This is Dulouz's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following Dulouz's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
Dulouz
Recent Activity
"no matter how detrimental it maybe, in a free society we cannot force anyone to ‘integrate’ if they refuse to do so." What a ridiculous statement from a Conservative! Of-course everyone is forced to integrate in society. Integration doesn't mean blind conformity, but it does mean that both men and women should contribute with ther fellow citizens, not hide themselves away. What is the veil's purpose? It is to keep Muslim women away from the looks of others deemed not worthy to look at them, or it means the Muslim woman herself is not worthy to show herself to others. Either way it is repulsive. To defend the right to keep women locked away from society just because they are a woman is not freedom.
1 reply
Edward Longshanks England is a gentle giant - that is why I love her so. It is also why I hate any Scots with a chip on their shoulder (their is much less than you would like to think. My English workmates haven't had any anti-English comments, although strangely my friend from Burnley is often told on the phone by Southern Counties types to go home to Jockland.) It is also why I hate to see this new un-English behaviour by the English who complain about this new super-race of Scots who run everything in England. Cameron hit the nail on the head. Scots are seen in England as two extremes. Either as drunken fools or masters of England. Both are contradictory stereotypes - much like the French either class Englishmen as either Homosexuals or fierce Hooligans. DC is right in saying that English people do not even bother to understand their fellow Britons. As I have said above, every time I have visited England my Scottishness has either been attacked or ridiculed - so lets not pretend ant-Scottishness does not exist. Ask any Scot in England and they will tell a similar story but Scots seem to accept this as par for the course. It is seen as fair-game in England at the moment, especially in politics, to be anti-Scottish. It may surprise you to know that in Scotland it is very different. The Conservatives, Labour, Lib Dems and even SNP have English MSP's sitting in the Scottish Parliament. I have never heard any complaints about this because (upsetting as this may be for you) to even bring this up would be classed as a racist taboo. In fact if you write the same about the English in Scotland as you have about Scots in England you would be classed as a racist. I AM NOT SAYING YOU ARE NOR DO I THINK YOU ARE - merely that similar anti-English talk in Scotland is seen as barbaric in a way that is fine in England against Scots. Of-course there are Scots who do talk this way but they are seen for what they are - morons. Can we say the same in England? Is this type of talk not glorified at present? Don't mistake the Scottish Football fans for the Scots, anymore than you would identify a English skinhead at an England game chanting BNP slogans and beating up Johnny Foreigner at a World Cup as being the epitome of England.
1 reply
Edward Longshanks, You are certainly an interesting individual. The political points you make may be right or wrong, but they are certainly valid. However, your true colours are shown when you complain about politicians being Scots and about "Scottish blood" which is a curiously backward type of language. What does it matter where someone comes from or what "blood" they have? Is it not their policies and opinions that matter? It seems some (and only some) Scots and English feel it is fair to say things about each other that they wouldn't say about a Jamaican or Pakistani. As for your name - I love it. Edward Longshanks was a fearsome man indeed and of-course I am sure your choice of a man rightly called "The Hammer of The Scots" was not a coincidence. One thing I would like to remind you of. Edward Longshanks was deliberately buried in a lead casket with the wish that when England finally conquered Scotland he be moved to a casket of Gold. He is still in his lead casket.
1 reply
Edward Longshanks, England is the dominant country in the United Kingdom. It always has been and always will be. This is not just accepted, but is natural - so your attack on the "silly Scots" is a bit silly in itself. As for Cameron having "Scottish blood flowing through his veins." What if he does? I would like to know if you are brave enough to admit you think this is bad? If you are a racist admit it. If you think it doesn't matter then why mention it? So what is it my friend? Do you hate "Scottish blood" or not?
1 reply
Terry, So you agree you feel equally as sad if a Scottish, Welsh, Northern Irish or English soldier dies? If so I genuinely apologise. However, you did say you went out of your way to see which part of the UK a dead British soldier comes from. Regardless of honourable intentions that in itself is beneath you. Can I ask a very simple question? Who is your enemy here? The Scots who in every poll want to see Scots MP's not voting on English only matters (because they know what it has been like for 285 years - including ME) or the English people who deny you these things?
