Jump to content

Even More SNP Nonsense


Stuart Lyon

Recommended Posts

coconut doug
48 minutes ago, jambos are go! said:

So you think the difference in drug deaths is down to the way the stats are compiled.Really?

There is a small effect but i listed 2 others which you chose to ignore.

 

You are telling us that the number of drug related deaths is related to police numbers. The statistics show no link.

 

You are claiming our very high rates are due to the SNP's incompetence but are unable to explain why so far because your police numbers rhetoric is not substantiated by the evidence. 

 

 Don't you think that if the answers were as simple as you seem to think they are the govt would have responded accordingly? 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 11.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • Space Mackerel

    2161

  • deesidejambo

    496

  • Pans Jambo

    477

  • JamboX2

    465

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

jambos are go!
1 hour ago, coconut doug said:

There is a small effect but i listed 2 others which you chose to ignore.

 

You are telling us that the number of drug related deaths is related to police numbers. The statistics show no link.

 

You are claiming our very high rates are due to the SNP's incompetence but are unable to explain why so far because your police numbers rhetoric is not substantiated by the evidence. 

 

 Don't you think that if the answers were as simple as you seem to think they are the govt would have responded accordingly? 

 

 

No. I am staying that the decision to increase police numbers south of the border will deliver a financial boost to Holyrood.

 

virtually every thing you say has not been said by me on this thread or debate. It's just you putting things together to suit your prejudices and preconceptions. Nonsense on stilts as they say. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

coconut doug
1 hour ago, jambos are go! said:

No. I am staying that the decision to increase police numbers south of the border will deliver a financial boost to Holyrood.

 

virtually every thing you say has not been said by me on this thread or debate. It's just you putting things together to suit your prejudices and preconceptions. Nonsense on stilts as they say. 

You did state that the SNP were neglecting the drugs issue. You words below.

 

" this should provide  enough funding to recruit  more that 2000 extra police officers in Scotland to tackle the Drugs crisis so neglected by the SNP.  And the SNP played no part in getting that funding. Better together indeed."

 

In the same quote you quite clearly claim that 2,000 extra police officers are going to tackle the drugs crisis and in so doing you assume a link between police numbers and the drugs crisis when the evidence suggests no such link exists.

 

You also claim in the same quote that the SNP played no part in getting the funding. I didn't point out the silliness of that comment because others had done so but if you understood the nature of the Barnett Formula you would know that no Scottish government could play a part, as a proportion of what is spent, necessarily comes to Scotland so there is no need for any Scottish government to play a part. What is more salient than your Better Together slogan is the notion that had we been an independent country we could have diverted resource and legislation more appropriately than waiting for a Barnett knockdown from Westminster.

 Your notion that the Barnett formula and the money given in consequentials give us  "more than our fair share" is at best a matter of opinion and one which i doubt you can adequately support. Even if you are correct in this assumption many people in Scotland do not want to be treated in this way.

 

If you do not understand your own posts that's not very good but just to summarise

 

 1 You have no evidence to show that the SNP have neglected the drugs crisis.

 

2 The money given to the Scottish government is given under Barnett and does not represent an act of altruism from this government, it is nothing but a knee jerk response to bad publicity and rising knife crime in England.

 

3 There is no link between the number of police officers and the scale of the drugs problem.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Weve had almost 11 years of Tory imposed austerity so any”additional” funding is really what we are owed anyway. Its our money!

 

Scotlands oil has been propping up the UK economy & Sterling for decades.

 

Time we got paid back!

 

Are folk seriously suggesting the SNP are to blame for the so called “drugs epidemic”?

 

If you take a drug and get knocked down, fall out the window or drown its classed as a “drugs death” in Scotland (even though it wasnt the actual drugs that killed you) It would not be counted that way in rUK but hey, any chance to piss on Scotland by the tory supporting MSM eh!

 

Are folk seriously suggesting Boris and his extreme right wing cabinet will be a good thing for Scotland???

