ” The former Respect Party leader and Bradford West MP, George Galloway.

    • Graham Fleming

      Tory? The word is derived from the gaelic or Irish,meaning an outlaw,brigand,or thief, very descriptive of the modern day Conservative party is it not.Another example of the language(gaelic) being used in everyday speech but George Galloway mmm a de ken,the jury is oot on that ane!

  48. Ian Tinkler

    Tory? That name derives from 1649! I think some of us have moved on a bit since then, Graham Fleming, but there will always be a place for infantile name-calling, especially when a depth of comment is so shallow.

  49. Peter Hamilton

    Ali’s statement is not one everyone would post.

    Aberdeen University was rejecting the autocratic imposition of a particularly hard-line act of Islamism. Such Islamism is not Islam. Resisting the Sultan’s imposition of restrictions on the freedoms of others is not Islamaphobic, as Ali may already know.

    Conflating these issues into a false statement, whilst describing the Sultan as a good Muslim, is something an islamaphobe might do, but pointing this out in neutral terms will probably see me attacked for being intolerant.

    There are hard-line inflexible dogmatic literalists in all major faiths, and the assembled texts of any faith are often contradictory. There are also people who hide their malicious agendas behind statements that might be designed to appear innocuous at first glance.

    It may seem a little pointless trying to make this kind of thing clear to closeminded hardliners, but the tricks extremists use to influence others have to be exposed. Otherwise we’ll have to live in the kind of society they want, and heaven help us then.

    It may help to remember that Scotland only abandoned trying to “cure” homosexuality with electro-shock therapy as recently as 1976.

    Securing a tolerant global community required international cooperation: hence the EU.

    • Ian Tinkler

      Sadly Islamophobia is alive and kicking on Shetland. I had to forcefully point out (online) to one of my former, supposedly rational patients, that her extreme views on immigrants were pure fiction. Her online rant /claim being that our immigrant population were full of infectious diseases (HIV, TB, STDs) and a danger to our (white?) community. That is a total fiction promoted by a malicious racist. She was mirroring a neo-nazi website sadly with the backing of several Shetland folk. She became very agitated when I pointed out to her oral and general health was no better nor worse than many of my overseas/immigrant patients. (Most immigrants have better dental health due to not consuming sugary foods) Needless to say, I was cascaded with a barrage of insults and threats. Thankfully she and her like-minded bigots blocked me on Facebook, thank God for small mercies!