1 reply
Terry Brown Your last point actually contradicts your first point. Scotland joined the Union presuming and wanting a "union of federal nations" in the first place - but were denied it by England. So much for equal rights and democracy. I think a "union of federal nations" is what most Scots desire still and I personally would welcome it with open arms. This would be the fulfilment of the Union. As for democracy, well why is it that the vast majority od Scots do not want nuclear weapons on their soil, but they are there anyway?. If Scotland was really in control or the Scottish nation had more rights than the English then that wouldn't be the case would it? The fact is that England doesn't want it anywhere near them. As for your "Britishness" dying - you are wrong. You never were British in the first place. You just confused England with Britain and were shocked that it wasn't necessarily the same thing. I am British and yet I am not, never will be and don't want to be, English. This seems almost an insult to English pride, as many of the "little Englanders" (See above on numerous threads) define their nation by belittling and hating others who are beneath them. When those they feel should be on a leash are realised to be standing beside them they feel insulted. In the thread above we have yourself who will now vote for a Gary Bushell party, we have Terry who admits going out his way to find out if a British soldier is English before he feels sad and a man who names himself deliberately over someone who hated Scots and loved killing them, and another who wants England to crack down on Scottish Terrorists! (sic) Is this representative of the Conservative Party I belong to. It is a serious question - are you people really English Tories?
1 reply
Terry, Don't you see your thought process is used in exactly the same way in Scotland? "Why is a Scottish vote less than an English one?" The Scots don't want Nuclear weapons in Scotland - but there they are because the English want them there. The Scots didn't want the Poill tax - but the English MP's said it should and so it was. The Scots didn't want the Iraq war but the English MP's said yes so there you are. ....and so on. You're argument falls on one point. If England is a nation that must decide EVERYTHING by itself and for itself, then so must Scotland and all of the above would be changed. As I have said on this place many times, far from Scotland leaving England forever, it will still be there only it will no longer have any influence from England. Why fervently attempt to lose influence? From the world's greatest power to no longer being able to have any influence on the top third of Britain. What a come down. From disagreements on immigration to possible alliances with foreign nations not in England's interest you will be powerless. England will not gain power over this Island it will lose it. This will come to pass, for even though I am a nominal Unionist, I see it all being swept before me in a tidal wave of pettiness on BOTH sides. The UK is dead - killed over a bunch of stereotypes. In fact the more I think about it - the bunch of controlling Superhumans that the Scots are (remember according to you they control a nation TEN TIMES their size) should flourish and go on to rule the world...then the solar system and beyond.
1 reply
Terry, Not only do you feel it necessary to resort to silly names, but you actually believe that 10 million non-English Britons rule the other 50 million? This is getting pathological, but I suppose even the dominant want to feel like victims in modern society. Funnily enough this attitude is very un-English and is the opposite of what makes England great. As for rushing to see which part of the UK a dead British soldier comes form well...that sort of sums you up my friend. PS. Why are you on about your name and email address etc? When did I mention anything of the sort?
1 reply
Martin, I would respect you a lot if you were courageous enough to simply say you hate Scotland and Scots. Go on, you know you want to! :)
1 reply
What a sad and pathetic thread this is. Each "side" given to petty and mythical stereotypes and sad little hatreds. When we live in a dangerous world that wants to destroy us all, and yet here we are in a prosperous and peaceful Union that has lasted for 300 years is it not strange we want to break it up? We are like an old married couple fighting over a chocolate bar inside their home while people outside want to tear down the very walls we live in. Utterly pathetic! I'll ask you this: when you hear a British soldier is killed in Iraq or Afghanistan do you rush to find out which part of the UK he /she is from so you can decide how you feel? Thought not! Grow up!