 

Jeezo!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Pans Jambo said:

Weve had almost 11 years of Tory imposed austerity so any”additional” funding is really what we are owed anyway. Its our money!

 

Scotlands oil has been propping up the UK economy & Sterling for decades.

 

Time we got paid back!

 

Are folk seriously suggesting the SNP are to blame for the so called “drugs epidemic”?

 

If you take a drug and get knocked down, fall out the window or drown its classed as a “drugs death” in Scotland (even though it wasnt the actual drugs that killed you) It would not be counted that way in rUK but hey, any chance to piss on Scotland by the tory supporting MSM eh!

 

Are folk seriously suggesting Boris and his extreme right wing cabinet will be a good thing for Scotland???

 

Jeezo!

It's just loyalists trying to distract people.  It's gonnae be fun watching their tears and snorters, come day of the Scots.

Edited by ri Alban
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, jambos are go! said:

Dear oh dear. I would have a more informed debate with a Haggis.

You have been shown up talking rubbish about police numbers so revert to anti-Scottish garbage as usual.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, coconut doug said:

You did state that the SNP were neglecting the drugs issue. You words below.

 

" this should provide  enough funding to recruit  more that 2000 extra police officers in Scotland to tackle the Drugs crisis so neglected by the SNP.  And the SNP played no part in getting that funding. Better together indeed."

 

In the same quote you quite clearly claim that 2,000 extra police officers are going to tackle the drugs crisis and in so doing you assume a link between police numbers and the drugs crisis when the evidence suggests no such link exists.

 

You also claim in the same quote that the SNP played no part in getting the funding. I didn't point out the silliness of that comment because others had done so but if you understood the nature of the Barnett Formula you would know that no Scottish government could play a part, as a proportion of what is spent, necessarily comes to Scotland so there is no need for any Scottish government to play a part. What is more salient than your Better Together slogan is the notion that had we been an independent country we could have diverted resource and legislation more appropriately than waiting for a Barnett knockdown from Westminster.

 Your notion that the Barnett formula and the money given in consequentials give us  "more than our fair share" is at best a matter of opinion and one which i doubt you can adequately support. Even if you are correct in this assumption many people in Scotland do not want to be treated in this way.

 

If you do not understand your own posts that's not very good but just to summarise

 

 1 You have no evidence to show that the SNP have neglected the drugs crisis.

 

2 The money given to the Scottish government is given under Barnett and does not represent an act of altruism from this government, it is nothing but a knee jerk response to bad publicity and rising knife crime in England.

 

3 There is no link between the number of police officers and the scale of the drugs problem.

 

 

Great post but you will never get a coherent reply

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jambos are go!
10 hours ago, coconut doug said:

You did state that the SNP were neglecting the drugs issue. You words below.

 

" this should provide  enough funding to recruit  more that 2000 extra police officers in Scotland to tackle the Drugs crisis so neglected by the SNP.  And the SNP played no part in getting that funding. Better together indeed."

 

In the same quote you quite clearly claim that 2,000 extra police officers are going to tackle the drugs crisis and in so doing you assume a link between police numbers and the drugs crisis when the evidence suggests no such link exists.

 

You also claim in the same quote that the SNP played no part in getting the funding. I didn't point out the silliness of that comment because others had done so but if you understood the nature of the Barnett Formula you would know that no Scottish government could play a part, as a proportion of what is spent, necessarily comes to Scotland so there is no need for any Scottish government to play a part. What is more salient than your Better Together slogan is the notion that had we been an independent country we could have diverted resource and legislation more appropriately than waiting for a Barnett knockdown from Westminster.

 Your notion that the Barnett formula and the money given in consequentials give us  "more than our fair share" is at best a matter of opinion and one which i doubt you can adequately support. Even if you are correct in this assumption many people in Scotland do not want to be treated in this way.