1 reply
David Cameron says a decent and noble thing that people should respect each other and that mayve the English should attempt to learn about Scotland in the same way every Scot from School to sport to TV learns about the English. Rubbish they cry. There is too much respect and understanding of Scots. Here are some examples that prove him right. It would be funny if it wasn't so sad: Og - [being Scottish would] "have gone down quite badly in Scotland, but would have been a massive gaffe for many English voters." Martin Cole - "Yet another major clanger dropped by this closet Scot" Sorry guys for being Scottish. I mean if it disgusts you so much then maybe I should just hide it? If it also freaks out England so much then the country really has problems. ------------------------------------ T Sinden - "so can we have a parliament for England fully equal to Scotland's ? Nope" Of-course that big thing in London that has been in existence for so many years has always given the Scots equal respect to England. Get real. It is a fact of life that England totally dominates the Union in every way. An example? Most English people don't want nuclear weapons on their soil. Most Scots don't want nuclear weapons on their soil. Who wins? ----------------------------------- Kingbongo - "I am very disappointed with this speech - and for my wife who suffered frequent anti-English sentiment when she ived in Aberdeen it's the final straw and she won't be voting for Cameron anytime soon." Well I have been spat on and nearly assaulted in London for having the audacity to buy a drink with a Scottish accent. By your logic the English are all anti-Scottish. ------------------------------------ ENGLISH! - "Cameron is so wide of the mark on this one it beggers belief. It is about time Scottish racism to the English was dealt with. Many Scots have such a perverse idea of history. I mean most of them still believe they are Celts! Few of them even understand that the south east up to forth was part of a Saxon kingdom. They are they ones who rely on a false history and use this to put forward anti-english arguments. Get real Cameron!" See the above on this racism nonsense. When did the English turn into wallflowers? Every Scot who has ever went to England has experienced some anti-Scottish sentiment so you are not alone my friend. "On the other hand, far too many Scots spend their time thinking how they can hate the English. Look at football, as an Englishman I support any British team, do the Scots? Of course not! The real racism in this country is that meated out by the Scots to the English. I was once told where to go in no uncertain times whilst in Scotland simply because I was English. Would that happen here, no. Would you be beaten up for wearing a Scotland shirt in England. Not likely. Would you be beaten up for wearing an England shirt in Scotland. Far more likely." Have you ever been to Glasgow? There are many English shirts on show without any bother. -------------------------------------- Della Petch - "Tough on terrorists? Not the Scottish variety, apparently. The silence is deafening." Oh my goodness. Did I just read that? Are you feeling okay? --------------------------------------- Aileen Brown - "I saw a rugby match on TV, between Scotland and England and a bunch of Scots had dressed up like Mel Gibson in drag, painted their faces and were chanting "Oooh Ooh" noises at the English team, who politely refrained from laughing. It was cringingly embarassing. We sat in stunned silence, witnessing Scotland's answer to the Taliban." Of-course English football fans are great ambassadors aren't they? The difference is I don't have such a small mind that I think this sums up the English, as you seem to think this sums up the whole Scottish nation. ---------------------------- Stephen Tolkinghorne - "Scots will not vote Tory, even if you bribed them with nightly free deep fried pizza and kebab." Ian Lambton - "Groooovey Dave is obviously wholeheartedly committed to an English Parliament and should be given the Scotch Darwin Award." Here are men who either knowingly insult Scots by calling them Scotch and say all they eat are kebabs and deep fried Pizza, or they do know they are insulting. Whats worse? David Cameron has got this respect and stereotypes thing all wrong hasn't he?
1 reply
I agree there will either be a federal or group of independent states. If this happens it will be interesting when England finds that the power it has over Scotland melts and far from having more power England has less over the island it forgets it actually shares. As for david - whose to say the English people will support the Queen of Scots?
1 reply
Jonathan It is you who are confusing issues. You talk about England as a separate nation on internal issues and then morph England into the UK on foreign policy or the economy, completely forgetting it is the same people in control of both. It is because England controls things through the UK Parliament that it does not have a Parliament called the English Parliament. This is because a federal UK must mean that there is a Parliament or body above the English and Scottish Parliaments that will no longer be dominated by England. England would be weaker in a federal UK or through independence. By having separate Parliament we therefore state that both Scotland and England are nations. By default one could not dominate the other. They would have to work together thereby increasing the power of the Scottish body politic. In independence this island is forever controlled by both England and Scotland and not England alone at present. Why can't you see this? And before you think I am against an English Parliament - I am not. Like the majority of Scots (maybe not the majority of Scottish Tories) I would welcome a federal UK. To me it would be the culmination of what the Union of nations was supposed to be other than an English controlled one. If it was independence then so be it. I am just stunned that otherwise intelligent people actually think Britain is not controlled by England in nearly every way. As for the emotive language of "sucking up" to France. Foreign policy is relative and it is to Scotland's credit that it is still there as a nation. So much so that some English people want to gain independence from Britain as if Scots dominate every walk of life. If that is true you must give those five million people of Scotland some credit if they dominate fifty million people of England! Of-course if you object to this and state this is not true, and that England does control Britain then what's the problem?
1 reply
Jake You say: "I am well aware that the idea of a separate parliament for England has quite a lot of support in Scotland - quite alot of support there also for regionalisation and therefore nuetralisation of England. So if Scots support an English Parliament it is because they support the "nuetralisation of England" and if they don't they are anti-English? That seems the classic double-bind to me and speaks volumes. As for "England should have the same control over our affairs as the Scots over their affairs via the Scottish parliament," I have yet to meet a single Scot who disagrees, so what is the anti-Scottish fuss about? Also if there is an English Parliament who decides policy if the English and Scottish Parliaments disagree? Will the English suddenly transform into British?