 

If you do not understand your own posts that's not very good but just to summarise

 

 1 You have no evidence to show that the SNP have neglected the drugs crisis.

 

2 The money given to the Scottish government is given under Barnett and does not represent an act of altruism from this government, it is nothing but a knee jerk response to bad publicity and rising knife crime in England.

 

3 There is no link between the number of police officers and the scale of the drugs problem.

 

 

The increasing drug emergency is not evidence that Holyrood is not doing enough. REALLY?

 

So extra money is irrelevant but 10 years of austerity was.  REALLY.

 

You think that increasing police resources is no way to tackle the drugs emergency,  REALLY.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, jambos are go! said:

The increasing drug emergency is not evidence that Holyrood is not doing enough. REALLY?

 

So extra money is irrelevant but 10 years of austerity was.  REALLY.

 

You think that increasing police resources is no way to tackle the drugs emergency,  REALLY.

 

 

Was it increased police number that stopped Glasgow being the "Murder capital of Europe" way back when?

 

Or was it a joined up approach using several agencies and a complete change in direction?

 

Police, courts and prison is not the answer, it never was.

Edited by Pans Jambo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...
jack D and coke
On 29/07/2019 at 10:08, jambos are go! said:

The increasing drug emergency is not evidence that Holyrood is not doing enough. REALLY?

 

So extra money is irrelevant but 10 years of austerity was.  REALLY.

 

You think that increasing police resources is no way to tackle the drugs emergency,  REALLY.

 

 

I’d you think throwing more police at the drug problem fixes your thinking is about as old as the drug laws themselves. 

Read a book called chasing the scream. 

Edited by jack D and coke
Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Phil Dunphy said:

Has anyone managed to blame Westminster for the taxpayer paying Salmonds legal bills yet?

 

Asking for a friend. 

 

What’s that got to do with the SNP? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, Phil Dunphy said:

Has anyone managed to blame Westminster for the taxpayer paying Salmonds legal bills yet?

 

Asking for a friend. 

Nope, any nobody could.

 

Scared of "SNP acting slow on beast Salmond" headlines, the party moved far too fast to eject him, breaching all kinds of rules in the process.

It was a ludicrous knee-jerk response to something that should have been handled correctly within the internal investigation rules.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cygnet said:

 

What’s that got to do with the SNP? 


A former SNP leader and First Minister having his legal bills paid by the taxpayer because of a botched investigation?

 

Aye, probably nothing. 
 

🙄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cade said:

Nope, any nobody could.

 

Scared of "SNP acting slow on beast Salmond" headlines, the party moved far too fast to eject him, breaching all kinds of rules in the process.

It was a ludicrous knee-jerk response to something that should have been handled correctly within the internal investigation rules.

Possibly, although it could have been because they knew he was guilty, they knew he would turn it into a circus because he was always bigger than the cause, because they didn't want Nicola named the sex offenders apprentice, or, they're just a bunch of incompetent half wits. More likely a combination of all this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Phil Dunphy said:


A former SNP leader and First Minister having his legal bills paid by the taxpayer because of a botched investigation?

 

Aye, probably nothing. 
 

🙄

 

The investigation was absolutely nothing to do with the SNP bud. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

50 minutes ago, SE16 3LN said:

Possibly, although it could have been because they knew he was guilty, they knew he would turn it into a circus because he was always bigger than the cause, because they didn't want Nicola named the sex offenders apprentice, or, they're just a bunch of incompetent half wits. More likely a combination of all this.

Right, he's guilty. Ok everyone, Millwall says he guilty, nevermind the trial.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Cygnet said:

 

The investigation was absolutely nothing to do with the SNP bud. 

 

I was under the impression the investigation was handled by the civil service. Which reports to Westminster. Is that not correct?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, ri Alban said:

Right, he's guilty. Ok everyone, Millwall says he guilty, nevermind the trial.

once again, you just made that up. Boring mate

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 14/08/2019 at 13:40, Justin Z said:

 

I was under the impression the investigation was handled by the civil service. Which reports to Westminster. Is that not correct?