1 reply
Tory Solicitor This is the great blindness that (and I think understandably) affects England at present. England controls so much that it forgets this. When something is outwith it's power it shrieks for equality for the English nation to control all it's own affairs when it does not offer it to others. You cannot have it both ways. Either England can (like the other nations) have some legislation decided against it's own will as a single body, or those nations are equal and any decision affecting them must be voted in by them only. Be honest with yourself. What you want is for England to control all it's own internal affairs, some Scottish matters and all UK-wide matters, but for Scotland to control nothing UK-wide and only some Scottish-only affairs like transport and education which has been Scottish only anyway. You want fairness and equality only when it suits England. This is the way it has always been - Scots accept this - but don't ask for England to decide for itself and only itself on all matters and then the others ask the same. If England is one unitary body, then so are the others and equality ensues. One nation, unlike the present, can then no longer decide on any UK-wide matter without the consent of the other.
1 reply
For Jake and Tory Solicitor. Firstly, as I have said before, every single Scottish Poll taken says that Scots believe in EVFEL. Every single one - so there is still animosity is about Scotland, even when we agree. Secondly, Jake, you talk about anti-English Scots. I have never met a single Scot who has ever been to England and not been abused because of their nationality at least once. Does that influence my views on England as a nation? Not in the slightest. Thirdly, you are confusing to ideas of the union to suit your argument: It seems you want England to be in control of all her own affairs? For England to control every single issue that affects England? To decide by itself, and for itself, every aspect of English life? Agree? Yes? If that is the case then you must allow Scotland the same rights. Scotland must be able to control all economic decisions. All immigration to Scotland. All aspects of Nuclear arms on Scotland. All defence policy. Agree? No? Either the nations are treated equally in a federal UK or through independence or England controls the UK except for a political anomaly that both the English and Scottish people want gone. It's your choice: either England is the boss or England is just an equal. Tory Solicitor: Take war/the economy/immigration/defence/ social security/pensions etc. How do you explain to someone in Edinburgh that their child must pay for a change in the policy of war/the economy/immigration/defence/social security/pensions etc when Scotland does not vote for it and England does? How do you justify that one nation overrides another? At least if we had a federal UK or independent England and Scotland we could say it was a democratic decision.
1 reply
For those who want an English Parliament - do you not realise that the power of England on this island would decrease considerably? In a federal system you would have to treat the Scottish Parliament as an equal on all UK matters. At the moment, through sheer population size, England controls immigration, foreign policy, the economy etc. This would no longer be the case and would lead to England being an equal partner instead of the controller. In an independent England, you would have no control over the huge land mass of the top third of this island. From immigration to foreign policy England could find herself seeing developments it can longer influence. At the moment England runs the show. Are you going to give that up for a small constitutional anomaly? This seems very strange.
1 reply
With respect Editor the question on the Union answered it's own question and was skewed completely in a pro-English nationalist way. For example you say: The relationship between England and Scotland has recently been a subject of much debate. Which of the following measures do you support to rebalance that relationship? You have already decided there is an unbalanced Union here, but in whose favour? Are you honestly saying Scotland's five million people dominate England's 50 million? The English people control nearly everything from foreign policy to the economy without the say of anyone else. It seems bizarre that England is being deliberately portrayed as a victim. Please tick ALL those which you support: Elimination of the subsidy that English taxpayers pay to Scotland This is a debatable point and not a statement of fact. Anyway, name one person who agrees with any subsidy? Why didn'y you put: Should London subsidise Newcastle? It seems you will get the answer you are looking for here. English and Welsh MPs being given sole control of laws affecting England and Wales Again, who is going to say no to this? This is another emotive and loaded question with the answer included. To be fair you should also asked whether Scottish MP's should have sole control of Laws affecting Scotland, which does not happen at the moment. Don't get me wrong. This is a wonderful website but it seems strange that I have never read any story or blog that has been positive about Scotland in any way.
1 reply
The generalisations and stereotypes about Scotland and the Scottish people are bordering on the xenophobic. If you exchanged the words 'Scotland' and 'Scottish' to Jamaican, Pakistanis, Germans or Indians you would clearly see what I mean. (Try it?) The key thing to notice is how Scots are bizzarely flipping from being the deadweight 'spongers' who are holding England back to the 'raj' masters that secretly control England. This contradiction between a people being not worthy and then paradoxically being so powerful that they are behind all the major decisions is the key to look for in all xenophobia. Of-course it is easily forgotten that a recent survey found around 60% of English people believe their fellow Britons should not be Prime Minister because of where they were born. It seems only those in the conspiratorial 'raj' can be anti- something. Scots are a people, I sadly have to remind even English Conservatives, who have been with them for 300 years through the best but also ourtheir darkest days without fail, have never voted for independence and have never threatened them in any way (unlike other nations even on these isles). To think that around 85% of the people of the UK who are English are not in complete control - or are being dominated by a tiny 5% of Scots - is so absurd as to be unworthy of serious debate. Maybe there were boards like this in Serbia that complained that the Montenegrins were running Serbia and Montenegro? Then again, look what happened there.