 

Does anybody have info on this? I'm still sitting here wondering. @Phil Dunphy, you brought it up--how were the Scottish Government and the SNP involved?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Zlatanable said:

So poor people dying, is open season for you to make political gain. 

Not a second thought on show, just Scottish independence. 

He has point, tho. Does he not?  British knife crime rises, was the headlines, when in fact, knife crime in Scotland was dropping fast. Then came the Scottish drug hysteria on the news. So, who exactly is making political gain?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Zlatanable said:

So poor people dying, is open season for you to make political gain. 

Not a second thought on show, just Scottish independence. 

My point is not about “poor people dying”. 

My point is that the union supporting MSM had the SNP Baaaad story regarding this same topic promoted front & centre, then it was discussed on BBC radio phone in shows and TV political shows etc. whereas the England & Wales version gets buried. Its there but you need to dig for it. 

Hypocrites. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jack D and coke
44 minutes ago, Pans Jambo said:

My point is not about “poor people dying”. 

My point is that the union supporting MSM had the SNP Baaaad story regarding this same topic promoted front & centre, then it was discussed on BBC radio phone in shows and TV political shows etc. whereas the England & Wales version gets buried. Its there but you need to dig for it. 

Hypocrites. 

It’s very deliberate. 

I had retards/rangers/mini Huns posting on my social media about it wanting the SNP hung for it and would you believe it it’s a U.K. national issue. 

Whodda thunk it🤷🏽‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, jack D and coke said:

It’s very deliberate. 

I had retards/rangers/mini Huns posting on my social media about it wanting the SNP hung for it and would you believe it it’s a U.K. national issue. 

Whodda thunk it🤷🏽‍♂️

Shhhhh. Lift that rug whilst it gets a sweep....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jambos are go!

The increase in E&W was 16% compared to 27% for Scotland . So the disparity is getting worse and the SNPs shame likewise. Not fit for Office IMO.

Edited by jambos are go!
Link to comment
Share on other sites

34 minutes ago, jambos are go! said:

The increase in E&W was 16% compared to 27% for Scotland . So the disparity is getting worse and the SNPs shame likewise. Not fit for Office IMO.

Apples for Apples mate.

 

Those figures are not.

 

Scotland counts ANY death as a drugs death if the deceased shows any signs of having illegal drugs in their system. So if you take a spliff & get run down crossing the road its a drugs death in Scotland.

 

But please, dont let that spoil your bashing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

jambos are go!
32 minutes ago, Pans Jambo said:

Apples for Apples mate.

 

Those figures are not.

 

Scotland counts ANY death as a drugs death if the deceased shows any signs of having illegal drugs in their system. So if you take a spliff & get run down crossing the road its a drugs death in Scotland.

 

But please, dont let that spoil your bashing!

Regardless of the method used the percentage increases are still valid for compar ing  how effectively the issue is being tackled surely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, jambos are go! said:

Regardless of the method used the percentage increases are still valid for compar ing  how effectively the issue is being tackled surely.

Righto!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 hours ago, Justin Z said:

 

Does anybody have info on this? I'm still sitting here wondering. @Phil Dunphy, you brought it up--how were the Scottish Government and the SNP involved?

Just reading the last few pages of this thread..and waiting for Phil's reply , but yes - I think you're correct.

The botched investigation costing taxpayers millions, is a result of civil service bungling, not the Scottish Government.

Others may know different. 👍

Link to comment
Share on other sites

coconut doug
42 minutes ago, Zlatanable said:

The hard yard: Brian Wilson says ministers must answer for Ferguson's ferries fiasco… https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/the-hard-yard-brian-wilson-says-ministers-must-answer-for-fergusons-ferries-fiasco/?utm_source=twitter via @Sunday_Post

 

Good read. 

 

Brian Wilson and the Sunday post what a combination for a "Good read" The figures are wrong and his interpretation of events considerably suspect. He says the Sick Kids has been overspent by at least £150million but i doubt he really believes that. Labour party people are not that stupid, are they? It's just a hate piece for the Sunday Post demographic. Makes the point about Salmond's legal costs and the £0.5million paid out to him for his "doomed defence" and blames those at St Andrews house. Wasn't the payment made for his defence costs because those in charge of investigating his behaviour didn't follow their own procedures and wasn't it the UK civil service and their appointees who were responsible for it?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seymour M Hersh
On 16/08/2019 at 15:43, Pans Jambo said:

Apples for Apples mate.

 

Those figures are not.

 

Scotland counts ANY death as a drugs death if the deceased shows any signs of having illegal drugs in their system. So if you take a spliff & get run down crossing the road its a drugs death in Scotland.

 

But please, dont let that spoil your bashing!

 

Please point us in the direction of something official that will confirm this. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Please point us in the direction of something official that will confirm this. 

Try Google. 

How are drug deaths counted in Scotland. 

Takes you to an NHS page that has links to many meaty documents. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seymour M Hersh
11 hours ago, Pans Jambo said:

Try Google. 

How are drug deaths counted in Scotland. 

Takes you to an NHS page that has links to many meaty documents. 

 

In other words you can't supply proof. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

In other words you can't supply proof. 

You cant use Google even when you are told what to type & where to look???

 

OK then. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dobmisterdobster
2 minutes ago, Zlatanable said:

On Twitter, Scottish Nationalists seem more than usual, stroppy tonight. 

I am guessing there is bad news in the pipeline. 

 

Twitter is an appaling website. Especially for politics. The place is full of fruitcakes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

dobmisterdobster
10 minutes ago, Zlatanable said:

Yes, its often terrible. 

But Scottish Nationalists are well grumpy tonight. 

 

They're always grumpy about something. Wonder what it is this time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, dobmisterdobster said:

They're always grumpy about something. Wonder what it is this time.

Electoral commission wanting input over second ref question thus delaying vote?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seymour M Hersh
2 hours ago, Pans Jambo said:

You cant use Google even when you are told what to type & where to look???

 

OK then. 

 

Surely the person making a statement like that bears the responsibility of providing the evidence and not sending people on wild goose chases through"meaty" documents. Come on clever clogs provide a link directly to where it explains that someone who has smoked a joint then been knocked down by a vehicle and killed is treated as a drugs death. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Seymour M Hersh said:

 

Surely the person making a statement like that bears the responsibility of providing the evidence and not sending people on wild goose chases through"meaty" documents. Come on clever clogs provide a link directly to where it explains that someone who has smoked a joint then been knocked down by a vehicle and killed is treated as a drugs death. 

U bored?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Seymour M Hersh
Just now, Pans Jambo said:

On Google, get yer Da to show ye

 

Why are you so determined to avoid liking it? Is it just a figment of your delusional mind? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, dobmisterdobster said:

They're always grumpy about something. Wonder what it is this time.

I'm not grumpy. Had a lovely night with my family. Nice homemade meal with good wines. Listening to music. Hope you had a good night too. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zlatanable said:

maybe the crime statistics? maybe not getting yes/no but leave/remain in #indyref2, 

but they seem well grumpy

who knows

I thought there wasn't an Indyref2? Leave/Yes doesn't really matter.

 

 

 

 

:jambobanana:

Edited by ri Alban
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Zlatanable said:

 

 

Not grumpy at all here. 

Quite open hearted and peaceful atm.

Naw yer no. This is ye. :raging:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, Zlatanable said:

 

 

Not grumpy at all here. 

Quite open hearted and peaceful atm.

What's the agenda. Do they think people who would vote yes, will somehow not vote leave. Or do they thick people are thick enough to think it's an Euref2.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...