1 reply
"It would return us to the very situation we were in before England conquered Scotland for good..." Posted by: Julian Morrison | July 04, 2006 at 21:12 This is the attitude that inflames the situation either through deliberate insult, or ignorance of what the Union is. If England has conquered Scotland what is all the fuss about? As for Scots playing the other side, well that is merely a matter of perspective - maybe it was England that was playing the other side?
1 reply
Huntarian After Scottish independence, how long will it be before the North of England asks how much longer should they subsidise England-wide serving bodies, jobs and organisations that are London based? Why should the North of England subsidise Wembley, the Millenium Dome and the Olympics as well as government and the civil service, which London alone couldn't afford, and yet make use of? Also, why should England subsidise the UK's Nuclear weapons and not get full use of them? Bring them home from Glasgow and set them up in the Home Counties!!! Just Kidding!
1 reply
John I am merely making the point that English MP's on all the really important issues like defence, the economy, foreign affairs and immigration can totally overide the wishes of Scottish MP's. You pretend that UK affairs are treated as different and that all the nations are treated equally but they are not. The reality is it is English affairs and interests not UK. Scots are well aware of this and have accepted this over the last 300 years. The Scottish body politic is much less powerful than the English body politic. For example, at the moment Scots would welcome more immigration to Scotland to boost the population and economy, but England say no because it doesn't suit them. I can't believe that England does not see that it's enormous population compared to Scotland gives it presently (and always has done) total domination in the Union. The reason England does not have a separate Parliament is because by not having one it gains advantage of population. In effect the UK Parliament has always been the English Parliament. A federal UK or break-up would actually give it less power over the affairs of this island as a Scottish Parliament would have to be treated as an equal in foreign affairs, immigration etc. The population advantage of England would be nullified. In independence, it would no longer be able to control such basics as immigration onto all of the island nor which national armies it allows onto this island - as well as thousands of other things taken for granted at present. England is rushing headlong into a decrease of power because of a complete mis-calculation of it's real power. It wants equality in one area that it is disadvantaged forgetting this means equality in all other areas where it holds absolute power. How strange!
1 reply
John You say the current situation is anti-democratic, but then say no-one representing Scotland can be PM? Also, can you answer this please? If every English MP wanted to go to war and every Scottish MP did not, would this mean that Scotland could opt out? If the UK nations are equal this would be the logical choice. However, the UK nations are not equal. England (understandably) dominates completely, so let us not pretend that this union of nations is not in England's favour. From England's perspective it has three choices: 1. We are a Union that is dominated by England, but to keep that Union England has to compromise on some issues. This is the present Union. 2. We have a Union of equal nations were England loses power, because it loses it's advantage of sheer population size. This is a federal UK. 3. We have a break-up of the Union and England loses complete control over the north of the UK, much like Ireland.
1 reply
Malcolm Once people start saying that any Briton cannot be PM because of his nationality or even constituency then you have a two-tier society. We all know what the two-tiers will be, and they are based on nationality. Not one person here as replied to the fact that although Scottish MP's can have a deciding factor, only if the conditions are right and only in some occasions, that English MP's dominate nearly every major factor of Scottish life without reciprocation. I think some people believethe Scottish Parliament rules every aspect of Scotland. It does not. The union has always been totally in England's favour. It seems strange this is never formulated into the equation. This is a matter that can be resolved very quickly and painlessly, especially as change has the support of the English and Scottish people. This being the case, you have to wonder why people are making this into such a major problem? It pains me to say, but could it be because Gordon Brown is Scottish? If he was from the Home Counties would it be such a problem?
1 reply
So the UK is a unitary body when the sheer weight of numbers means that England tells the rest of the UK what to do, from immigration to taxation and the economy to the declaration of war - but as soon as England does not have total control (50 odd MP's out of nearly 600) then Scots can no longer be PM? I am a Scottish Unionist because I believe in the values of Britain. This isn't the values of Britain. Again, can I remind you that EVERY poll taken in Scotland shows the Scots think that only English MP's should vote on English matters. It seems though that even when the Scottish people are supportive, that it is not enough to stop the "race card" being played.
1 reply